James Carville has been losing his mind over Donald Trump for years.
Now he’s turned his sights on the Supreme Court — and the meltdown is jaw-dropping.
And what Carville said about the justices on his podcast will have every Trump supporter shaking their head in disbelief.
Carville Unloads on the Court
The 81-year-old Democrat strategist — the man who helped Bill Clinton win the White House back in 1992 — went on a profanity-laced tirade on his Politicon podcast, calling the nation’s highest court flat-out illegitimate.
“The Supreme Court in my mind, and thank God [House Minority Leader Hakeem] Jeffries said the same thing, you have to follow them. They are not legitimate. They have nothing legit about these people. They have no code of ethics. They were rammed through or delayed by the Congress. They stole elections. And I got news for you, Johnny Boy, you might be looking at another 12 colleagues instead of eight because the country is sick of your bull****” Carville fumed.
He was clearly aiming that “Johnny Boy” line at Chief Justice John Roberts. And he wasn’t done.
Carville went after Justice Samuel Alito by name, calling him “nothing more than a political hack” and railing against the court’s 6-3 ruling that weakened a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. He called the ruling “unintelligible” and claimed the justices wrote it purely to benefit one political party.
“These sons of ******* were so political, so happy to help the Republican Party any way they could, they wrote a convoluted decision that legal scholars are still trying to wander through to think, ‘What the **** was the rationale for this?'” Carville said.
He didn’t stop there.
“There is no reason, none, that you should have any respect or any admiration for this pack of people who take money from anybody, don’t report anything, are the only nine people in the entire f**king federal government that operates under no ethics rule,” Carville said on the Politicon podcast, labeling the court “corrupt.”
The Court-Packing Demand
Carville has been pushing court-packing for a while now, but this episode made clear he wants Democrats to treat it as a top priority the moment they regain any power.
In a separate Politicon episode, Carville laid out exactly what he wants done: “If the Democrats win the presidency and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should make Puerto Rico [and] D.C. a state, and they should expand the Supreme Court to 13.”
That’s not a policy proposal. That’s a power grab dressed up in outrage.
Granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico would almost certainly hand Democrats four new Senate seats. Pack the court on top of that, and you’ve got a political machine that runs itself for a generation. Carville knows it. Democrats just don’t care anymore if Americans know they are scheming to transform America into a one-party socialist state.
President Trump saw through it. He fired back at Carville on Truth Social, calling him a “wacko” and describing Democrats pushing similar ideas as “Country Destroying Sleazebags.”
The Ethics Argument — and Why It Falls Apart
Carville’s main complaint, buried under all the cursing, is that Supreme Court justices don’t face the same ethics requirements as other federal officials. And look — there’s a kernel of something real in there, even if Carville buries it under a mountain of partisan rage.
The court did adopt its first formal code of conduct in 2023, after scrutiny mounted over undisclosed gifts and travel accepted by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Justice Thomas disclosed in 2023 that he had accepted trips on billionaire GOP donor Harlan Crow’s private jet. Justice Alito came under scrutiny over a luxury 2008 fishing trip to Alaska with a wealthy Republican donor. Questions also emerged about Jane Sullivan Roberts, the Chief Justice’s wife, and her work recruiting lawyers for firms that had business before the court.
But Carville isn’t making a good-faith ethics argument. He’s making a political one. The man who proudly told an audience he has “Trump Derangement Syndrome” isn’t exactly a neutral observer on matters of judicial independence.
“A private in the army is subject to more ethics regulations than the nine justices on the Supreme Court,” Carville said on his podcast. Fair enough as a factual matter. But Carville’s solution — adding four new justices hand-picked by a Democrat president — isn’t an ethics reform. It’s a takeover.
The Trump Rant That Started It All
Worth noting: the Supreme Court tirade came at the tail end of a separate rant about President Trump. Carville told his podcast audience he received “nothing but messages of support” for being “nasty” to Trump at the Kentucky Derby.
“I don’t want to hear any more talk about Trump being sick, I don’t want any more talk about that s**t,” Carville said. “I want that motherf**ker so alive and so cognizant and so aware on election night in November that you can’t believe it.”
So the man calling the Supreme Court corrupt is also the man who openly admits he has Trump Derangement Syndrome and who brags about being nasty to the President at a horse race. That’s the source of this great moral outrage over judicial ethics.
Carville also called Chief Justice Roberts a “whiny ***** baby” in another recent Politicon video — a remark that didn’t get nearly the attention it deserved. Roberts, for his part, had recently urged Americans to tone down personal attacks on judges, calling such rhetoric “dangerous.” Carville’s response was to turn the volume up.
What Carville Actually Wants
Strip away the profanity and the performative fury, and Carville’s position is pretty simple. He wants a Supreme Court that rubberstamps the Democrat Party agenda. When it doesn’t, he calls it illegitimate. When justices he dislikes get appointed, he calls it stolen. When the court rules against Democrat priorities, he calls it corruption.
But the three justices Carville is most furious about — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett — were nominated by a duly elected president and confirmed by the United States Senate. That’s the process working exactly as designed. Carville just doesn’t like the outcome.
And the court-packing scheme he’s pushing isn’t new. Franklin Roosevelt tried it in 1937 and got laughed out of the room by members of his own party. The idea failed then because it was transparently about political control, not judicial integrity. Nothing has changed except the names on the jerseys.
Carville has been predicting catastrophe for years. He predicted Trump would jail journalists. He predicted Trump’s coalition would shatter. He keeps moving the goalposts, and his audience keeps cheering. At some point, you have to ask whether the rage is the product or the point.
But the Supreme Court isn’t going anywhere. And three justices appointed by Donald Trump are going to be on that bench for a very long time.
Carville can yell all he wants. It won’t change a thing.
Sources: Mediaite, The Daily Beast, The Hill, Raw Story, Fox News, Grabien