It doesn't even seem to be much work now that they aren't pretending to have legitimate rationale behind these decisions. They have a 6-3 majority, lifetime appointments, and zero oversight beyond impeachment which will never fucking happen. They're bulletproof assholes and they'll push as far as they feel like so long as they don't piss people off enough to assassinate them, and it's almost exclusively conservatives who would go to such lengths, so yeah they're bulletproof.
Hey now, researching who was the most misogynistic witch finder of the 14th century takes a while
I think the supreme court is the biggest example that what this country needs is to be rebuilt. It is wildly overpowered for its responsibilities and wildly reliant on a faulty premise of branch unity the founding fathers based their accountability mechanisms on. As if the feeling of being encroached on as a legislator would override their happenstance agreement with the specific ruling they see doing the encroaching.
What we need instead is for "SCOTUS" to be a sortitionate body, any federal judge can serve on a SCOTUS provided they are randomly selected for the case and haven't served it already, up to five SCOTI can try a case via appeals before an "en banc" judgement where all five SCOTUSes retry the case, and if even that fails a judicial synod can be called where every federal judge drops their shit and gets together to law nerd this shit out.
Don't forget Judicial Review isn't actually an original function of the Judicial Branch. It's a power they decided to give themselves some ten years after the Constitution was written.
Yeah that's the other thing, a single branch should not be able to give itself new powers.
Judicial Review in of itself isn't the craziest concept, plenty of other democracies have adopted similar processes since then and it has seemed to serve them well, but I can guarantee that none of those other democracies saw those processes invented by the courts that use them themselves.
Also, if a law goes out of effect because of a ruling, it should be considered stricken completely, that shit in Arizona where they tried to frog boil everyone on that law that was "technically" on the books even if it was unenforceable should never have been allowed to get anywhere.
Every ten years the current body of law should be censused and coalesced to provide an up to date resource on the current body of law and standing precedents, and if there's some obscure law that hasn't been enforceable since the civil war is "technically" still on the books because the state legislature or whatever never got around to officially voting to nix it, it should still be booted because it's an illegal law and therefore cannot be part of the body of law even for hypotheticals where the law or ruling countermanding it get overturned themselves.
