<>What does that mean?<>
It has nothing to do with congress “growing a pair.”
It means Scotus was never designed to protect state interests. Only the states themselves can do that. Only through the Framers’ design of the senate can they defeat horrid, anti-10th Amendment congressional bills before they become law. The Framers did not expect federalism to be protected by Scotus, but rather by constitutional structure. It was the interplay between the people and states in congress that was supposed to determine the limits of federal and state powers, not Scotus.
Scotus is institutionally and temperamentally incapable of serving as a substitute for the states in congress.
It is long past time to correct a mistake, the 17th Amendment. Since congress will never voluntarily relinquish power, it is up to us to reestablish freedom saving federalism.
Article V. There is no substitute.
“Article V. There is no substitute”
10th Ammendment. No need to substitute anything.
Scalia by the way meant that the Congress is shirking their job of passing legislation by throwing everything to the courts to decide. Which is what they are doing.