WASHINGTON, DC – The Supreme Court has just released its final decisions in cases argued during the 2025-2026 term. Although many Court-watchers are discussing how well the Trump administration fared, hidden behind that narrative is the success of corporate interests in shaping this year’s most significant decisions. Constitutional Accountability Center Deputy Chief Counsel Brian Frazelle issued the following reaction:

In this term’s most important cases, corporate interests got what they wanted, whether they were supporting the Trump administration or opposing it. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wanted to block the President’s tariffs, and the Court agreed. The Chamber advocated giving presidents free rein to fire the leaders of independent agencies, and the Court agreed. The Chamber urged the Court to exempt the Federal Reserve Board from that ruling, and the Court agreed there too. The through-line in this term’s most significant cases was the success of the big business agenda.

Notably, the Chamber was victorious this term in nearly every case in which the Justices disagreed on the result. With just one exception, the Chamber won each case in which the Justices divided 5-4, 6-3, or 7-2. In contrast, nearly all of the Chamber’s losses were unanimous—indicating that the Chamber’s position was so indefensible that no Justice would endorse it. In other words, the Chamber lost cases only when it was obvious to all the Justices that its position was wrong. But when the outcome of a case was at all debatable, the Chamber won nearly every time.

Also remarkable is that the conservative Justices blasted away precedent after precedent when ruling for corporate interests this term. In Trump v. Slaughter, the conservative supermajority overruled a 90-year-old precedent on which the elected branches have long relied in creating independent agencies that protect the public. In National Republican Senatorial Committee v. FEC, the same conservative supermajority overruled a 25-year-old precedent so that even more unrestricted money can flow into federal elections. And in Cisco Systems v. Doe I, the majority overruled a 20-year-old precedent to shut the courthouse doors to victims of torture and other human rights violations. In each of these cases, the Chamber urged the Court to discard settled precedent, and in each of these cases, the Roberts Court complied.