A good ruling. Everyone getting upset at this should take a couple things into consideration- 1. Both parties do this now and have done it historically. It is

A good ruling. Everyone getting upset at this should take a couple things into consideration- 1. Both parties do this now and have done it historically. It is no more a danger today than it has ever been in the past and the Republic has lived and thrived with this system. Generally what it does it create a magnification of power for a party that is in a slight majority position, which can create more continuity in government and allow their ideas to make it into actual law over opposition. This is not a necessarily a bad thing. Voters get to see the full affects of a party's agenda take place and then if they don't like it, the party tends to get thrown out wholesale and the other 'team' ends up with similar magnification to implement their agenda. See Texas and California where this has played out in opposite directions in recent decades. 2. Modesty in the judiciary is a very good thing. Notice that the new 'ultra-conservative' judges have regularly been crossing over to join with the court liberals this term. Why? Because their underlying philosophy is to interpret the law and constitution as written. I appreciate here that they are calling out that the actions taken by the legislatures are not necessarily appropriate, but respecting the boundaries of what their constitutional role will often play to the advantage of those who disagree with this particular ruling. If they were true 'movement' conservatives dictating by desired outcome rather than the law, they could easily slip into a tyrannical mode from the POV of many here. Instead the worst you can say is that they are trying to enforce the law and Constitution as written and you can use your vote to get those changed.