Your post above does not manifest a familiarity with either the common law or equity. The common law, which is judge made law, was so important to the Founding generation that it is cited in the 11th amendment to the US Constitution. The concept of Equity, cited in Article III of the US Constitution, predates the Founding generation and was and is intended to provide relief to litigants where the common law does not.
By contrast, no where in the US Constitution does it state or imply that federal courts must only interpret the law.
Anyone who has taken even a high school history class knows that the basic system of checks and balances among the three branches of government involves the legislative branch
making laws, the executive branch
enforcing laws, and the judicial branch
interpreting laws. The 11th amendment in no way means the Supreme Court has the right to ignore large, bipartisan majorities in Congress back in 1996 or the citizens of California. As one scholar recently said, "It is absurd for the court to suggest that Congress doesn't have the power to define the meaning of words in statutes that Congress itself enacts." This is nothing but taking democratic self-government away from the people and putting in the hands of a few legislating-from-the-bench judges.
