What's 'Supreme' About Our Extremist Supreme Court? By Jim Hightower

[Igel]

2. No, that's the ICC.

One thing: They are the highest court in the US and their precedents are binding on all other courts, both superior and inferior. (Which terms also have their own definitions, neither of them in the least bearing on virtue or merit. Just authority within the court system.)

Congress can create lower courts but cannot create a court superior to the one that's 'supreme'. No inferior court can bind a superior court. A superior court can't bind the highest court. That is, the one that's 'supreme'--those versed in Latin and some French would know that's what the word meant at the time. "Best" or "all-controlling" or something like that being dominant to English speakers is later in meaning.

Their precedents bind lower courts and to a great extent the rest of the government; it's law, not ethics or morality and to confuse the two sets of things is not a good practice.

Everything else is just insisting on taking the text of the Constitution out of context, which is strange because every state has its own 'supreme court' that binds the lower courts in those states and only those states just like SCOTUS binds lower courts in the US.