Thanks. To ignore it as best they can would mean continuing to get important positive reform via the legislative route. A least trying your hardest to. Yep, sounds about right. This from that one
"But considered in context, the court has been a bulwark of racism, reaction, and capitalist tyranny for almost its entire existence. Rulings enshrining slavery and Jim Crow, protecting racist murderers, banning basically all public health or labor regulation, or legalizing corruption far outweigh the brief and (not terribly effective) period of Warren court decisions. By the same token, conservatives are lying when they say they are against judicial activism. What they mean is that the legal system should enact their preferences by judicial fiat, and strike down those of Democrats. Judicial review is better for the right than the left, because the right generally wants to stop reforms from being passed, the legal profession is structurally conservative, and the legal system is relatively immune to democratic accountability. All that is why McConnell is stuffing the courts full of right-wing judges. They hide this anti-democratic objective behind overheated rhetoric accusing their opponents of exactly what they are doing."
is certainly consistent with sortagreen's, and the other i posted too. That was good info for me. i didn't fully realize the court had been that reactionary.
Of all the options to actually change the system the floating one feels maybe the best ..
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
