Will one man decide the fate of 300 million Americans?

Mark Steyn cuts to the chase on the horrible confluence of Big Government legislation and a Supreme Court that is increasingly adrift.

And yet, and yet . . . If you incline to the view that Obamacare is a transformative act, isn’t there something slightly pitiful about the fact that the liberties of over 300 million people hinge on the somewhat whimsical leanings of just one man? I mean, Kennedy seems a cheery enough cove, but who died and made him the all-powerful Sultan of Swing? “It is a decision of the Supreme Court,” explained Nancy Pelosi a few years back in more congenial times for the Democrats. “So this is almost as if God has spoken.”

That’s not how earlier Americans saw it: “If the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court,” wrote Abraham Lincoln, “the people will have ceased to be their own rulers.”

Which they have. Or it would not have come to this.

One of many reasons why we should focus like a laser beam on senate and congressional elections. Monstrous infringements on liberty, like ObamaCare, should never even see the light of day, let alone become the law of the land. Nor should bad laws be carved in stone at the behest of a high court whose members include an uncomfortably high proportion of ideological hacks and dreamy navel-gazers.