mousethief - "I think they should change the court to an even number, half conservative and half liberal. And no "tie" votes are ever allowed. Make 'em talk to each other, dammit."

Excellent suggestion!

If "stare decisis" is really an important principle, the SCOTUS should change their own rules and require at least a 7-2 or 6-3 vote to overturn a major previous SCOTUS ruling (something that's basically considered "settled law").   We should not be seeing major changes in legal interpretation based on 5-4 rulings, nor should something as momentous as the Bush v. Gore ruling (a case which SCOTUS had no business taking in the first place) have been decided 5-4.

The Roberts court is one of the most "activist," non-"originalist," non-"strict-constructionist" courts we've ever had.   Does anyone seriously think Madison and the other framers of our Constitution (and its amendments) meant for money to be considered "speech," for corporations to have all the rights of people yet not be subject to all the obligations and penalties (such as imprisonment or death, the prohibition against owning each other, etc.), for the government to be able to "take" private property from one person to give it to another person or business, etc.?

It is not hard for me to see how Stevens and others who are now considered "liberal" were just a few decades ago seen as "conservative."