Judging Hypocrisy

58 Pages Posted: 12 Nov 2019 Last revised: 11 Jan 2021

See all articles by Todd E. Pettys

Todd E. Pettys

University of Iowa - College of Law

Date Written: November 1, 2019


Editorialists, political leaders, scholars, and others sometimes accuse the U.S. Supreme Court’s members of hypocrisy, especially when they believe that divisions among the Justices are the product of partisan loyalties rather than good-faith differences in impartial legal judgment. Due to these hypocrisy charges’ delegitimizing potential, they pose a serious threat to the Court’s legal and moral authority. In legal circles and elsewhere, however, one finds a remarkable lack of clarity about what hypocrisy is, the forms it can take, and the moral precepts that define its boundaries. As a result, participants in public discourse about the Court can easily find themselves talking past one another. To be assured that the Justices are not hypocrites with respect to their commitment to impartiality, for example, is it sufficient to be persuaded that the Justices are not trying to deceive us when they say they do not regard themselves as mere politicians in robes, or is more required?

In this Article, I first offer a conceptual framework for thinking about hypocrisy of all sorts. I argue that hypocrisy appears in three principal forms—Faking Hypocrisy, Concealing Hypocrisy, and Gerrymandering Hypocrisy—and I identify the anti-equality thread that runs through all of them. I then show how this three-part framework can deepen our thinking about the work of the Court. With respect to the Justices’ pledge to be impartial, for example, I argue that there are circumstances in which (as many commonly assume) the Justices can be guilty of hypocrisy only if they are schemers bent on duping the American public into believing they are unbiased. In other circumstances, however, the Justices can be guilty of hypocrisy even if they sincerely believe they are doing what the law requires.

Keywords: hypocrisy, hypocrite, supreme court, judging, partisan, bias, equal, equality, rule of law

JEL Classification: K00, K1, K10, K3, K4, K40, K41, K49

Suggested Citation

Pettys, Todd E., Judging Hypocrisy (November 1, 2019). U Iowa Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-24, 70 Emory Law Journal 251, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3479366 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3479366

Todd E. Pettys (Contact Author)

University of Iowa - College of Law ( email )

Melrose and Byington
Iowa City, IA 52242
United States
319-335-6814 (Phone)
319-335-9098 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics