In his post today about the Supreme Court’s decision to throw out the Texas lawsuit without so much as an explanation, Jeffrey Tulis wishes that the Supreme Court had written a more extensive statement explaining why they threw it out. Tulis cites a similar piece by Tom Goldstein making roughly the same argument. Both Tulis and Goldstein want the Court to have written a more extensive opinion which, to use Goldstein’s words, “decimates” the lawsuit. Although I agree that this lawsuit was not only ungrounded but dangerous, I would suggest that a more lengthy “decimation” would have been a serious mistake on the Court’s part. By simply rejecting the lawsuit and saying nothing about why, the Court preserves the authority it possesses through its objectivity. Insofar as many Trump supporters thought that a Court full of Trump appointees would simply do as he wanted, a confrontation with that simple objectivity is even more powerful than an extended opinion. An extended opinion looks political and the Trump people can label it as such. By throwing themselves into the political fray, the Court would be confirming all the allegations made against his appointees but just on the other side. The simple dismissal is more powerful because it affirms the rule of law over and against politics. At a certain point, the law isn’t political. And just because Trump had his appointees on the Court doesn’t mean they’ll throw an election in his favor; it doesn’t mean that they would make a mockery of the law for the sake of his victory. But it also doesn’t mean that they’ve become part of the other political team looking to attack him. A lengthier opinion might please those already lined up against Trump, but it would do nothing to, as Goldstein writes, “make the country listen.” It’s better that Trump and his supporters are confronted with the silence of the law’s command—a command that, like the mandate that he leave office at the end of his term if he is not reelected, is not at all political. The Supreme Court did more to restore the authority of the law by saying nothing at all.