How the US Supreme Court that Donald Trump filled is changing American life

Analysts say the conservative-majority court is more hard-line than anyone anticipated, tossing out rights previous courts had said the Constitution guaranteed

Long-accepted rules of justice have been turned on their head by decisions on abortion rights, gun control, voting rights, emissions and religion in schools

Reading Time:3 minutes

US President Donald Trump gestures next to Judge Amy Coney Barrett on a White House balcony in 2020 after she was sworn in as a member of the US Supreme Court. Photo: AFP

Published: 2:01pm, 3 Jul 2022Updated: 3:07pm, 3 Jul 2022

Two years after President Donald Trump filled its ranks with conservatives, the Supreme Court has engineered a sharp turn in US constitutional law that could have a profound effect on American life for decades.

Key decisions that rescinded abortion rights, permit Americans to tote their guns freely in public, expand religion in schools, remove voting rights protections, and impede the government’s ability to set controls on greenhouse gases, have turned long-accepted rules of justice on their heads.

With a 6-3 majority on the bench, the conservatives led by Chief Justice John Roberts represent a mighty swing of the judicial pendulum from decades of a modestly progressive course.

Protesters in Los Angeles demonstrate on Saturday against a US Supreme Court decision that rescinded abortion rights. Photo: EPA-EFE

Politically, the Roberts court is effectively payback by the Republican right, which has since the 1970s endeavoured to claim control of the high court to reverse key decisions they view as excessive.

But analysts say the just-closed annual court season has revealed a set of judges more hard-line than anyone anticipated.

They have brashly tossed out the decisions of their respected predecessors, including, as with abortion, rights that previous courts said were guaranteed by the Constitution.

“It’s not unusual to see the pendulum swinging, and to have what might be considered course-corrections,” said American University constitutional law professor Stephen Wermiel.