If a law is not deemed unconstitutional by SCOTUS, then the constitution has been followed. Just cause you don't like something or think you are more a constitutional scholar than the SC justices, doesn't make it true
And even these 9 Black-Robed Humans get it wrong.
Do you have a better way of doing it?
Be honest now, this isn't about choosing sides, or Whom wins or looses. Does it ever bother you that so many controversial decisions are based on a 5/4 split?
What ever happened to giving light to the full arguments, giving weight to relevance, importance, and allowing place in the Ruling. Does the Court in Theory serve Truth and Justice or Expediency and Convenience, at the Cost of Truth and Justice? Personally I think the Court leaves too much unresolved, It needs to try harder. I really think the Justices need to discuss with each other further, and better refine the end resolution. My point is that the process should better refine.
Last edited: