[discostu]

But anything the legislature makes into laws will be debated in the courts, that's how the balance of power is supposed to work. The people demand it, the legislature writes it, the executive approves it, and the courts decide if it fits within the framework of the founding documents as a just law that defends society from undo harm. To say something should be legislated but ignored by the courts is to say the balance of power is inherrently flawed, which is an interesting debate in it's own right but secondary to the issue at hand.

[William McKinley]

No, that is not the way it is supposed to work. The practicality and suitability of laws is only supposed to be the purvey of the legislature (in conjunction with the Presidential veto authority on the Federal level).

The judiciary is merely supposed to ensure that the constraints on the legislature as described in the Constitution are being adhered to. Nothing more, nothing less.