这是一个保守的最高法院，它的行动充满信心和信念，但它似乎越来越意识到自己的形象问题。
自从唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)总统提名的三名大法官加入以来，法院的六名保守派大法官的绝对多数已经启动了美国法律和社会在一代人时间里最重大的变化——推翻了罗伊诉韦德案(Roe v . Wade);扩大隐蔽携带枪支的权利;支持言论自由，推进宗教自由。
今年最大和最有争议的决定有效地结束了45年的平权行动在高等教育中;否决了拜登总统的4000亿美元学生债务免除计划;并且，雕刻出一个反歧视法的例外反对同性婚姻的人。
不出所料，这些重大裁决受到了共和党人的赞扬和民主党人的谴责。一项调查显示，大多数美国人认为法官主要是根据政治而不是法律来裁决的新的ABC新闻/益普索民意调查。
但是，虽然头条新闻的决定和意识形态的分歧可能会定义它，但美国最高法院在2023年的分歧比近年来明显减少。在几起保守派本可以大获全胜的案件中，法院表现出了惊人的克制。
自2022年10月以来，法院发布的58项意见中，超过一半是一致或接近一致的，要么是9比0，要么是8比1。超过90%的案件中，最高法院的自由派法官占多数。
法官们强有力地拒绝独立的州议会理论对于选举法，特朗普及其盟友拥护;回绝了德克萨斯州对拜登政府移民和驱逐计划的挑战;支持《选举权法案法案》第2条，保护人们在重新划分选区时免受种族歧视;并支持了具有里程碑意义的印第安儿童福利法案，该法案受到了美国土著部落的庆祝。
也许最值得注意的是，只有5起案件是由6比3的意识形态分歧决定的——保守派对自由派。据哈佛大学的亚当·费尔德曼称，这一数字低于上学期的14项，也是过去六年中意识形态分歧决定的最低数量经验主义的斯考特斯。
其中许多结果似乎反映了首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨(John Roberts)非凡的影响力和策略，他在特朗普执政期间被挤到了中央权力经纪人的位置，但仍掌握着巨大的权力。
一年前，克拉伦斯·托马斯大法官似乎正在成为对最高法院的主导影响力，他与塞缪尔·阿利托(Samuel Alito)和尼尔·戈萨奇(Neil Gorsuch)大法官一起参与了一个推进法律最大化方法的项目。
但许多资深法庭观察家说，这个学期，形势似乎发生了转变。
根据费尔德曼的说法，首席大法官罗伯茨和大法官布雷特·卡瓦诺是本任期决定中最常见的法官组合。卡瓦诺在96%的时间里占多数，罗伯茨在95%的时间里占多数。
罗伯茨和卡瓦诺都公开表示并在他们的著作中表达了对法律采取更渐进方法的愿望——这种方法着眼于加强法院作为公众眼中的机构的合法性。
公众支持率接近历史最低水平，加上对道德和公正性的日益担忧，引发了两党对最高法院现状以及外部需要采取哪些措施来提高其可信度的辩论。
尽管大法官们经常坚称他们不会根据公众意见来裁决案件，但他们也不会对此视而不见。
通过这一切，九名法官表现出了惊人的凝聚力。在两名保守派法官托马斯和阿利托涉嫌道德失误的党派风暴中，整个法院发布了一份签署的公开声明，证明其道德做法，并一致拒绝民主党领导的立法“改革”的努力。
处于这一切中心的一个潜在的不确定因素是最高法院的新成员，凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊大法官。根据费尔德曼的说法，美国第一位黑人女法官从一开始就公开展示了巨大的参与和影响:她在口头辩论中的发言比历史上任何其他新法官都多，也比这一时期的任何法官都多。她在幕后的影响需要几年时间才能显现出来。
这一切将走向何方?
法官们将在这个夏天冷静下来，并希望公众对他们的不满也能冷静下来。与此同时，他们的待审案件清单上又多了一份今年秋季的重磅案件:关于持枪权、社交媒体审查、政府监管和投票权的案件，这将让他们在进入选举年时有足够的时间思考。
Supreme Court shows surprising restraint in chaotic year of crises: ANALYSIS
It's a conservative Supreme Court that has acted with confidence and conviction, but one that seems increasingly aware of its image problem.
Since the addition of the three justices nominated by President Donald Trump, the court's six-justice conservative supermajority has set into motion the most significant changes in American law and society in a generation -- overruling Roe v. Wade; expanding concealed carry gun rights; bolstering free speech and advancing religious liberty.
The biggest and most controversial decisions of this yeareffectively ended 45 years of affirmative actionin higher education;struck down President Biden's $400 billion student debt forgiveness plan; and, carved out anexception to anti-discrimination lawsfor opponents of same-sex marriage.
The major rulings were predictably praised by Republicans and condemned by Democrats. A majority of Americans say they believe the justices have ruled mainly on the basis of politics, not the law, according to anew ABC News/Ipsos poll.
But while the headline-grabbing decisions and ideological divisions may define it, the nation's highest court was significantly less divided in 2023 than it has been in recent years. In several cases where conservatives could have made big gains, the court showed surprising restraint.
Of the 58 opinions the court issued since October 2022, more than half were unanimous or near-unanimous, either 9-0 or 8-1. More than 9 out of 10 cases had one of the court's liberal justices in the majority.
The justices forcefullyrejected the independent state legislature theoryfor election law, embraced by Trump and his allies; rebuffed Texas' challenge to the Biden administration's immigration and deportation plan; upheld Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, preserving protection against race discrimination in redistricting; and upheld the landmark Indian Child Welfare Act, celebrated by Native American tribes.
Perhaps most remarkable, only five cases were decided by a 6-3 ideological split -- conservatives versus liberals. That's down from 14 last term and the lowest number of straight ideological split decisions in the past six years, according to Adam Feldman atEmpirical SCOTUS.
Many of these outcomes appear to reflect the extraordinary influence and strategy of Chief Justice John Roberts, who was pushed aside as a central power broker during the Trump years, but still wields significant power.
One year ago, Justice Clarence Thomas appeared to be emerging as the dominant influence on the court, joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch in a project to push ahead on a maximalist approach to the law.
But this term, the tables appeared to turn, many veteran court watchers say.
Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh were the most common alignments of any pairing of justices in the decisions this term, according to Feldman. Kavanaugh was in the majority 96% of the time, Roberts 95% of the time.
Both Roberts and Kavanaugh have signaled publicly and in their writings a desire for a more incremental approach to the law – one that has an eye on bolstering legitimacy of the court as an institution in the public eye.
Near-record low public approval, compounded by growing concern over ethics and impartiality, has fed bipartisan debate about the state of the court and what steps may need to be taken from the outside to improve its credibility.
While the justices frequently insist that they do not decide cases based on public opinion, they are also not blind to it.
And through it all, the nine justices have shown surprising cohesion. In the midst of a partisan firestorm over alleged ethics lapses by two conservative justices -- Thomas and Alito -- the entire court released a signed public statement attesting to its ethical practices and unanimously rebuffing Democrat-led efforts to legislate "reform."
One potential wild card at the center of it all was the court's newest member, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The nation's first black woman justice publicly showed outsized engagement and impact from the start: She spoke during oral arguments more than any other new justice in history -- and more than any justice sitting during this period, according to Feldman. Her influence behind the scenes will take years to come into focus.
Where does it all go from here?
The justices will take the summer to cool off -- and hope the public disaffection with them does as well. Meantime, they have filled their docket with another list of blockbuster cases for the fall: on gun rights, social media censorship, government regulation and voting rights that will give them plenty to chew on heading into an election year.
