Justice Elena Kagan warned that rulings by the Supreme Court’s conservative majority on gerrymandering, campaign finance, and voting rights are deepening political polarization and undermining American democracy ahead of pivotal midterm elections.
WASHINGTON — Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan warned on Tuesday that recent election and voting decisions by the court’s conservative majority have accelerated political polarization and actively weakened American democracy.
Speaking before students and faculty at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law just two weeks before high-stakes congressional midterm elections, the liberal justice delivered a pointed critique of the bench’s impact on the electoral landscape.
“The court has kind of blinded itself to the very deleterious effect of their rulings on how the political system works and has created a democracy that does not work as well as it should,” Kagan stated.
Kagan, who authored dissents in several pivotal voting cases, took aim at decisions that dismantled campaign finance safeguards, diluted the Voting Rights Act, and effectively sanctioned partisan gerrymandering.
Reflecting on the rise of aggressive redistricting, she observed: “Over the last couple of years especially, both political parties have been engaged in a race to the bottom in terms of doing these partisan gerrymanders, … making what I think is unfortunately a too polarized country even more so.” She added that everyday Americans view the torrent of untraceable campaign cash “chasing all these political candidates” as a “nightmare.”
The conservative majority has consistently defended its posture, arguing in a landmark 2019 decision that partisan gerrymandering constitutes a non-justiciable political question outside the purview of federal courts. The bench has also rolled back campaign finance caps on First Amendment grounds and progressively narrowed minority protections under the Voting Rights Act.
The ensuing redistricting battles have intensified under President Donald Trump, who has pushed to preserve narrow Republican majorities in the House of Representatives.
Despite her sharp criticism, Kagan pushed back against claims that the bench acts merely as a rubber stamp for the administration, noting several instances where the justices rejected executive actions involving tariffs, birthright citizenship, and mail-in voting.
