The Atlantic
June 4, 2026
Supreme Court's Role in Its Own Institutional Vulnerability
TL;DR
The Supreme Court's willingness to unsettle long-established institutional arrangements may have inadvertently created conditions for its own institutional undermining, including court expansion proposals.
Key Takeaways
- 1Court expansion is considered the most dangerous institutional change proposal, potentially triggering cycles of tit-for-tat institutional restructuring
- 2The Court has historically benefited from 150 years of settled practice around its nine-justice composition, functioning as a constitutional settlement
- 3The Supreme Court itself has demonstrated willingness to overturn established institutional arrangements, such as limiting presidential removal powers over independent agencies
- 4By unsettling entrenched institutional norms, the Court may be creating a dangerous precedent that threatens its own structural stability
- 5The Court may not fully recognize the vulnerabilities it is creating for itself through its decisions on institutional arrangements
Notable Quotes
“the proposal to make the court bigger seems to me of all the proposals the most dangerous”
“I worry so much about um piercing the myth of the Supreme Court and then discovering we did need it and now we we've lost it and it can't be recovered again”
“the court itself has shown itself so willing to unsettle settled institutional arrangements”
“the court doesn't quite realize that it is setting in motion something that it itself is going to be vulnerable to”
Chapters
1. The Danger of Court Expansion
Court expansion is identified as the most dangerous of various proposals to reform the Supreme Court, with concerns about how it could undermine the institution's stability and legitimacy.
2. 150 Years of Constitutional Settlement
The nine-justice composition has been a settled practice for 150 years, functioning as an unofficial constitutional agreement that institutions should not lightly disturb once established.
3. The Court's Role in Unsettling Institutions
The Supreme Court has shown willingness to overturn settled institutional arrangements, including decisions on presidential removal powers and federal agency independence.
4. Unintended Consequences and Institutional Vulnerability
By unsettling established institutional dynamics, the Court may be creating a precedent that makes it vulnerable to similar institutional changes, including expansion, without fully recognizing this risk.
Glossary
- Court expansion
- Proposals to increase the number of justices on the Supreme Court beyond the current nine
- Constitutional settlement
- An established practice or arrangement that, while not explicitly mandated by the Constitution, has become accepted as a binding constitutional understanding
- Institutional arrangements
- Long-established structural and procedural practices within government institutions that define their function and authority