The court's docket has become dominated by cases from these interest groups, whether it's regulatory interests, whether it's social interest, whether it's religious interests.

And the justices are doing nothing to stem that tide.

They're like, ooh, candy, as opposed to, wait a second. Maybe we should, like, slow our role.

I'm Bethany McLean.

Did you ever have a moment of doubt about capitalism and whether greed's a good idea?

And I'm Luigi Zengalis.

We have socialism for the very rich, rugged individualism for the poor.

And this is Capital Isn't, a podcast about what is working in capitalism.

First of all, tell me, is there some society you know that doesn't run on greed?

And most importantly, what isn't?

We ought to do better by the people that get left behind.

I don't think we shouldn't kill the capital system in the process.

I want to start with a sentence the Supreme Court wrote about itself in 1992. The court's

legitimacy depends on making legally principled decisions under circumstances in which their

principled character is sufficiently plausible to be accepted by the nation. Basically, we only

have power because you trust us. It sounds like 1992 was a different millennium.

But anyway, it's not trust us because we're powerful.

It is we earn power because we show our work.

When a court is at its best, it persuades even the people who disagree with it.

It proves to be above politics. But is it today? Fed independence

can slide into this sort of idea that because it's technocratic, outsiders shouldn't question it,

even when it's making choices that result in the distribution of wealth. The idea of court

...