You might believe SCOTUS has abdicated their duty, but that doesn’t make it illegal. The whole reason the Supreme Court exists is because there is no such thing as “clearly illegal” without some kind of adjudicating body that can decide if something breaks the law. Laws aren’t like math axioms; you can’t prove or disprove that a law has been broken with pure logic, you have to have humans interpret the words and apply it to a situation.

By definition, the supreme courts decisions are the law, unless the legally prescribed measures to overrule them are taken.

By definition, the law is what we, collectively, agree on as being the law. The Supreme Court is only able to serve as the executor of the law on the basis of the institution being seen as legitimate and by virtue of being given that right by society.

The Supreme Court suddenly deciding that the constitution does not matter does not make their decision law, it erodes trust in that institution and removes their mandate to execute the law. Said supreme court has decided to throw away all trust in favor of giving unchecked and clearly illegal power to the executive, overriding Congress's very clear authority as delegated by the constitution.

Many of the actions taken by this Supreme Court are illegitimate and are things that will need to be reckoned with assuming that the presidency changes hands in 2028. As well as the actions by ICE and this presidency in general.

Well, the law of this land is based on the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court ultimate authority to interpret the law. That is what gives it the force of law.

Now, the legitimacy of the CONSTITUTION is based on what we, collectively, agree on, however

> the law of this land is based on the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court ultimate authority to interpret the law

The Constitution vests "the judicial Power of the United States" in "one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish" [1].

That isn't the same as "ultimate authority to interpret the law." In practice, SCOTUS does usually have this power, due to Marbury and other precedent. In practice, too, it can be bullied, e.g. by FDR and potentially right now.

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-3/

If that's true that's the same thing as Supreme Court simply having all the power isn't it? SCOTUS largely serves as a veto power on the other two branches. If they can actually unilaterally make a binding interpretation of the constitution then they could simply declare the constitution is actually saying SCOTUS has all of the federal powers and that Clarence Thomas is King.

SCOTUS has been relied on far too much as a method of legitimation of extra-constitutional powers. People know they are lying bastard, but because the court-gods have used their holy powers to interpret the constitution as magically meaning stuff like intrastate commerce is actually interstate commerce and sawn off shotguns aren't actually protected 'arms' then many gullible zealots will actually believe that.

There are supposed to be checks on the power of the supreme court through both the ability to impeach justices and the ability to pass constitutional amendments. Those checks are not working as they are supposed to for many reasons.

Immigration has always come under the plenary powers of The Congress and is not subject to judicial review. This plenary power doctrine has weakened over the centuries but it still holds.

https://cis.org/Report/Plenary-Power-Should-Judges-Control-U...

The constitution doesn't prohibit the deportation of illegal immigrants. It's interesting that you believe the Supreme Court is illegitimate for rightly ruling based on the letter of the law.

If you want it changed, you have 100 ways to advocate for that without declaring one of the greatest American institutions we have as "illegitimate". It's an extreme view, but certainly common in shrinking hyper-left-wing online spaces.

You won't always get your way. That's Democracy.

> The constitution doesn't prohibit the deportation of illegal immigrants.

Who are you responding to? I don't see that anywhere in this thread.

Immigration 'mostly' falls under plenary powers of The Congress and the courts have little to no authority in these matters (similar to how Presidential pardons may not be overturned by the Court or Congress). This legal theory has been changing over time but it still mostly holds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenary_power https://cis.org/Report/Plenary-Power-Should-Judges-Control-U...