During his tenure as president, Joe Biden faced a string of significant defeats at the U.S. Supreme Court, where the conservative-dominated bench dismantled parts of his agenda and upended legal precedents long upheld by liberals.
The Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, delivered one of its most seismic rulings in 2022 by overturning Roe v. Wade, a 1973 landmark decision that had guaranteed the constitutional right to abortion. Despite the Biden administration’s efforts to safeguard it, the ruling marked a major blow to reproductive rights.
In 2023, the court further undermined Biden’s priorities by striking down race-conscious admissions policies at colleges and universities. These policies, long defended by his administration, were designed to boost representation among Black, Hispanic, and other minority students. Additional setbacks followed, including the court’s decision to expand gun rights in 2022 and, in 2024, invalidate a federal ban on bump stocks, devices enabling semiautomatic weapons to mimic machine guns.
One of the most striking defeats came in 2023 when the justices blocked Biden’s $430 billion student loan relief program. The court also curtailed the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory reach as part of broader efforts to limit the power of federal agencies.
Legal experts compared the scope of these defeats to challenges faced by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, whose New Deal initiatives were struck down by a similarly conservative Supreme Court. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley Law School, noted, “I think it is the toughest series of defeats since Franklin Roosevelt… had many New Deal programs declared unconstitutional.”
John Yoo, a former Justice Department lawyer under President George W. Bush, echoed this sentiment, stating, “It’s hard to think of another president in our lifetimes who lost so many high-profile cases on issues so near and dear to his constitutional agenda.”
Conservative Majority Solidified Under Trump
Biden’s presidency began just months after the Senate confirmed Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Donald Trump’s third appointee, cementing a solid conservative majority. Trump’s other nominees—Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh—joined Barrett and fellow conservatives Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito to form the 6-3 divide.
In contrast, Biden managed to appoint only one justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, who became the first Black woman on the court. However, her appointment replaced another liberal justice, Stephen Breyer, leaving the court’s ideological balance unchanged.
As Biden’s presidency concludes, Trump’s second term could allow him to further shape the judiciary. By potentially replacing senior conservative justices with younger counterparts—or even filling a liberal vacancy—Trump could ensure a long-lasting conservative influence.
Chemerinsky attributed Biden’s judicial losses to the “ideological difference between the Supreme Court’s majority and the Biden administration.” These defeats underscored Biden’s frustration, with the president at one point describing the court as “not a normal court.”
In his final year, Biden proposed significant judicial reforms, including term limits for justices and enforceable ethics rules. He argued that “extreme opinions that the Supreme Court has handed down have undermined long-established civil rights principles and protections.” However, these proposals found no traction in a Republican-controlled Congress.
Conservative Legal Philosophy and Administrative Constraints
John Yoo criticized Biden’s administration for failing to adapt to the court’s conservative approach, which emphasizes the Constitution’s “original understanding, history, and tradition.” He argued, “By refusing to accept this change, the administration rendered itself irrelevant on the most important constitutional questions of the day. That is a recipe for defeat.”
The Supreme Court’s conservative bloc has been advancing a campaign to rein in federal agencies, a movement sometimes referred to as a “war on the administrative state.” This philosophy proved instrumental in high-profile rulings during Biden’s presidency.
Faced with a gridlocked Congress, Democratic presidents have increasingly relied on federal agencies to enact policy. However, during Biden’s term, the court embraced the major questions doctrine, a principle granting judges discretion to invalidate agency actions with significant economic or political impact unless Congress explicitly authorized them.
This doctrine was pivotal in the court’s decision to block Biden’s student debt relief program and restrict the EPA’s ability to regulate carbon emissions from power plants.
Cornell Law School professor Gautam Hans highlighted the challenges this posed, noting, “The environmental law and student loan cases show how disdainful the court is of Democratic executive action, precisely because the lack of congressional movement means that executive action remains the only avenue for any kind of policy progress in the U.S.”
In another blow to regulatory power, the court in 2024 overturned the Chevron deference, a 1984 precedent that required courts to defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws. This longstanding principle had been a target of conservative and business interests.
Limited Wins for Biden
While major defeats dominated Biden’s record at the Supreme Court, his administration did secure some victories. In a significant ruling, the justices upheld a law requiring the sale of TikTok by its Chinese parent company or its ban in the U.S., citing national security concerns.
Additionally, the court preserved the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and upheld a law barring individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms.
However, other cases resulted in more tentative victories. The court dismissed several challenges against Biden-backed policies due to a lack of legal standing, including cases involving access to the abortion pill mifepristone, immigration enforcement priorities, and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).
Hans cautioned that these outcomes were not definitive triumphs, explaining, “These cases didn’t really resound to validate political goals of the Biden administration.” Instead, he warned that the issues might return in future cases, potentially leading to adverse rulings.
Trump’s Legal Wins
While Biden grappled with setbacks, Trump enjoyed notable victories at the Supreme Court, particularly in cases addressing presidential immunity.
In 2023, the court ruled in favor of Trump’s request for immunity following his indictment on federal charges related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. The decision marked the first time the court recognized presidential immunity from prosecution for official acts. Biden criticized the decision as setting “a dangerous precedent.”
Steve Schwinn, a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, observed that Biden’s challenges reflect broader trends in the court’s jurisprudence. These include curbing federal agency powers and expanding presidential authority. Schwinn remarked, “We’ll see this immediately in the second Trump administration, with a president who has promised to take full advantage of these trends.”
Biden’s presidency may ultimately be remembered for its confrontation with a Supreme Court determined to reshape the balance of power in American governance. As Trump prepares to assume office again, the court’s conservative majority appears poised to continue its transformative agenda.