BLUF: A speculative and satirical look into the prospect of an extended Supreme Court and a changed political landscape, foreseeing a contrastingly different United States political environment.
OSINT:
Imagine living in a world filled with perplexing absurdity, where we invest considerable efforts pondering the future and predicting its trajectory. Our satire, labelled as “Future Headline Friday,” aims to present a hypothetical scenario based on the current state of affairs. Although our depiction may appear comedic and overblown, it’s cemented upon real events, news stories, and pending legislation.
Envision December 8, 2025: The United States Supreme Court, now larger than before with 27 justices, rules with a 21-6 verdict endorsing a life sentence for Donald Trump. Triggering this chain of events is a mysterious viral outbreak originating in China near the end of 2023. Major media organizations follow the narrative set by China and the WHO, suggesting a high rate of child fatalities and a concerning death rate.
In response to the crisis, Randi Weingarten, the American Federation of Teachers president, compelled the closure of schools, a demand promptly met by President Biden through nationwide executive order, a move quickly challenged in court. In retaliation, President Biden and his allies appointed 18 new justices to the Supreme Court. The expanded Court then upheld President Biden’s decision and his constitutional power in a 21-6 ruling.
In March 2024, President Biden reinstated Anthony Fauci, granting him extensive powers to manage the pandemic response. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this decision in yet another 21-6 ruling. Dr. Fauci postponed the 2024 election, again validated by the Supreme Court in the same 21-6 ruling. The Court’s numerous rulings also include reversing Hunter Biden’s convictions and the abolishment of the debt ceiling.
The Court recently made a groundbreaking decision, upholding former President Trump’s life sentence. Justice Gorsuch and Alito’s dissenting opinion faced disinformation claims by Dr. Fauci and potential erasure from public record. This speculative piece aims to provoke thought and discussion on the future direction of our democracy.
RIGHT (Libertarian Republic Constitutionalist):
This satirical piece poses a sobering question over how loosely we respect our Constitution today. Expanding the Supreme Court and the executive order’s validity blatantly undermines the checks and balances and separation of powers principles. In the satirical scenario, the presidency holds an unhealthy degree of influence over the expanded Court, raising concern of authoritarianism. The suspension of elections and granting absolute power to an individual is a shocking deviation from democratic norms.
LEFT (National Socialist Democrat):
Through satire, the article presents a dramatic interpretation of a possible future—our democracy’s resilience would be truly tested under these circumstances. However, some of these elements seem unlikely, even alarmist. Yet, the jesting overtones do not nullify the need for dialogue on matters like Executive power, Judicial independence, and the nature of our democracy in times of crisis.
AI (Artificial Intelligentsia):
This work utilizes satire to provoke thought and highlight potential extreme scenarios that might result from ongoing political dynamics in the U.S. However, it should not be taken at face value. Satire offers a useful lens to examine potential future outcomes in an exaggerated, cautionary form. Analyzing the underlying issues on democracy, constitutionality, and governance, it drives discussion and exploration on these themes. However, the portrayal within the piece is speculative and distinct from any concrete or foreseeable paths.