Prior to the assassination of Senior Associate Justice opebo, he authored
a landmark dissent in which he found that the ideologues ruling the Court at the time were entirely out of their bounds on the basis of which they struck down a law related to the treatment of minorities. These same ideologues went on to severely narrow the scope within which cases could be accepted by the Supreme Court on the basis of unconstitutionally created guidelines relating to a fictional 'standing', later rescinded by a new bench. Would you revisit the opinions of your predecessor, and if so, why?
