supreme court Jabin Botsford/Getty Images

In the last few decades the Supreme Court has lost its non-partisan reputation.

For the good of the country and the Court, the justices should issue a unanimous decision about President Donald Trump’s tax returns.

Michael Gordon is a long-time Democratic strategist, a former spokesperson for the Justice Department, and the principal for the strategic-communications firm Group Gordon.

Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.

Like so much in our politics today, the Supreme Court has lost its halo. Shattered is the image of Justices sitting and serving to deliver impartial justice.

At his confirmation hearings, Brett Kavanaugh was the perfect metaphor for the Court in our times: splitting the country with his ranting and his rhetoric.

Our current political polarization began with the fall of the Fairness Doctrine and the subsequent rise of conservative radio, Newt Gingrich, and cable news. As the division grew, the Supreme Court entered the fray with Bush v Gore. The 5-4 decision installing a president was political, not judicial, on both sides of the aisle.

In the wake of Bush v Gore came Citizens United and Hobby Lobby, both 5-4 decisions that were more about political leaning than legal precedent. To be fair, there were 5-4 decisions that were historic in a positive way: gay marriage and Obamacare, for example. But these decisions were at least minimally bipartisan.

Now, with the release of Trump’s taxes before them, the Supreme Court has the chance to speak clearly and unequivocally, if it can bring the historic moments in its rearview to the fore once again.

The power of unanimity

Some of the most consequential decisions in Supreme Court history were unanimous. Chief Justice Earl Warren knew the import of Brown v Board of Education and thought the stamp of a unanimous decision would put the issue to bed – not only judicially but in the court of public opinion.

Similarly, United States v Nixon, which compelled President Nixon to turn over his White House recordings and effectively led to his resignation little more than a fortnight later, was a unanimous decision. Three Justices appointed by Nixon put the public interest first.

In both cases, the power of a Court ruling unanimously and without partisanship helped cement a piece of US history.

A rare opportunity with Trump’s taxes

That leads us to the lawsuit over the release of President Trump’s taxes. A unanimous decision on a hot-button political topic has been out of fashion for at least a generation. Even with US v Nixon and Clinton v Jones as at least moral if not legal precedents, a split decision on the President’s taxes would not be surprising with the level of norm-breaking today.

Now it is true that, since 2000, a plurality of Supreme Court cases have been unanimous – but the unanimous decisions tend to be of less import to our politics and the issues driving the partisan divide.

Trump has flouted many norms, but the question over his taxes has become a sort of touchstone. He has promised to release them and reneged so many times that it would be a bigger surprise if he wasn’t hiding something. Whether it’s his foreign business ties, stretching of the tax laws, poor business judgment, or some combination, it is important that the American public see his returns.

The public interest — in the legal not tabloid sense — is so great that the battle for the returns has made it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Reclaiming a halo in our divided government

Given the importance, the Supreme Court’s decision on Trump’s tax returns can redefine its role in this era.

If the Supreme Court can hold this President accountable and do so unanimously, it will add to its credibility in these polarizing times. Chief Justice Roberts has called for more consensus and less politicization of the courts, but there would be no more striking example of the independence and integrity of the Court than a unanimous decision here.

Given Trump’s hold on the GOP, even if the president’s taxes are turned over, we will learn something interesting about the President, but like everything else there will be zero political impact. And even with the Supreme Court stamp, I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump finds another end-around given his success in rewriting rules without consequence.

With that said, I almost don’t care what decision the Supreme Court reaches, as long as all nine are unified. If a group of diverse Justices can find a way to reach true consensus on an issue central to our governance, it will shine the first light during a dark period for the rule of law.