4 ms·

I can't predict the future, but I also will point out if it gets to the SC it won't be now, it will be the SC 10 years from now. That being said I would hope t

I can't predict the future, but I also will point out if it gets to the SC it won't be now, it will be the SC 10 years from now. That being said I would hope this is an open and shut enoght case under the 1st Amendment and the Interstate Commerce clause to justify this. Which I would hope overrules personal agendas in the court. I know a lot of people are upset with the overturn of Roe v Wade, but even the initial judges in that case said the constitutional ground that case was ruled on was shaky, which my understanding is the basic job of the SC is to rule on the constitutionality of laws. Now decades of an activist judiciary have distorted that concept as the legislative branch has chosen to abdicate their responsibility for their own gain, but the fact still stands, congress should be making the laws and the courts deciding if they are constitutional.

32163704 4y ago
> Now decades of an activist judiciary have distorted that concept as the legislative branch has chosen to abdicate their responsibility for their own gain, but the fact still stands, congress should be making the laws and the courts deciding if they are constitutional. The Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality the first time. If it’s up to Congress to make the laws, then why did the Supreme Court intervene this time? They could have kicked this back to congress and said: “We already ruled on this. If you want a different outcome, do your job.” But they didn’t.