Like its predecessors during the last 50 years, the recent report of the President’s Commission on the Supreme Court isn’t likely to inspire much-needed reforms of the Court’s management and practices, let alone its culture. The old saw about the Court as “nine scorpions in a bottle” is fast becoming an unpleasant and dangerous reality.

Problems with the selection process have grown over the years; recently matched by speculations over retirements that have become their own psycho-dramas. Some justices seem to confuse a lifetime appointment with immortality—a tendency that may influence what many observers see as a growth of “judicial activism” on the part of individual justices in their formal opinions and public remarks.

Are there realistic options for judicial reform? Are justices becoming more egocentric? What explains the precipitous decline in formal decisions? (Last year the Court issued only 67 written opinions—one of the lowest numbers since the Civil War). Finally, at a time of deep national concern about the extent of executive power and congressional ineptitude, can we rely on the third branch to be the guardrail of American democracy or will the decisions of the Court’s 2022 term demonstrate that it’s fast becoming “the most dangerous branch”?