Let me walk you through this slowly.
It is 'settled law' I (at least so you claim) only because people are dumb or immoral enough to give political support to politicians similiar to Arnold Schwarzenegger.
You do know that politicians choose judges, right?
By the way, if it is so 'settled', why are the Democrats beside themselves over judicial appointments?
It is 'settled law' I (at least so you claim) only because people are dumb or immoral enough to give political support to politicians similiar to Arnold Schwarzenegger.
No, it is settled law because jurists unanimously agree that it is. It is settled law because it is supported by 30 years of ruling after ruling that all reinforce each other, solidifying it in a web of case law. The longer it stands and the more supporting rulings, the more hardened it becomes. Justices are loathe to overturn established precident. It is all but impossible for it to be successfully overturned by now.
It's time to come to grips with the harsh reality of it.
You do know that politicians choose judges, right?
Yes, I am aware that politicians choose judges. Are you aware that the California Supreme Court cannot overturn the US Supreme Court?
By the way, if it is so 'settled', why are the Democrats beside themselves over judicial appointments?
Because it is a red herring. They just don't like judges that they can't buy off.