The people whose job it is to interpret the law have abandoned any pretense of doing that in favor of shoving words into the mouths of men who died before humans discovered dinosaurs. The court is openly, brazenly corrupt.
In a democracy, what method would you propose judges use to impose restrictions on the actions of the democratically elected government based on a written constitution?
> what method would you propose judges use to impose restrictions
Judges are appointed (or voted in) by the very people you think they "impose restriction" on. Any ruling against the ruling class in our favor is nothing more than a happy accident.
Do you have an argument that would be persuasive to someone who doesn't believe that representative democracy is fundamentally flawed or somehow inoperative in the US?
