There really wasn’t a Supreme Court “Decision.”

I believe this is the definition of judge that is intended to be used by a Supreme Court Justice, indeed, any Judge at any level.
verb: “to form an opinion about through careful weighing of evidence and testing of premises.”

I think prejudge is what was used by the majority to make the recent “decision”: verb: “to judge before hearing or before full and sufficient examination.”

Prejudging is not a “decision,” it is a preconceived notion that is not put forward in evidence or premise. It is never “tested” in any way. It is what Judges spend a great deal of time instructing juries NOT to use. I would say, more than half of what a Judge tells a jury is not to prejudge, to set YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS ASIDE. Use only the law and evidence presented in court.

Essentially, the Supreme Court held itself to a lower standard than the lowest courts hold citizens to who are called to do jury duty.

Prejudge is the base of the word prejudice.

The prejudice in this case was religious doctrine which is, if one believes in it, inviolate. It cannot be judged, it can only be followed, ignored or refuted. The premise that existed and was not examined in this case has to do with the concept, belief in or existence of souls and when they “ensoul” a body.

Regardless of your beliefs—and I personally do believe in this idea though not in the Christian way—it has no place in a court of any kind.

Those who stand for the United States of America should be aware that that is how the courts are supposed to operate—without prejudice.