Previously published on BillMoyers.com
The latest session of the US Supreme Court was especially contentious, with important decisions on the separation of church and state, organized labor, campaign finance reform, birth control and women's health, among others, splitting the court along its 5-4 conservative-liberal divide.
On the other hand, nearly two-thirds of the court's decisions this term were unanimous -- the first time that's happened in more than 60 years. But there's more to that seeming unanimity than meets the eye: In some instances, conservative justices went along but expressed their wish that the court had gone even further to the right, and many believe that some of the decisions might simply be a preliminary step toward a more significant breaking of legal precedent in years to come.
This week I speak with Linda Greenhouse, a New York Times columnist, and Dahlia Lithwick, a senior editor at Slate, about the latest rulings from the Supreme Court, a beat they've both covered for years.
"You can't look at the Roberts court and say that they've done anything other than systematically unravel voting rights, women's rights, workers' rights [and] environmental progress," Lithwick tells me.
Greenhouse adds: "I think it's hard for anybody looking at this court objectively to come away not thinking that it's a court in pursuit of an agenda."