Each tribunal whether executive, judicial, or jury can choose to not enforce existing statutes, but it can't create new laws to enforce.
Nowadays, all government officers and jurors are usually threatened with jail unless they do what "the courts" say they must, but that's not how it is supposed to work.
And the claim that government officers currently blindly follow "court interpretations" of statutes is ridiculous on its face. There's all sorts of old nutty statutes on the books (like adultery statutes) that the police never enforce and prove that their claim that they are "sworn" to follow "court interpretations" is baloney.
Not really. Then again, I am not a libertarian, so I don't come at the issue from the point of view that individual rights always and everywhere trump the right of the people to legislate through their representatives. As a conservative, I think things are almost always far more complicated than libertarians make them out to be, and the question of when individual trumps community and when community trumps individual is no exception. This is a question which has had no final and definitive answer for six thousand years of human civilization, and we will undoubtedly be hashing it out for as long as human civilization continues.
Each tribunal whether executive, judicial, or jury can choose to not enforce existing statutes, but it can't create new laws to enforce. (Emphasis added.)
And that's where our disagreement lies. I think when the Constitution states that the President "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," those words (again, the plain language of the document) actually mean something. Refusal to enforce a law because it conflicts with the Constitution is consistent with that requirement. Refusal to enforce a law because the President dislikes it is not. To give a single man, even an elected official, complete discretion over whether a law is or is not enforced is a recipe for tyranny, even granted that he cannot on his own account add positive prescriptions to the law.
And the case is even clearer in the case of the courts, which are far less accountable than the President, and which (at least on the federal level) have no constitutional legislative authority.