Better than that, I’ll explain my witticism:
- The Court can use any kind of reasoning to change the law that it chooses; a jar of Skippy peanut butter can serve for their basis on deciding case law if they so choose. Anybody, especially attorneys/judges, can make any interpolation/extrapolation on previous law to say that up is down, or down is up, and if anybody questions them, TS.
They are omnipotent-they answer to no one, when they decide a case. - You questioned what rationale they ‘needed’ to use (my word).
- My heart was touched that you thought that they needed a Constitutional reason to decide law.
- Much laughter, and my comment ensued.