Your ability to perceive the truth or reach a conclusion doesn’t need to be based on someone else’s opinion and resume ... unless you just don’t understand English or unless you lack self-confidence or integrity. You do understand that this idea that “someone of merit” needs to agree about an issue is a logical fallacy?? The Supreme Court is composed of NINE people of merit, yet they don’t all agree all the time. Basing a conclusion on a third-party opinion from a so-called person of merit doesn’t mean that person is more correct on the issue than anyone else.
This is a point I am constantly reiterating. It is such a well known fallacy that it has a Latin name. "Argumentum Ad Verecundiam."
The Supreme court does not determine what is the truth. They only determine what doctrine will be enforced. In a functional system, that doctrine corresponds with what *IS* the law of the land. The road to the truth does not begin at the Supreme Court, it begins at primary sources. i.e. Those who CREATED the law.