Here's where we are:

[no_hypocrisy]

1. We're stuck with the current USSC panel for a while. With the exception of Thomas and Alito, most justices are in their early 50s to mid-60s.

2. It's 6-3 now. Given health and longevity, and republican Senate shenanigans, it can become 7-2 or worse in the future.

3. Roe is the canary in the mine shaft. This USSC can literally dismantle American democracy one case at a time. Example: with Roe, last week, Alito's position was "Let the States decide." In another term when the issue is whether abortion in ANY state is legal, I predict the goalposts will be moved and states' rights will be a quaint concept when it comes to protecting "unborn children". Find the law to fit your conclusion.

4. There will have to be a series of precedents that will have to be reviewed (if ever) by future USSCs to return to the status quo.

5. For legal scholars and the US Justice System, this opening salvo introduces a fearful uncertainty. If you're an attorney and you go to trial and win, and your adversary appeals and loses, appeals to a higher court and loses -- but you get to the USSC, you don't know if they'll follow legal precedent or be judicial activists. Why even pursue "Justice"?

6. How far will this Court go? Call the Constitution "unconstitutional"?

And just wait. Wait until a new Constitutional Convention is called. All bets are off.

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Alito is 72

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Point taken. Corrected. Thank you.

[Scrivener7]

3. The question "how far will this Court go?" suggests that they are moving in a single direction,

which would be one thing.

They ARE moving in a single direction in terms of Xtianizing the country in opposition to the Constitution.

But in terms of how they are applying the law, there is no logic or pattern whatsoever. As many have pointed out, the abortion ruling demands that the state preferences should be honored. The gun ruling forbids the state preferences from being honored.

They are ruling on whims.

If Thomas woke up tomorrow and decided everyone should have to go to his Catholic church starting now, they would simply find a way to make that happen that has a lot of words, but no basis in whatever case was brought and no basis in the law.

It will be impossible for those lawyers you describe to stay ahead of all the moles they are whacking in the days to come.

PS: Anyone else get the feeling that Thomas was a large hand in all of this? He's been silent all this time because he was working with the ultraconservative community, plotting to get to this moment. And now he's going to let loose.

[Meadowoak]

4. Abolish the Supreme Court!

[no_hypocrisy]

6. You can't do that without a Constitutional Amendment.

Plus, even overruling Marbury v. Madison will never happen. We're stuck with the Institution.

The whole concept of a neutral panel of justices was to stabilize the economy, give predictability to Justice, to keep people from shooting each other over disputes (well, that's not exactly working out these days, is it?), to protect society from criminals, and to provide civility to amongst Americans.

[Novara]

5. I remember the Dems talking about a SCOTUS ethics bill

Does anybody know where that stands? Not that it will pass unless the filibuster is busted, but are they even working on it anymore?

Gorsuch flat out lied to make the prayer ruling. There has to be some check on that sort of shit.