Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Supreme Court is handling its job?

Approve (21%) – "I'm always impressed by our Supreme Court, and I love to read court briefings. I'm an independent, and I don't find this court to be overly conservative. They're reading the law of the constitution, which is how it should be. I know there are grumblings from the left that the constitution should be "updated," but I think it's an excellent document and it is still relevant today."

• "What people too often forget about the Court is what its role is. They are not there to create law, only interpret the intent behind the law that was created by the legislature. If you don't like the outcome, maybe change the law through the appropriate path?"

Disapprove (69%) – "When the Justices adhere to the letter of the law rather than allowing personal preferences to influence their decisions, they will fulfill the responsibility for which they were appointed. The institution is called the Supreme Court for a reason; however, for several decades, it has fallen short of the impartiality and integrity that its name implies. As in many areas of public life today, political considerations have increasingly displaced objective judgments of right and wrong, undermining public confidence in the Court and compromising its institutional credibility."

• "There are three branches of government and the Supreme Court has been increasing the power of one of those branches. In addition, the members of the court should be interpreting their findings for a 21st Century world. The founders could not have imagined how the world would change and we should not be stuck in the 19th Century. The Constitution needs to be a living and breathing document."

"I feel the court has become very biased rather then being blind to politics. Judges receive favors from lobbyist and political groups to curry favor. These justices should be censured if not removed. It's shameful that they don't even recuse themselves when these connections are brought to light."

• "The Supreme Court is supposed to be neutral politically. But the majority conservatives have politicized their decisions. They have misinterpreted Constitutional guarantees in opposition to rights that clearly were protected."

"SCOTUS purchased the beautiful house next door, and I was looking forward to them being good neighbors. Over the years the house began to need maintenance. They neglected many of what I would call structural issues. The paint was peeling (Citizens United), windows were broken (Dobbs), weeds were overtaking the yard (Presidential Immunity), raw sewage flowing on the property (undisclosed gifts/influence). The house was beginning to crumble slowly but surely. I dreamed they could be evicted. If only they were renters instead of homeowners. Maybe it's time to change the zoning and property codes for the community, for the benefit of the community. Something WE need to address."

• "It is clear that the conservative majority is bucking precedent in many instances and misinterpreting the constitution to appease a president that is constantly violating the law to stay in power."

Unsure/other (10%) – "Other. I think most of the justices are interpreting the law as is required by their duties. I disagree with their interpretations in many circumstances, but that's not an indictment on their job performance; it means I disagree. Except Gorsuch, with his view on the tariffs being illegal but too complex to rectify; that was a spineless opinion. I do, however, believe that the cases they're seeing are wildly political, that at least one of them is outright corrupt and has put his decisions for sale to the highest bidder (Justice Thomas), and that there's a very dangerous prevailing wind of the unified executive theory at play that represents a threat to a representative republic. So ultimately, my opinion varies based on opinions issued per decision, but I'm generally net-negative."