Americans on Facts and Opinions

[Rev. Rye]

Coming from the constitution=explicitly stated within the Constitution.

Coming from an interpretation of the Constitution= Inferred from judges reading between the lines in the Constitution. Remember, judges in different eras ruled that Segregation was technically constitutional in the 1890s, and also inherently opposed to the same Constitution in the 1950s.

Granted, both the Constitution and the Opinions of the Supreme Court are the law of the land, but the thing is that my Plessy/Brown point shows how malleable it can be. With the right amount of determined judges and a the right case, those opinions can actually change, and so can the law. Hell, within the span of 43 years, laws against gay marriage were allowed to exist (Baker v. Nelson), and then with Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, they were considered unconstitutional.

And do you think that if the Republican Party can get enough judges in the Supreme Court and get the right case, they can't find a way to consider laws against the bete noire de jour constitutional again? Looking at Wikipedia's list of overruled Supreme Court cases, I don't see any that were overruled, but then had that overruling overruled, but I can see no reason it can't happen.