Of course there's a reason? Legislation was passed (the real problem here) and the entire point of the court is to evaluate legislation against our constitution. I agree with every single statement in your last paragraph, but you have to point the blame at the correct place. SCOTUS taking this up is completely legitimate and falls entirely within their role in our government.

The state legislators are infringing on private citizens and their medical care. That's the crime here. Even then, it's important to understand that nothing is off limits to legislators. Even our core rights can be changed by a supermajority in the national congress. Power decides what rights get protected in a society. That's been the recurrent tale of history for all time. We are beyond fortunate to have a sliver of that power and we are failing to use it to stomp these legislators into the dust. That's the crime here, not SCOTUS taking up a case that falls entirely under its jurisdiction and mandate.

Without the courts, the law stands. The Supreme Court is not the problem here. The Republican legislature is. The Supreme Court is supposed to be a check on the legislature; and their failure to do that is a problem.

Also, this case is not about women's rights, it is about trans rights. Trans men are impacted too.

"Hell, I never vote for anybody, I always vote against." -- W.C. Fields in a rare serious moment.

Clinton earned her loss.

Since you seem very familiar with the shortcomings of First Past The Post voting, you probably would be interested to hear there are alternative electoral systems out there with no chance for a spoiler effect.

Alternative vote

Ranked choice voting

STAR voting

You should ask your representatives about electoral reform so we can fix this mathematical flaw in our voting system. Then no one would have to cast a "harm reduction vote". They would be free to vote for someone they feel best represents them, safe in the knowledge their vote would still count against those they don't want in office.

Shouldn't your enemy be the 1% that is funding the propaganda networks for both Republicans and democrats?

What action are you trying to imply, exactly?

Sounds like a divisive call for violence and civil war, the exact sort of shit the nuttier conservatives play up when talking about liberals. You aren't even advocating attacking the definite bad actors in positions of power, you are advocating attacking neighbors.

This even works as the exact sort of propaganda foreign state adversaries would use to stir up unrest to keep the US frozen from the inside, in to reduce our impact on potential global conflicts, ie Ukraine, Taiwan, South Korea, etc.

When all you see are enemies, you've embraced the very hate you think you are standing against.

"What about the children?"

Drives kids to suicide

Conservatism is a cancer

rather than just being normal and evaluating the law on ‘does it seem normal or moral to ban this’

This is the job of the legislature. To make law based on norms and morals, as well as a dozen other factors.

almost like ConStITuTUiOnALiTy is a dumb fucking way validate the law

The job of the judiciary is to rule based on what the various laws say, which obviously includes the Constitution.

Do you really want the judiciary ignoring the law and legislating from the bench? Remember, your preferred group isn't the one in the majority.