Many of us are under the illusion that "judicial tyranny" is some kind of problem that needs to be addressed in order to restore the legitimate authority to our duly-elected representatives who have had their authority taken away from them by appointed judges.
The reality is that the judicial branch of government never took any authority away from the legislative branch. Rather, this was effectively an abdication of authority by these legislators -- who realized that the judicial branch of the Federal government could be counted upon to implement certain policies on a national level that no legislator would ever have been able to support.
Here's the irony of the whole thing . . . this system is likely to continue until the system of national party politics is turned upside down -- and the GOP becomes a minority party as a result of a resurgent pro-life Democrat Party.
Your post reminds me of a conversation husband and I had regarding President Bush's inaugural address and freedom vs. tyranny. How can we export freedom to other nations or even stand with freedom seekers in other nations when the freedoms we have been granted via the US Constitution are contingent upon the whims of the judiciary? Husband called it "judicial tyranny." We have lots of freedoms, but compare freedom today with freedom fifty years ago. Is democracy what makes us free?