To what extent, and in what ways, can the judicial branch enforce their rulings-especially absent support from the other two branches? Especially in the face of entrenched opposition to their rulings.
The founders framed our government so "We the People" decide and self govern.
Having fought off the tyranny of British monarchy rule that made American colonists second class subjects with no representation in England, founders framed our government as a constitutional representative republic so majority mob rule of larger city states could not be imposed on the minority rights of smaller rural states, as outlined in the Bill of Rights that were added to the Constitution. That's why the founders rejectected the Popular Vote and representation in Congress solely by population numbers and instead chose the Electoral College with equal representation in the Senate, regardless of population numbers.
So when state law makers and governors passed unconstitutional laws violating the Bill of Rights, "We the People" sued the states so the judicial branch could check their powers and this is what justice Gorsuch said about the role of the judicial branch, separation of powers and "We the People" self governing -
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-9#post-12421616
"Our Bill of Rights is excellent ... Judges are the backstop to ensure rights and liberties, that is our job ... My business is your rights, ALL OF THEM, are enforced
The original Constitution now includes 27 amendments passed by the 'We the People' ... 'We the People' amended the Constitution, ... to fix the injustices... improved the Constitution, made it a better document. And that is the proper process to do that
I am an originalist ... We have a written constitution that our founder wrote down ... They made a charter among 'We the People' ... This is what we agreed to as to what the government's powers are and what they are not ... What our rights are. Originalists ... honor what's written there. Honor those words ... Don't make stuff up and don't take things away.
Well, I think one thing [James Madison] might tell us is to pay attention to the separation of powers ... the truth is that our rights, including the separation of powers, are only as good as the people who want to keep them there.
'We the People' can do this ... We can govern ourselves."
And in 2016, "We the People" elected a president using the Electoral College and using equal representation in the Senate (To represent rights/interests of smaller rural states), sent additional "Originalist" justices to the Supreme Court to check and balance the government powers (Violated by state law makers and governors) to protect the minority rights of gun owners. And in 2022, the Supreme Court ruled for "We the People", and justice Thomas stated the Second Amendment is not a "second class" right for Bruen ruling.
So how will the Supreme Court ruling be enforced when executive and legislative branches won't?
"We the People" will decide.
Keep in mind that while the House wrote many bills that represent the majority mob rule of the larger coastal city states, the Senate representing the minority rights/interests of smaller rural states vetoed these bills.
In 2022 and 2024, "We the People" will choose the legislative and executive branch make up and if we get representation that reflect the sentiment of "We the People", then make up of the House will write bills to enforce the Supreme Court rulings approved by the Senate for the president to sign them into law.
That's how "We the People" will decide and self govern.
And this is what district judge Benitez wrote about state government imposing on the rights of minority gun owners in his
Duncan v Bonta ruling -
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...r-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-9#post-12421711
"This case is about a muscular constitutional right and whether a state can impinge and imprison its citizens for exercising that right. This case is about whether a state objective is possibly important enough to justify the impingement"
And in his
Miller v Bonta ruling -
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-aw-magazine-ban.905531/page-10#post-12437128
"In the end, the Bill of Rights is not a list of suggestions or guidelines for social balancing. The Bill of Rights prevents the tyranny of the majority from taking away the rights of a minority.
When a state nibbles on Constitutional rights, who protects the minorities? The federal courts ... The Second Amendment is about America’s freedom: the freedom to protect oneself, family, home, and homeland ... California’s assault weapon ban disrespects that freedom.
... Government is not free to impose its own new policy choices on American citizens where Constitutional rights are concerned ... The Second Amendment stands as a shield from government imposition of that policy."