Many, including some asshole with a blog, have noted that there has to be a judicial decision that is so egregious, so unfounded in law, evidence, and precedent, and so harmful that the other co-equal branches of government simply tell the judiciary to fuck itself. As a ridiculous example, if the Supreme Court or even a single federal judge decided that ‘shooting guys named Mike in the head is now legal’, it would be ignored (Hopefully. I’m not exactly an uninterested party in this admittedly). So we’re really arguing about the limits of congressional and executive branch deference to the judiciary.

The recent decision by Judge Kasmaryck to overrule the FDA–after 23 years of the safe use of mifepristone–seems to fit the bill for ignoring a decision, especially since, on the same day, a different federal judge ruled that mifepristone could not be banned*.

There has to be a point at which the other branches reassert some authority–some Bush the Younger used to do quite often with signing statements–over the judiciary. Yes, there are other judicial reforms needed, but really horrible, unfounded decisions need to be overruled: sometimes two principles conflict (the importance of judicial review versus preventing a single rogue judge from annihilating decades of established policy), and difficult decisions have to be made. That’s what grown-ass adults do.

*It also seems that, if two equal courts reach opposite decisions, that alone would be grounds for ignoring one decision until the conflict is resolved.