 But statutes often go farther than the problem that inspired them, and under the rules of statutory interpretation, we stick to the text anyway. Well, my comment is, Justice Barrett further wrote that the majority atextually narrowed the law and failed to respect the prerogatives of the political branches. But I say that's the job of the courts, to stop politicians from exercising their improper use of law and not allow broad interpretations beyond the actual intent of the text.