Under what illusion do you assume that there is consensus on the law, particular

Under what illusion do you assume that there is consensus on the law, particularly on constitutionality, and more particularly on the ambitions of the Court in the broader context of the consequences of legislation, regulation, and findings of the court?

In economics we are extremely conscious of the lack of commutability between domains, yet in law, this escapes the ‘lawyering’ class, which should be obvious given the disputes over decisions, and it certainly escapes the public who for some reason confuses their personal moral intuition as unassailable substitute for the sciences, empirical evidence, and any attempt at logic.

Reply addressees: @Luigipalazzini @Fiesty26Fiesty @tribelaw