Erosion from Within: The Judiciary’s Fight to Preserve the Rule of Law

The rule of law—the principle that all individuals and institutions are subject to and accountable under the law—is the bedrock of democratic governance. It ensures the consistent and impartial application of justice, protects individual rights, and establishes the boundaries of governmental power. Yet, this foundational tenet of American democracy is facing unprecedented internal pressures. As Chief Justice John Roberts recently warned, the judiciary is witnessing a troubling erosion of public trust and institutional independence. This essay explores the nature of the threats facing the rule of law from within the United States’ own legal and political systems, the judiciary’s efforts to uphold its integrity, and the reforms needed to ensure the continued strength and credibility of one of democracy’s core institutions.

I. Understanding the Rule of Law and Its Fragility

To appreciate the judiciary’s current struggle, one must first understand the importance and fragility of the rule of law. It rests on several interrelated pillars: legal predictability, impartial adjudication, equal access to justice, and judicial independence. These pillars can be slowly weakened not only by direct political attacks but also by public cynicism, inconsistent enforcement, or legislative overreach. Unlike overt crises that provoke immediate responses, the erosion of the rule of law often begins subtly—with disinformation, manipulation of norms, and politically motivated legal decisions.

Chief Justice Roberts has long advocated for the judiciary’s nonpartisan role, cautioning against the politicization of the courts. In a 2025 speech at Georgetown Law, he emphasized that “the rule of law is not self-executing” and warned that sustained attacks on the integrity of judges could lead to a breakdown in public faith in the judicial process. When citizens begin to view courts as mere extensions of partisan ideologies rather than impartial arbiters, the legal system’s legitimacy is jeopardized.

II. Politicization of the Judiciary

One of the most significant internal threats to the rule of law is the growing politicization of judicial appointments and decisions. The U.S. Supreme Court, once viewed as a relatively neutral institution, has increasingly been perceived as politically divided. Judicial confirmations have become intensely partisan affairs, with nominees evaluated more on their perceived ideological alignment than on their legal qualifications. As a result, public confidence in the courts’ neutrality has plummeted.

This erosion of trust extends beyond the Supreme Court. State and federal courts have also seen growing interference from political actors. Judges have faced attacks from elected officials, and in some cases, legislatures have attempted to limit judicial review or restrict court jurisdiction over controversial issues. In Florida and Texas, for example, laws have been proposed or passed that limit what judges can consider in cases involving educational content, voting rights, and immigration enforcement. These efforts reflect a broader trend toward undermining judicial independence in favor of ideological conformity.

III. Disinformation and Attacks on Judicial Integrity

The modern information landscape poses another significant threat to the judiciary. Misinformation campaigns, often fueled by social media, have targeted judges and court rulings, painting legitimate legal decisions as partisan betrayals. In high-profile cases, judges have been doxxed, threatened, and vilified online, making it increasingly difficult for them to perform their duties without fear or favor.

Chief Justice Roberts has decried such attacks as dangerous and corrosive. “The judiciary does not respond well to criticism by meme,” he quipped in a recent speech, acknowledging the difficult balance between free speech and respect for judicial institutions. The rise in threats against judges—including death threats—has led to heightened security measures and calls for legislative protection. Yet the damage to public perception may be more enduring than the immediate risks to individual judges.

IV. Internal Challenges: Ethical Lapses and Accountability

While external pressures are substantial, the judiciary also faces internal challenges that contribute to the erosion of the rule of law. Ethical lapses by judges, including undisclosed financial interests, conflicts of interest, and inappropriate public commentary, have damaged public trust. Recent investigations into travel and financial disclosures of federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, have raised questions about transparency and accountability.

The lack of binding ethics rules for Supreme Court justices, in particular, has fueled criticism. While lower federal courts follow strict judicial codes of conduct, the highest court remains governed largely by self-regulation. This disparity undermines the judiciary’s credibility and reinforces perceptions of elitism or double standards.

V. The Judiciary’s Countermeasures and Defense of the Rule of Law

Despite these challenges, the judiciary continues to fight to preserve its independence and the broader principle of the rule of law. Many judges, both state and federal, have courageously issued rulings that uphold constitutional principles even in the face of political backlash. From decisions protecting voting rights to judgments blocking executive overreach, these actions demonstrate the judiciary’s critical role as a check on power.

Additionally, professional associations and judicial councils have advocated for stronger ethical standards and more robust judicial training. Educational programs have been developed to emphasize impartiality, integrity, and the historical role of courts in defending democracy. The National Center for State Courts and the American Bar Association have launched initiatives aimed at improving public understanding of the judicial system and countering misinformation.

VI. Necessary Reforms and the Road Ahead

To truly preserve the rule of law, deeper reforms are necessary. First, a binding code of ethics for Supreme Court justices must be established. Transparency and accountability are essential to maintaining public trust, and no judge should be exempt from scrutiny.

Second, judicial appointments must be depoliticized. While it may be unrealistic to completely remove politics from the process, reforms such as bipartisan selection commissions and increased scrutiny of nominees’ qualifications can reduce overt partisanship.

Third, civics education must be reinvigorated. A population that understands how the legal system works is less susceptible to disinformation and better equipped to hold leaders accountable. Judicial institutions must invest in outreach and education to strengthen public understanding of their role.

Finally, increased protection and support for judges are needed. This includes not only physical security but also legal protections against harassment and defamation. Courts must remain safe spaces for reasoned deliberation, not battlegrounds for political vendettas.

Conclusion: A Fight Worth Waging

The judiciary is often described as the “least dangerous branch” of government, but its role in safeguarding democracy is indispensable. The erosion of the rule of law, as Chief Justice Roberts has warned, is not merely a theoretical concern but a lived reality that threatens the integrity of the entire democratic system.

The fight to preserve judicial independence is not one that can be won by judges alone. It requires the support of lawmakers, educators, media professionals, and ordinary citizens. By recognizing the value of impartial justice and demanding accountability from all branches of government, the public can help reinforce the very foundation of American democracy.

In the end, the rule of law will survive not because it is invincible, but because those who believe in its promise choose to defend it—from without and, just as importantly, from within.

Source: http://criminal-justice-online.blogspot.com/2025/05/erosion-from-within-judiciarys-fight-to.html