@Pat Dunno.. so far I can see, the supreme court really depends on which individuals are in there. So in my opinion they're really not following the law since the law in general is supposed to be stable. Technically, the SC is also supposed to be stable.. but if the 'law' of the SC depends on who are in the SC...
Uhuh, can't convince me there that the SC is really being neutral here.
That's why there is the principle of stare decisis, which says that deference should be given to previous decisions. Otherwise judges could change their interpretation for each case which would mean there would be no law at all, just what the judges want.
Also, stability of the law is not to say that the law should never change, but it should be determined by the people and their representatives, not unelected judges. But Congress doesn't act to update the laws and they just leave it up to the courts, which erodes democracy. It's been over fifty years since we've had a new amendment to the Constitution.
QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.