Constitutional law - theory or practical
There is a notion that the U.S. Constitution provides for a government that has limited powers. What does that mean? Is it a hedge against voter aka constituent expectations that government cannot solve all problems? Perhaps.
What if we add the clause: “government cannot solve all problems beyond its means?”
Would not that acknowledge and set a boundary for government limitations?
Then, we could ponder, is providing a good life for all within our means?
It seems to me that conservative justices would like to throw the proverbial ball back to Congress or let them off the hook altogether. It seems to me that more socially conscious justices are a more practical breed and would like to address the real needs of people with findings toward a workable solution.
“Ginsburg said she found it odd that all agree the system of taxing and payments that formed the Social Security system was constitutional, but that trying to use private insurance markets to handle a health-care crisis would be beyond Congress’s powers.”
Justices don’t go to work to be scholarly theorists; they are appointed to deliver just outcomes.