Yep. When the going gets tough, the judiciary caves. As this story from the Washington Free Beacon explains, by deferring, refusing to hear cases; Courts Across Country are Abdicating Their Constitutional Duty
 
They like to call it “judicial restraint,” pretending they’re taking some high moral ground, but many courts these days – including the U.S. Supreme Court – are deferring cases that involve the powers of other government branches ~
 

Clark Neily (senior attorney at the Institute for Justice and author of the new book Terms of Engagement: How Our Courts Should Enforce the Constitution’s Promise of Limited Government) calls this “judicial abdication,” or the unwillingness of the Supreme Court to fulfill its constitutional role as an “impenetrable bulwark against every assumption of power in the legislative or executive,” as James Madison wrote. He advocates for “judicial engagement” in his book to curb the surge in federal regulations and responsibilities.

 
Deferring these cases undermines the separation of powers established by America’s founders ~

“The Framers didn’t expect the other branches to obey the Constitution—that’s why they created the judiciary,” said Neily, who argued for the plaintiffs in the District of Columbia v. Heller Supreme Court case that affirmed the Second Amendment right of an individual to possess a firearm.
 
“The duty lies with the judiciary and they as a system are shirking that duty and have been for some time,” he added.
 
He said the most recent example is the court’s decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare.
 
The court was prepared to strike down the controversial law last year until Chief Justice John Roberts reportedly rewrote the opinion to say its individual mandate, the requirement that all Americans purchase a form of health insurance, was constitutional because it was a tax, not a penalty. The move was seen as an attempt to insulate the court from criticism by Roberts, who is an advocate of judicial restraint.
 
Neily called the ruling “a preposterous reading of the statute” because the mandate was designed to coax people into buying insurance rather than raise revenue.

 
Tragically, this trend will only get much worse now that the Senate has betrayed the Constitution and the people’s trust, and changed the rules of the game, allowing the accelerated appointment of more activist judges.