Just read - no comments needed

[AussieMick]

"In a second, milder dissent, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, questioned whether the Trump administration could be trusted to enforce what he called “the proclamation’s elaborate system of exemptions and waivers.”

Justice Kennedy agreed that Mr. Trump should be allowed to carry out the travel ban, but he emphasized the need for religious tolerance."

Could someone tell me how many people voted for the Supreme Court judges, and how many voted for Trump? (that's a rhetorical question)

Its just that I get quite annoyed that here in Australia we sometimes have a situation where High Court judges take it upon the themselves to interpret our Constitution so that it suits their own political purposes. Of course they would not like it to be put in those terms. No doubt they convince themselves (and many in the media) that they are coolly and independently assessing the executive decision and evaluating it with regard to the Constitution and what the Constitution developers intended.

Ok, ok. I'm not living in the US. But what happens in the US, and what your Supreme Court judges decide, certainly affects the rest of the world. So I claim the right to express an opinion.

I'm sure the High Court/Supreme Court judges are very very clever and much better educated than the rest of us. But I do get uncomfortable when they make decisions from on high which significantly impact a nation (and the world). Whether their name be Taney or Sotomeyer.