Staff Reports
Howard Dean showed up on Ari Melber’s show this week and unloaded a tidy little conspiracy: he says the Supreme Court is “just making this stuff up” to let President Donald Trump do whatever he wants. The clip — carried and amplified across outlets — gave liberals a sound bite and conservatives a headline. For anyone who cares about courts, power, or plain common sense, the exchange is worth more than the shrieks and the hot takes it produced.
What Howard Dean actually said on The Beat
On The Beat with Ari Melber, former Democratic National Committee chairman and former governor of Vermont Howard Dean accused SCOTUS of “bald partisanship.” He called recent legal ideas “crackpot theories like unitary presidency” and said the Court is “making this stuff up” after a long conservative effort to reshape the judiciary. Melber asked about deterrence and corruption; Dean answered with political thunder, and cable TV found another clip to chew on.
Reality check: the unitary executive debate and recent rulings
There is a real legal debate behind Dean’s fireworks. The “unitary executive” idea is a serious constitutional theory about how much control a president has over executive agencies. In recent years, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority has issued rulings and arguments that some legal experts say move the law in that direction. That doesn’t mean the justices are writing policy on a napkin — but it does mean the stakes for presidential power and agency independence are high, and people on both sides are yelling.
Who’s being political — and why it matters
Dean’s claim that the Court is “making stuff up” reads like partisan theater. He’s right that there has been a long conservative effort to appoint judges who read the Constitution differently — Republicans won that fight at the ballot box and in confirmation battles. But calling the Court illegitimate because you don’t like its rulings is a convenient way to dodge real arguments about law, elections, and governance. If concerns about power are real, they deserve legal scholarship and votes, not just cable outrage.
Bottom line: sober debate beats shouting
The Dean clip will run as proof of whatever side you already cheer for. Conservatives will use it to show hypocrisy; liberals will say it proves the Court is captured. The better response is to debate the legal theory, explain the cases, and ask voters what rules they want for the separation of powers. Rhetoric like “they’re just making this stuff up” gets views, but it doesn’t resolve whether the Constitution should favor a stronger presidency or stronger agency independence. That fight is coming, and it will be decided in courts, legislatures — and at the ballot box, not on late-night punditry.
