• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

what are the worst supreme court decisions in U.S history?

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,738
Reaction score
6,290
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The supreme court does not have a perfect record in making its decisions based on constitutional law.

i was wondering what some people consider as the worst decisions made by the court. By definition, i am asking which supreme court decisions caused the most harm to American society

so if anyone has court decison they think earned the distinction of being among the worst, post a suggestion.
 
Last edited:
Dred Scott is the worst decision ever made.
 
Off of the top of my head thinking of maybe 5-6 big Supreme Court cases Dred Scott would be the worst. Or Plessy
 
Madison v Marbury. Every bad decision since then, and there have been many, derive from the power they took for themselves there.
 
i personally believe Lochner v. new york, and Plessy v. Ferguson are among the worst decisons that he supreme court ever made.

Well considering I don't know many, Dred Scott and Citizens United seems to be up there.
 
Lets not forget National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius,
 
Dred Scott is an obvious one, but it has since been made moot.

I pick one that's a little more obscure because of the effects it has had on a multitude of areas, not just civil rights.

Dole V SD.

What this ruling did is allow the federal government to blackmail states into doing things they don't want to do by withholding funding for unrelated spending if the state doesn't pass a specific law or regulation. In this case, it was the age 21 restriction for purchasing and consuming alcohol. But, that's completely beside the point. Because of this ruling, the federal government can pick any law they want and coerce the states to enact it or lose funding for nationally and locally vital interests like highways and military bases.
 
Dred Scott is an obvious one, but it has since been made moot.

I pick one that's a little more obscure because of the effects it has had on a multitude of areas, not just civil rights.

Dole V SD.

What this ruling did is allow the federal government to blackmail states into doing things they don't want to do by withholding funding for unrelated spending if the state doesn't pass a specific law or regulation. In this case, it was the age 21 restriction for purchasing and consuming alcohol. But, that's completely beside the point. Because of this ruling, the federal government can pick any law they want and coerce the states to enact it or lose funding for nationally and locally vital interests like highways and military bases.

Can the states not react by withholding their tax dollars?
 
I'm waiting for the bible thumping religionists to show up and call the 14 supreme court decisions affirming marriage as a fundamental human right to be the worst supreme court cases of all time.

These people are probably also big fans of the Dred Scott decision so it doesn't really matter what they think.
 
Can the states not react by withholding their tax dollars?

Maybe, doesn't matter though. We don't need tit for tat games when it comes to the 10th Amendment.
 
I'm waiting for the bible thumping religionists to show up and call the 14 supreme court decisions affirming marriage as a fundamental human right to be the worst supreme court cases of all time.

These people are probably also big fans of the Dred Scott decision so it doesn't really matter what they think.

LMAO...so all Christians are automatically racist now? Wow. What's next, anyone that wears a red shirt hates dolphins? Anyone that has blonde hair is sexist? Anything that drives a Ford pickup is an anti Semite? Anyone that eats at Jason's Deli hates the rain forest?

I could do this all day.

Anyone that stays at Hilton hotels wants polluted rivers? Anyone that watches an LG tv is probably an axe murder? .....
 
LMAO...so all Christians are automatically racist now? Wow. What's next, anyone that wears a red shirt hates dolphins? Anyone that has blonde hair is sexist? Anything that drives a Ford pickup is an anti Semite? Anyone that eats at Jason's Deli hates the rain forest?

I could do this all day.

Anyone that stays at Hilton hotels wants polluted rivers? Anyone that watches an LG tv is probably an axe murder? .....
I never once said all christians are racist. I said the christians who have so little respect for fundamental human rights that they want to use government force to harass gays will likely also likely support Dred Scott.
 
The Dred Scott decision I believe was, though morally wrong, constitutionally correct. Our constitution needed a bit of work back then. Plessy on the other hand was incorrect legally and retarded our progress on race 60 years. Possibly more harmful are a series of decisions that have expanded the commerce clause and the general welfare clause that has turned a constitution that gave the federal government very limited powers to an omnipotent power only somewhat restrained by the Bill of Rights.
 
I never once said all christians are racist. I said the christians who have so little respect for fundamental human rights that they want to use government force to harass gays will likely also likely support Dred Scott.

Ya, that's not what you said, nor is this a better/more logical statement.
 
Removing limits on corporate, labor donations to campaigns.
 
Roe v Wade, Citizens United v FEC, Texas v White

to name but a few...

*oops, almost forgot...

National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius
 
Last edited:
I never once said all christians are racist. I said the christians who have so little respect for fundamental human rights that they want to use government force to harass gays will likely also likely support Dred Scott.

you will find that both political sides, want to use the power of government force on people.
 
The supreme court does not have a perfect record in making its decisions based on constitutional law.

i was wondering what some people consider as the worst decisions made by the court. By definition, i am asking which supreme court decisions caused the most harm to American society

so if anyone has court decison they think earned the distinction of being among the worst, post a suggestion.

Without reading the thread past your post I will bet that someone has mentioned Roe v Wade.

Beyond that I don't know specific decisions as I don't know many court case names. I would say that declaring the Obamacare Mandate a "tax" has got to be among the worst. Another would be when they decided that they can limit how much a farmer grows. By doing so they extended the commerce clause far far beyond what it was meant to be applied to. If I could only pick one cases out of all the cases I do know that would have to have been THE NUMBER ONE worst decision ever and needs to be over ruled.
 
Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927)
 
I never once said all christians are racist. I said the christians who have so little respect for fundamental human rights that they want to use government force to harass gays will likely also likely support Dred Scott.

Well, actually, what I read you to say is that if someone opposes gay marriage, they'd likely support Dredd Scott. That, of course, would include quite a number of folks of African descent, including the President until recently.
 
Back
Top Bottom