**'The Gilded Gavel': Legal Historians Stunned as Supreme Court's Landslide of Major Decisions Echoes the "Midnight Appointments" Scandal of 1801**

‘The Gilded Gavel’: Legal Historians Stunned as Supreme Court’s Landslide of Major Decisions Echoes the “Midnight Appointments” Scandal of 1801

By Analicia Vega, History & Politics Correspondent

WASHINGTON — Legal historians are comparing the current Supreme Court term to one of the most notorious and politically explosive moments in early American history: the “Midnight Judges” affair of 1801.

Experts note a striking structural parallel. In the waning days of John Adams’ presidency, a lame-duck Federalist Congress passed the Judiciary Act, packing the courts with last-minute appointees. Today, following a similarly contentious election cycle, the Court is issuing a firestorm of 6-3 decisions on abortion, affirmative action, and executive power—all while public approval of the judiciary hits historic lows.

“This isn’t just about the decisions themselves; it’s about the pattern,” says Dr. Eleanor Vance, a constitutional historian at Georgetown. “In 1801, the outgoing party used the bench to entrench its ideology for a generation. The result was a constitutional crisis that birthed Marbury v. Madison—and the very concept of judicial review. Now, we’re seeing a modern Marbury moment where the Court’s legitimacy is directly challenged because the public perceives it as a partisan prize, not a neutral arbiter.”

The comparison is gaining traction on social media under the hashtag #MidnightCourt, with historians pointing to leaked drafts and unprecedented ethical debates as echoes of Chief Justice John Marshall’s strategic power grabs.

“They are not making law; they are staging a quiet, constitutional coup under a velvet robe,” tweeted one constitutional law professor, the post quickly going viral.

The White House has remained silent, but inside the Beltway, the chatter is clear: The Court is no longer perceived as above the fray—it is the fray.