Supreme Court Cases Could Impact 2022 Elections

Supreme Court Cases Could Impact 2022 Elections

( – America is at a unique crossroads. Around the country, attorneys general in liberal big cities are taking it upon themselves to decide who will be prosecuted for crimes, and for which ones. Equity leading to discrimination against white people is a new form of prejudice that the Left is promoting for what it believes is political gain. Topping it off, the Biden administration continually pushes the limits of executive authority and is perhaps one of, if not the, most lawless presidencies in US history.

For many Conservatives, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) might be the last best hope to preserve America’s heritage, uphold the rule of law, and protect the US Constitution. It won’t come without a political challenge from the Left. In 2022, the court is doing something rarely seen in an election year. It’s taking on cases that could strip Liberals of their unconstitutional passions, re-assert the US Constitution in the role of government and society, and impact the midterm elections in November.

The Court to Hear Controversial Precedent-Setting Cases

As America enters a new year, the SCOTUS will hear several transformative cases. Keep in mind that the justices choose what cases they will take and won’t. Few make it as far as the nation’s highest court. Still, it’s not often that the court agrees to hear so many cases in one term that could be historic and set a tone for the next few elections.

Suffice it to say, 2022 is a big year. The court typically goes more conservative in the cases it hears in an election year. Democrats continue to threaten conservative justices that they’ll pack the court if the judges don’t deliver on their demands. The political rhetoric is unlikely to phase the justices. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have taken on the controversial subjects.

So, let’s jump in for a quick review.

Vaccine Mandates

On Friday, January 7, the high court finally heard the merits, or lack of merits, of President Joe Biden’s vaccine mandates regarding companies that employ over 100 workers. The case is about equal protection and the Tenth Amendment. It raises core questions about federal authority and if the executive branch wrote law despite a lack of authorization from Congress.


The holy grail of the Democratic Party… the court will decide this summer if Mississippi can impose a 15-week limit on abortions. Some believe the 1972 Warren Court created an abortion law independent of Congress and out of step with the separation of powers. The question is, did the federal government have unilateral Constitutional power to legalize abortion nationally? The SCOTUS could overturn or gut Roe v. Wade. Most scholars believe the court will increase the authority of the states while recognizing protections for reproductive rights.

Gun Rights

This case could be a virtual heart attack for gun control advocates. A 1911 New York law allows local officials to decide who can and cannot get a conceal carry permit based on “proper clause” – meaning whether or not they can prove they need the conceal permit for self-protection or other reasonable means. Many scholars predict the court will reinforce individual gun rights under the Second Amendment and deal a blow to gun control laws across the country.

Executive Branch and Creating Law

Two cases are threatening what’s called agency deference. In 1984, the high court created the “Chevron Doctrine.” It insulates federal agencies from legal review and gives them an incredible amount of power in our system of government. Some refer to it as the fourth branch of government.

The American Hospital Association (AHA) v. Becerra is a case that questions if the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) can unilaterally cut outpatient drug reimbursements to hospitals without the weight of law from Congress.

Similarly, West Virginia is challenging a Biden administration climate policy. The state questions if the EPA can unilaterally regulate carbon emissions without legislation from Congress. If the court rules for the states, it will crush progressive goals to use the administrative state to accomplish what Congress can’t with legislation.

The Court Could Force the Government to Follow the Constitution

Over recent years, the court has begun enforcing the Nondelegation Doctrine. It’s forcing the administrative state to defer to federal law, and where none exists, implore Congress to pass one.

There’s another principle at stake. When the executive branch abandons the intent of a statute, that law can be applied in a manner that is contrary to its intended purpose. The results can be devastating. It forces the Supreme Court to step in and enforce the US Constitution, resulting in anger from those who may not understand or like how the Constitution works or the principles behind it.

The court is not a political advocate for a position, or at least it shouldn’t be. That’s the difference between originalism and modern judicial progressive theory. Originalist interpret the Constitution the way it was understood at the time Congress ratified it. They don’t re-imagine it or ignore it to meet a political need.

At the core of these cases, the SCOTUS may reset the boundaries of separation of powers. Doing so will have an impact on the 2022 election. The question is, will voters turn out to support the ideals of the Constitution or vote for more people who choose to ignore it altogether?

We’ll find out in November.

Don Purdum, Independent Political Analyst

Copyright 2022,