I agree that dealing with the beast of judicial activism on the state level is better than dealing with it on the national level, but that doesn't really rectify the fact that the ruling itself is S tier mental gymnastics though. This makes the barrier to abolishing it artificially high. If this ruling isn't overruled by a higher court in Michigan (it should be but who knows because honk honk) then they would need to amend the state constitution to do something that should realistically just need a simple law.
Working as intended would be the legislature, not the judiciary.
It was ruled as conflicting with the State constitution, was it not?
If that is the case, that's down to the state's constitution, a product of the legislature, no?
I agree that dealing with the beast of judicial activism on the state level is better than dealing with it on the national level, but that doesn't really rectify the fact that the ruling itself is S tier mental gymnastics though. This makes the barrier to abolishing it artificially high. If this ruling isn't overruled by a higher court in Michigan (it should be but who knows because honk honk) then they would need to amend the state constitution to do something that should realistically just need a simple law.
Personally, agreed.
That said, if this forces Michigan to alter it's constitution to make the abortion ban stick ... good luck undoing that on a whim.