How deferential is the Roberts court to presidential power?
This article analyzes whether the [[Roberts Court]] has been unusually deferential to presidential authority by measuring how often the [[United States]] wins on the merits through support-rate data drawn from the [[Supreme Court Database]] and terms through 2024–25. Adam Feldman situates the analysis within scholarship on the attitudinal model, partisanship, and historical chief-justice eras, comparing support rates across eras and by appointing president while examining individual justices’ voting patterns. The piece finds the Roberts Court’s 49.39% pro-government rate below many past courts, highlights partisan sorting and docket effects, and notes important caveats — notably exclusion of the [[shadow docket]], agency-deference cases where the government is not a party, and the complexity of separating Trump-specific from party-driven patterns — and calls for further granular study. It warns that other issue areas may show different patterns.