>>>The outcome is not irrelevant to 99.9% of the country -- for the first time in 40 years we will have a conservative court. Think about it -- Gore won the popular vote, Hillary won the popular vote, and the GOP stole Obama's pick. ...thus the court is not a true reflection of the people or represent the people either. The thinking of "I" "I" "I" "ME ME ME ME" is not the proper way to look at this - the court is for all Americans - not just you.
>
>The SC's role is to interpret Federal law, including the Constitution. But it's Congress- popularly elected Congress- that gets to make the law. And if the specter of partisan SC activism against popular sentiment is real, then voters can elect a Congress who can undo it with the stroke of their pen.
>
>A cynic might declare that the real fear is from those who hoped to stack the SC with their own lifetime activists when HRC was elected, but now must convince popularly elected representatives.

You're correct that the courts role is to interpret the law -- but in many cases these laws can be ambiguous and there can be varying interpretations - which can result in appeals....it boils down to a liberal or conservative interpretation - thus in theory the court *should* lean the way of the population.