Supreme Court makes constitutional accurate decisions.

 THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW FOR THE GOVERNMENT

IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THEN USE THE LEGAL AMENDMENT PROCESS TO CHANGE IT

The court this week made rulings on several constitutional issues. The rulings are based on the written rules that are often plain to understand to anyone with a simple education. Yet for decades we have seen courts, and in some instance it is still going on, making decisions based on popular opinion or what they believe should be the result. This then ends in the serious consequence of weakening the rule of law that is fundamental to a sound and peaceful democracy.

Last years correct ruling to allow the states to decide about abortion is one such ruling. It allows the states to decide this contentious issue because there is no authority for the federal government to be involved in this issue. There was no ban or outlaw, in fact, it just insisted that it was not the federal government role.

This week the court sided with a suit brought by Asian students who were rejected in their bid for acceptance to certain colleges because they were discriminated on by decisions based on race. Asians are known for placing education as a priority in their hope of improving the future of themselves and their families. They excel in student testing and preparation and are often rejected because some colleges feel their are too many Asians, not enough of some other race etc. It is just the same kind of discriminations that often was experienced by Jewish students years ago. It is finally a blow to affirmative action that was in effect reverse discrimination. Discrimination, particularly by race is now not a legally acceptable policy.

An effective way to end all discrimination in these instances would be to assign applicants a student number. No Name, place of birth or religion included, and of course race. Let the admission process consider only facts and merit.

The other ruling was so obvious it was shameful that this had to go to the supreme court. Joe Biden, by executive order had sought to forgive student loans. It was a blatant attempt of abuse of power for political purposes and it will continue to be used as political wedge issue. The constitution is clear the president has no authority to tax or forgive loans, it is solely the role of the House of Representatives to bring forth those ideas, then approved by the Senate and signed by the president. The president is not a dictator, as some would like.

The third ruling dealt with a religious person who refused to do web design work for a gay couple. This ruling decided that private business has the right to not do what they find out of step with their beliefs. As a private business we should all have the right to associate with whom we please and not be forced to add acceptance and approval to things we find unacceptable. Tt should be just a matter of freedom of association and freedom to make personal decisions. We all want freedom, forcing others to do what they don't want, is denying them their freedom.

So while there will be political accusations and distress, if some don't like the laws as written, and the constitution is the law, then there is a legal way to change it, by a constitutional amendment. While it is lengthy and difficult, as it should be, it is the proper way to change what some may not feel is proper.

But of course, such would eliminate the seeking of contributions, protests, accusations and chaos and other off the mark activities and place the focus on a sound legal decisions and a proper way to make changes.