Get ready...

[Weltall]

You know that's not true. All you have to do to overturn a Supreme Court case is write a law that changes that law... yes, that can be hard in some cases, but it's hardly impossible. Balance of powers...

That's what I said. Unfortunately, it's exponentially easier for the Supreme Court to alter the interpretation of a law than it is for the legislature to counter it. The Judiciary has the most unfettered and inaccessable power structure of the three branches. It is a balance that is surely tipping. They answer to the other two branches, but that's not enough. They also need to answer to us. After all, it's our lives that are affected by their decisions, and usually in a very direct way. It's against the entire democratic process to allow one point of the triad to be able to ignore public scrutiny and act with impunity. It's harder for the legislative and execuitive branches to counter the judiciary because they have to worry about what we think. The Judiciary needs that same kind of worry. They need to have to think about what the people care about before they hand down cast-iron rulings that affect our lives.

My interpretation of the system is that the judicial branch of our goverment is supposed to serve as the ultimate check against the other two, which in theory have more broad policymaking powers at their disposal. Instead, it is the judiciary that seems to wield the least-checked power. It should not be that way. No official in any position of lawmaking power should be above public scrutiny. This is our government and our system. Our president and Congress rule because we as citizens allow them to. We don't have any say in who rules on the Court, and it's really wrong that we don't.