The rise of a privileged expert class has become a pressing issue in American democracy, as highlighted by Justice Clarence Thomas in his recent concurrence in United States v. Skrmetti. This ruling upheld Tennessee’s ban on adolescent transgender treatments and served as a rallying cry against the unchecked influence of so-called experts in shaping policy that contradicts public sentiment.
Justice Thomas Critiques the Expert Class
In his concurrence, Justice Thomas articulated a critical stance toward an elite group of individuals who have long dictated policy decisions without accountability to the public. He cautioned his colleagues to resist the allure of an “expert class” whose opinions often serve more to promote ideological agendas than to foster genuine scientific inquiry. Thomas stated, “so-called experts have no license to countermand the ‘wisdom, fairness, or logic of legislative choices,’” emphasizing the need for courts to respect the democratic process and the will of the people.
Groupthink and Questionable Authority
The term “expert” has been weaponized in political discourse, often used to lend legitimacy to a viewpoint that may not withstand scrutiny. As reported by The Federalist, Thomas pointed out that the “overwhelming opinion of experts” can often mask a dangerous groupthink that overlooks dissenting voices. This phenomenon was glaringly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, where public health experts promoted policies like mandatory mask-wearing and school closures. Many of these measures later proved to be ineffective and devoid of solid scientific backing, leading to significant public distrust.
Visit the TN Capitol - TN General Assembly
The Collapse of Public Trust
Public confidence in the expert class has plummeted in recent years. According to a Gallup poll, only a third of Americans express great confidence in higher education institutions, representing a dramatic decline of over twenty percent in just a decade. This erosion of trust can be traced back to an educational environment increasingly dominated by ideological conformity, where dissenting opinions are often silenced. As Justice Thomas noted, the expert class has allowed ideology to influence their recommendations, leading to misguided policies on critical issues such as gender dysphoria treatments for minors.
Ideology Over Objectivity
The shift from objective inquiry to ideological advocacy has further alienated the public from experts. For instance, British pediatrician Hilary Cass faced a backlash for her research questioning the efficacy of gender-identity treatments for children, as reported by The Guardian. The suppression of dissenting views in academia has become commonplace, where scholars who challenge the prevailing orthodoxy on topics like climate change or social justice are often ostracized. The once-respected notion of expert authority has been compromised by a relentless push for ideological conformity.
Opinion | The Supreme Court Case Over Trans Youth Could Also ...
Consequences for Legislative Process
The implications of this trend are profound. As courts and society increasingly reject the expert class, we may witness a resurgence of legislative authority that prioritizes the voices of ordinary citizens over disconnected elites. The Supreme Court's recent decision to reconsider the Chevron doctrine reflects this shift, as justices call for enhanced scrutiny of agency decisions that have long been shielded from public accountability. This judicial reawakening signals a potential rebirth of constitutional principles that uphold the separation of powers and respect for legislative intent.
Justice Thomas’s critique underscores a pivotal moment in the ongoing struggle for democracy. The expert class, once revered for their knowledge and insight, has become a symbol of elitism and hubris. As public sentiment hardens against this class, it is imperative for lawmakers and judges to remember their duty to uphold the Constitution and serve the interests of the American people.
