[sophacles]

You keep saying the judciary gets the final word... but that's not right, no matter how often you repeat it. The judiciary gets the penultimate word. The constitution can be changed, there's an entire procedure for it, perhaps you should propose an amendment.

[hash872]

The US famously has the most difficult-to-alter constitution of any country. There's about 200 countries globally, political scientists generally agree we have the single most-difficult to change one. So sure, it's 'possible' in the same way that I could potentially make an NBA team, sure

[sophacles]

Any of the changes you're wishing for and proposing require a change to the constitution though, or worse. Are you suggesting that we should just jump to a straight revolution/civil war rather than try the existing process or changing the wierd cult-like culture that exists around the constitution? How can you know that the same cultish behavior around what the constitution says won't stick around with something new?

[hash872]

The Supreme Court could at any time remove the ability of individual judges to issue a nationwide injunction against the federal government. Both Thomas and Sotomayor have made rumblings that they're considering it- it's the most nakedly partisan abuse of the judicial system today. More interestingly, Congress could- by the Constitution!- remove the jurisdiction of some courts to hear some cases. You can read more about jurisdiction stripping here- completely legal and as old as the republic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurisdiction_stripping