No, the Supreme Court is not always Right

It is often suggested that as soon as the Supreme Court weighs in on a particular issue, it can no longer be revisited and whatever opinion is rendered must be treated as an eternally binding edict.

If one adopts to this position, they must then accept the following: that free blacks are not citizens and thus have no legal protections (see Scott v. Sandford), that individuals are subject to the regularly power of the federal government if they personally grow a surplus of wheat (see Wickard v. Filburn), that the president can unilaterally gather individuals based on their ancestry and send them to government internment camps without respect to due process (see Korematsu v. United States), among other absurdities.

On the contrary, the Supreme Court often gets things wrong, both morally and constitutionally. In such cases, the judiciary’s pernicious decrees should be treated as nothing more than idle blather – and actively resisted by the states and people.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.