After rereading your post, I don’t agree with you.
Ah, so then you don’t think that the USSC will act in such a manner as to invalidate the Constitution they are sworn to uphold?
Consider that they have assigned themselves the position of declaring that the Constitution says whatever they say that it says; this results in them being able to alter or add-to the Constitution w/o going through that pesky Legislature which is the only Constitutionally authorized branch of government to make or alter laws [including the Amendment of the Constitution].
{If the Judiciary can just ‘reintrepret’ the constitution & laws then why do we even need a Legislature, whose job it is to make/alter law?}
1) Keelo v. New London; the USSC declared that Eminent Domain *CAN* be used to seize private property and given to another private entity for the development thereof pursuant to private business. This is counter to the portion of the 5th Amendment which says “nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.” There is a REQUIREMENT that it be for public use. Note that the word USE invalidates the governments claim that the eminent domain was legitimate because of the “public BENEFIT” resultant in the projected (not actual) increase in tax-revenue.
IE, they said that Larceny is a-ok should it have the Government Seal-of-approval. {Ironically violating the 14th Amendment...}
2) Roe v. Wade; the USSC acted contrary to the 10th Amendment and invalidated ALL state laws protecting their unborn citizens.
3) The USSC has declared that the Constitutional prohibition on Ex Post Facto laws ONLY applies to criminal law; this allows the Congress to make/apply Ex Post Facto laws with respect to tax laws... yet violations of those same tax-laws are prosecuted in a CRIMINAL court.
4) The refusal of the USSC [and even lower courts] to hear cases against Obama’s eligibility are, in fact, refusals to see that the “laws are faithfully executed.”
5) The interstate commerce clause abuse; Wicard v. Fillburn IIRC.
The reason that so MUCH of what the federal government does is contrary to the Constitution is because the Constitution was designed for a government of VERY limited scope & power.