Let's make miscarriages illegal.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You're 100% cool with this? Nine people that none of us voted for, nine people who have lifelong terms, nine people who aren't even held to the same ethical standards as other federal judges, are the people that you trust with defending the Constitution?

Yes.

The Supremacy clause binds the Congress to uphold the Constitution. If you don't trust them, why do you trust the SCOTUS? What stops SCOTUS from making decisions that conflict with the Constitution?

Its that pesky democratic process that you like so much. Sometimes the constituents want things that are clearly unconstitutional (flag burning being the obvious example). Congress may pass things over their better judgement to satisfy the mob. The SCOTUS exists as an equal branch of government to hold Congress in check. SCOTUS can make mistakes, but at least they are dedicated to uphold the Constitution regardless of mob sympathies. As someone with a NRA avatar, I'd imagine you'd be happy with that considering the Heller decision (ie, if it wasn't for the SCOTUS some cities would likely have completely banned gun ownership in violation of the 2nd Amendment - with approval from their constituents to do so).

In brief, why don't you trust the democratic process? Do you believe that America would be run better if we just gave up voting altogether?

This is amusing considering all the breaks the authors of the Constitution put on the democratic process. After all, the Senate used to originally be filled by members of State Senates. Unrestrained democracy was resisted greatly - hence the phrase, a Republic, not a Democracy.

Would you rather a direct democracy, run by polls? If so, why don't you trust the democratic process?

[Imran Siddiqui]

The Court ceased being a major impediment to the New Deal after 1937 and FDR was able to construct a majority on the Court favorable to his agenda. He was also reelected in 1940. I'm having trouble seeing FDR as a cautionary tale.

Well he kept getting voted in . I think though, that speaks even greater to the fact that Court is not completely insulated from the democratic process... a party stays in power long enough, it can change the composition of the court. Though the caution was deliberately screwing with the dynamics of how the Court works rather than waiting it out.

[MrFun]

In brief, why don't you trust the democratic process?

Because the democratic process could be used to deny a minority group their rights, and effectively dehumanize that group of people in the eyes of the majority.

[Thorn]

Because the democratic process could be used to deny a minority group their rights, and effectively dehumanize that group of people in the eyes of the majority.

Then just send the minority to the firing squad, so there are no conflicts.

[MrFun]

Then just send the minority to the firing squad, so there are no conflicts.

I would, but the problem is that straight white men are not the minority.