Ok fair enough, but going back to the original argument if the USSC were to decare something unconstitutional and the Executive were to do it anyway, in my eyes that simply grounds for impeachment. Otherwise we have a dictatorship.
Grounds for impeachment? Good idea. Get the Legislative branch involved. Now we can celebrate the balance of powers our forefathers gave us and let the chips fall where they may.
President Andrew Jackson openly defied a Supreme Court order when he forced the Creeks and Cherokees off their land. Was the order Constitutional? Absolutely. Not because the Supreme Court said so, but because the Constitution itself stated it. Was Jackson impeached? No. Mainly because Congress didn't have a lot of sympathy for Native Americans, nor the treaties their own members passed.
Plessy v Ferguson. The Supreme Court ruled against the 14th Amendment, granting the State of Louisiana the right to enact different rules for different people. Woodrow Wilson would take it a step further by federalizing segregation nationwide. The vote was 7-1 with Judge Harlan dissenting. So was it Constitutional? According to the 1954 Supreme Court, it was not. They agreed with Harlan's dissent a half century earlier.
The one thing that did not change was the 14th Amendment. Same words in 1896 as in 1954. Yet one group of Judges says 'Constitutional' while another group says 'unconstitutional'.
If we are going to yield to the tyranny of men and women in black robes, then we have no need for a Constitution in the first place.