WASHINGTON — Liberal Justice Elena Kagan on Tuesday sharply criticized the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, saying it has undermined democracy in a series of rulings, several of which triggered a new wave of legislative mapping that increasingly eliminates competitive districts.
Kagan, who has dissented in the cases, has also taken aim at the majority, calling for the elimination of campaign finance restrictions and, in her words, “repeal” of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, which was enacted to protect minority voters.
“The court erred in part because of a lack of appropriate concern or understanding of the consequences of its decisions,” she said in remarks at Catholic University School of Law in Washington, D.C.
“I do think that in all of these areas the courts have ignored the very harmful effects that their rulings have had on the way the political system operates and created a democracy that cannot function as it should,” she added.
Kagan specifically pointed to a 2019 ruling that said federal courts could not intervene to limit extreme partisan gerrymandering. She also pointed to a series of rulings that gutted the Voting Rights Act, including one this year that led Republican states to eliminate majority-Black precincts. Courts also continue to strike down campaign finance restrictions, most recently in June.
Ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections, some states have redrawn their congressional maps to maximize the number of seats the majority party can win in the state. Texas was the first to launch the effort at the urging of President Donald Trump, with other states including California following suit.
Kagan said the 2019 redistricting ruling was particularly harmful. As a result, “both parties are locked in a race to the bottom in doing these partisan gerrymanderings.”
She added that unbalanced maps deny people “the right to vote equally” and have the effect of “driving people away from the center, toward the wings, toward the extremes” because candidates only have to worry about winning the primary.
Kagan said the court’s failure to act on the issue “makes it even more of a country that I think is unfortunately too polarized.”
She added that when states draw legislative districts, it all but eliminates the ability of many voters to elect candidates of their choice, which is “extremely damaging to our democracy.”
As for the increasingly unlimited amount of money in politics, Kagan said many voters are uncomfortable with it.
“I think you know, the American people look around at this political system and think that all this money, chasing all these political candidates, is a nightmare, and they’re right,” she said.
During a question-and-answer session with Professor Joel Alicia, Kagan also criticized a Supreme Court ruling this year that gave Trump greater control over hitherto independent federal agencies that were created by Congress and free from political interference.
She questioned the wisdom of giving the president too much power and said there was a “danger of a president being able to lord it over all other government agencies and people.”
But Kagan also defended the Supreme Court, where conservatives hold a 6-3 majority, against claims by the left that the court is a rubber stamp for Trump. She cited several rulings where the president has failed, including one in which he tried to impose sweeping tariffs.
She said the court was “very conservative” but would “certainly rule against the president” in some cases.