3 ms·
Well they can "return it to the states" to decide after a creative re-interpretation. Nothing is settled after all. And what I was really saying was that even i
by blinkingled 4y ago
Well they can "return it to the states" to decide after a creative re-interpretation. Nothing is settled after all. And what I was really saying was that even if 13th and 14th aren't voided in our lifetime, there are other easier targets - same sex marriage and contraception namely that would further cement the idea that everything is hackable to your beliefs (without even needing unanimous SCOTUS decision to undo long established precedents) using this recipe - when what one would treat settled and what one wouldn't is never clear everything is unsettled and open to hacking away.
Sounds ridiculous but look at gun rights - Scalia said Second Amendment applies to individuals, but the decision would not affect other gun safety regulations. Now we have the SCOTUS expanding gun rights at the expense of states' rights and their safety regulations.
Could Congress maybe make a law stating precedents will not be overturned unless there is unanimous assent? That might make some things somewhat better for the foreseeable future.