For years, pollster Gallup has been monitoring public views on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1999, Gallup found that 80 percent of respondents either had either "a great deal" or a "fair amount" of "trust and confidence" in the High Court. But in recent months, according to Gallup, public approval of the Roberts Court has been around 41 or 42 percent — an historic low.
CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic examines the state of the Court in her May 24 column, emphasizing that the justices "appear mired in antagonism and distrust."
READ MORE: 'All states will be impacted' by Supreme Court's Idaho abortion case
"Liberals have been bluntly exposing their differences with the conservative majority and asserting that it is changing the law in America simply because, with new justices, it can," Biskupic explains. "Conservatives, who indeed hold the upper hand on the 6-3 Court, nonetheless spike their writing and remarks with derision for the left. And the Court faces an increasingly disapproving public amid a series of self-inflicted controversies over ethics and perceived conflicts of interest — the latest from flags flown at homes owned by Justice Samuel Alito that are often associated with Trump supporters and the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack."
On April 25, the Court heard oral arguments on former President Donald Trump's immunity claims. Trump has claimed that because he was still president in late 2020 and early 2021, he enjoys "absolute immunity" from prosecution in special counsel Jack Smith's election interference case.
Biskupic points out that the justices have "sounded testy and looked weary" during recent "weeks of oral arguments" — including those in the immunity case.
"The larger atmosphere suggested many were simply not listening to each other or respecting divergent views — a pattern bound to make the final sprint of negotiations especially difficult," Biskupic notes. "As a result, it could be harder for Chief Justice John Roberts to win unanimity, or something close to it, in the controversy over Trump's demand for immunity."
READ MORE:Why Alito's response to inverted flag controversy is as troubling as symbol itself: analysis
The CNN journalist adds, "In past challenges to presidential power, whether involving Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton, chief justices have labored toward unanimous rulings. Personal discord can also make the tone of their written opinions harsher all around, as seen in March in the Trump ballot case from Colorado or Thursday in a racially charged voting case from South Carolina. More substantively, these differences can stymie compromise."
READ MORE:How the Supreme Court is waging an all-out assault on democracy: analysis
Joan Biskupic's full CNN column is available at this link.
