"Your answer is articulate but non-responsive. You insert a fallacy by instantiating "that should ALWAYS be left to the individuals involved" as including issues which don't qualify. Request the answer be stricken and deponent asked to respond, your Honor."

Sorry, Amos, the logical transition must have stumped you. The Supreme Court address Constitutional issues and, on occassion, goes back and reverses itself. Cases in involving individual liberties, including some addressed in the specific cases I refer to, are Constitutional issues. Therefore the Supreme Court can reverse itself on cases involving individual rights and has many times, including cases which set precedents I'm sure you take for granted.

Q.E.D.


Net, net? The Supreme Court can reverse itself anytime it wishes for whatever reason it wishes. The men and women in the black robes always call the shots.

Now that wasn't hard was it?