[churchillbuff]

A believer in states' rights would say that the Nevada Supreme Court has the ultimate authority to interpret the laws of Nevada.

That's why I'm not a believer in states' rights -- any more than I'm a believer in animal rights or "tree rights." I'm a believer in INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS' rights - - and when states, or any other level of government, violate individuals' rights, there should be an appeal to a higher authority.

[Mr. Lucky]

...but wouldn't it be better were the higher authority not always the federal judiciary?

[SolidSupplySide]

I'm a believer in INDIVIDUAL HUMAN BEINGS' rights - - and when states, or any other level of government, violate individuals' rights, there should be an appeal to a higher authority.

I'm not sure what you mean. My original post suggested that Nevadans take care of their Supreme Court through political means. It appears that you are arguing that the federal government is a higher authority than the citizenry. I reject that in the most passionate terms.

[Skywalk]

Bingo!

I guess some states' righters would have us acquiesce to a state court ordering Jews to wear Stars of David or interning blacks in camps, just so long as it was dutifully passed by legislature and affirmed by the state supremes.

Sorry, LIBERTY comes first. States' rights are an important bulwark against centralized tyranny, but the petty tyranny of oppressive individual states is no picnic either.