See you on Substack! buildingtherecord.substack.c…

America is stronger when every branch honors its limits. SCOTUS, this moment tests your courage: will you protect the Constitution from political misuse of power in these made-up emergencies? The People are watching united by principle, not party. 🇺🇸

How do you feel in 5 words, GO!

Kavanaugh’s Defense of Cryptic Rulings Misses the Real Problem: Why Use the Shadow Docket at All? Justice Brett Kavanaugh this week defended the Supreme Court’s often cryptic rulings as the inevitable product of compromise among nine justices and the pressures of emergency decision-making. But critics argue his explanation skirts the more fundamental issue: the Court is increasingly choosing to resolve consequential disputes through its shadow docket, a path that almost guarantees vague, unexplained outcomes. Kavanaugh told an audience that terse opinions often arise from the difficulty of crafting consensus language. “Consistency is a lot easier when it’s one person than when it’s nine,” he said. He also warned of a “lock-in effect” when justices draft opinions too quickly in emergencies, potentially boxing themselves into positions that don’t reflect the Court’s final view. Those defenses may explain why rulings look cryptic, but they don’t justify why those cases landed on the shadow docket in the first place. The Court has a regular process for handling complex, high-stakes issues: full briefing, oral arguments, and reasoned opinions. When the majority bypasses that process, it is not surprising the results come out thin, or that lower courts struggle to apply them. “This isn’t just about writing style,” said [Legal Scholar/Justice], who has criticized the practice. “It’s about legitimacy. If the Court is going to reshape national law, it should do so in the open, with full reasoning, not through midnight orders with no explanation.” The shadow docket, sometimes rebranded by Kavanaugh as the “interim docket,” has been used in recent years to decide major disputes over immigration, elections, and pandemic restrictions. Each time, the majority insisted quick action was necessary. But observers note many of these disputes could have been scheduled for the normal docket, where the Court traditionally handles weighty questions. By treating opacity as unavoidable, Kavanaugh’s remarks deflect attention from the Court’s choice of process. The problem isn’t just cryptic rulings, it’s a Court that increasingly prefers to rule in the shadows.