>The Supreme Court is just interpreting the law. I find it quite surprising that there's people who still believe that. Certainly that's what the defined purp

>The Supreme Court is just interpreting the law. I find it quite surprising that there's people who still believe that. Certainly that's what the defined purpose of the court is, they very often decide things specifically contrary to what the law says. Two cases I often bring up to show how partisan SCOTUS is are "King v. Burwell" and "Shelby County v. Holder". In both of these cases the argument for the majority opinion was that SCOTUS should act because congress won't. The interesting contrast between these two cases is that the decision in one favored the Democrats, and the other favored Republicans. They were decided largely along party lines with Roberts and Kennedy changing sides. But 7 out of the 9 justices completely reversed their logic for why they voted the way they did. In one case arguing they should leave it to congress to fix, and in the other arguing that they should act because congress won't.