Or, again, was SCOTUS previously wrong, in which case it is not by definition right?
C'mon, Tublecane, you can do better than this. The Plessy case was grounded in contemporary "racial science." Racial science was all the rage for quite some time (e.g. racist beginnings of Planned Parenthood). For some reason, after WWII it fell out of favor. Reversing a Supreme Court decision is extremely difficult (as it should be), but a fundamental flaw in its finding of fact is one avenue.
Ive been trying to figure out what the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality is, if not the Supreme Court, and I've realized that it's you, some other Freepers and South Carolina. Great to have that cleared up.
“The Pleasure case was grounded in contemporary ‘racial science’”
Even if it wad, and I’m not agreeing, so what? SCOTUS still decided differently then compared to Brown. That was the point. The only way I could see to salvage your SCOTUS infallibility argument was to make it a “living Constitution.”
“I’ve been trying to figure out what the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality is, if not the Supreme Court”
Ask yourself why the Constitution starts “We the people,” aside from a bask to hide the constitutional convention being a coup led by a small cabal of spites. We believe, or pretend to believe, in popular sovereignty. It is the people who are the final arbiters, either trough the federal government, through the states, or through themselves.
“I’ve realized that it’s you, some other Freepers and South Carolina”
Crazy system, this popular sovereignty, and workable. But that’s how it is. Possibly saner than ultimate sovereignty lying within the central government itself, specifically nine lifetermers.