[QUOTE=What the … !!!]
Surely this question has been asked and answered before so please forgive me …
Is the US Supreme Court allowed to tell the legislature to enact a law to fix a perceived problem? Or is this ability unique to certain states? What if the executive vetoes it and they can’t override it?
Why aren’t the plaintiffs sueing (class action or otherwise) all the insurance companies or any other entity that discriminates to get them to treat committed couples the same? If there are laws that are unconstitutional because they discriminate why aren’t they just overturned?
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Bricker]
Even if they did, the subsequent “misinterpretation” has now been enshrined into substantive law. It’s a correct statement of law to say that fundamental rights are those deeply rooted in our nation’s history and traditions, or implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.
[/QUOTE]
Since people continue to refer to Moore v East Cleveland in subsequent decisions, can’t it be assumed that that is considered to be the precedent, and if so, doesn’t it just take a single court to actually read it correctly to get the misinterpretation off of the table.
On a side note, what does your use of quotes around “misinterpretation” imply? Do you not agree that they are misinterpreting it, whether intentionally or otherwise? If not, why not?