And those judgments should represent the will of the people. Just one example, Clarence Thomas has already said he wants to come after same-sex marriage next when 70% of America support same-sex marriage
This lets us know that they do not represent the will of the people
This lets us know that they do not represent the will of the people
We also know that after the Roe v. Wade decision was overturned that only a minority of people in this country cared. It isn't their #1 concern or even their #2 concern. Instead we have a bunch of vicious, vile and despicable people threatening judges and trying to institute mob rule. The antithesis of representing the will of the people.
I am not familiar with what Clarence Thomas has said concerning same sex marriage, however, I do feel that he often represents my will and that he easily represents the will of 1/9th of Americans.
There are justices that do not represent my will. When Sonia Sotamayer said that many babies are born as zombies, she was not representing me or my opinions or will. Still, I am not clamoring to have her removed. So be careful what you wish for. If Clarence represents 50% of the country and they remove him you can be sure the 50% will rise up and remove the lame brains like Sotamayer and the woman who can't define what a woman is.