CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford delivered a sharp rebuke of her own profession Sunday, accusing much of the press of peddling a false and dangerous narrative about the Supreme Court that undermines public confidence in the rule of law.
Appearing on Face the Nation, Crawford was asked by host Margaret Brennan to identify what she sees as the most underreported story of 2025. Crawford did not hesitate, turning her fire squarely on media coverage of the nation’s highest court.
Crawford said a persistent narrative has taken hold portraying the Supreme Court as corrupt, a claim she said gained momentum after the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade and has since morphed into accusations that the court is merely doing the political bidding of President Donald Trump.
“You know, there is a narrative that the Supreme Court is corrupt,” Crawford said. She argued that this storyline is not only wildly overreported but “patently false” and deeply harmful. According to Crawford, such rhetoric threatens the integrity of the institution itself and erodes public faith in the rule of law.
She stressed that while Americans are free to disagree with the court’s rulings, labeling the justices as corrupt crosses a dangerous line. Crawford reminded viewers that the Supreme Court has been conservative for roughly two decades, and that ideological disagreements do not equate to misconduct.
“This is a conservative Supreme Court. It has been a conservative Supreme Court for 20 years,” Crawford said. “People can disagree and do disagree with their opinions, but it’s profoundly wrong to call it — or say corruption — where there, in fact, is none.”
Crawford argued that what truly goes underreported is a serious discussion of what the Supreme Court has actually been doing over that time. She said the press has largely failed to explain how the justices view their constitutional role, their relationship to the other branches of government, and their efforts to restore accountability within the constitutional structure.
According to Crawford, the court is functional and consistent, even though the nine justices often disagree sharply with one another. She noted that the justices do not all interpret the Constitution or federal law the same way, and that their internal debates reflect a legitimate and healthy struggle over constitutional interpretation.
“That is as it should be,” Crawford said, arguing that disagreement among justices is not a sign of dysfunction, but of a living constitutional system.
Crawford also framed the issue in historical terms, noting that as the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, Americans should be thinking seriously about the importance of the Supreme Court and the rule of law. She suggested that maintaining confidence in the judiciary is essential to preserving democracy itself.
Brennan reacted to the remarks by noting the weight of Crawford’s warning, particularly her suggestion that democracy itself is at stake.
Crawford doubled down, saying that if the public loses confidence in the rule of law, the consequences for democracy are unclear but potentially severe. She called media claims of corruption “profoundly irresponsible.”
Another panelist added that such rhetoric can fuel threats against the justices, a point Crawford immediately agreed with, underscoring the real-world dangers of careless accusations.
In an era of heated political division, Crawford’s comments stood out as a rare, blunt defense of the Supreme Court from within the mainstream media — and a warning that reckless narratives may do lasting damage to the institutions they target.
[READ MORE: Migrant Truckers Sue California After DMV Revokes Thousands of Commercial Licenses]
