John,

As a new Supreme Court term kicks off this week, I’m excited to share with you a new piece I wrote for Slate. In it, I dive into a troubling trend I’ve seen taking shape in recent years: right-wing lawyers are inventing strawman plaintiffs to better help their chances at the Supreme Court — and the court is rewarding them for doing so.

Here’s a quick preview:

“A bedrock principle of our legal system is that the federal judiciary adjudicates and redresses actual harms to real people. The courts are limited to settling disputes in which the plaintiffs can show ‘concrete and particularized injury.’ This principle restrains the courts from wielding unchecked, ideological veto power over laws enacted by the other two branches.

“Yet the mifepristone case is the latest in a series of recent examples of conservative jurists playing fast and loose with the words concrete and particularized.”

(Keep reading in Slate.)

The illegitimate Supreme Court supermajority is a reactionary right-wing force — but it’s not working alone. It’s part of a larger coordinated movement to weaponize the power of our judiciary to impose a radical, regressive agenda from inside the courtroom and out.

The more we shine a spotlight on how the justices and the rest of the conservative movement are working together, the harder it will be for them to keep their corruption in the dark.

Will you help us spread the word by liking and sharing the piece on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook?

Thank you for your partnership in our fight to take back the court, 

Sarah Lipton-Lubet

President, Take Back the Court Action Fund