The HN timing is interesting what with the sci-hub story still being on the front page. It&#x27;s in that very thread that there was intense (and quite correct) discussion on the difference between <i>justice</i> and <i>law</i>.<p>Texts, traditions and principles are references. Sometimes they&#x27;re wrong. Also, as a non-american I find it absolutely absurd that for a lot of people there is this fascination with &quot;the constitution&quot; as being this all-powerful scripture and <i>that&#x27;s</i> what the supreme court is supposed to defend, not the more abstract aspects of morality.<p>It&#x27;s all nonsense of course - all supreme justices know exactly what kind of power they have, why they have it and how to use it ... and the constitution is really just a reference.<p>I remember reading some of Scalia&#x27;s comments (I believe on marriage equality) explaining away how the supreme court should not &quot;redefine&quot; etc but as another poster said, it&#x27;s easy to say that <i>when convenient</i> and forget it when even more convenient. Those comments could be applied to just about every single case...