The gap that exists between the abstract top and the concrete bottom is the same gap that exists between the interpretive practices of the Supreme Court and the bottom. Of course, the Top, whether one of the three Branches,or,the top of State government,is always abstract. The three Branches as well as the top of each State government are conducted on an abstract level. Since, all are governed by the same abstract nature, their communicatuions should be in conformity with the Constitution. The Constitution governs the abstract nature of the centers of power established by it. On an abstract level, there is no issue of who governs who. There can be no issue of the power or function of the Branches, or the power of the State governments. The only issue is the Constitutionality of the particular policy. If any Branch or State feels that the decision is wrong, it has to do the same as the people at the bottom have to do with a law that they disagree with. What does the government tell someone who disagrees with the law as written? The government states, "thats the law, if you disagree with it, change it!". The Federal Branches and the States also have to follow the law as enunciated and if they disagree,they can initiate proceedings to change it. They're not as bad off as the people at the bottom who do not have money: they have plenty of money, so follow the rules! If those problems arise between the abstract Top and the abstract Branches and the abstract States, can you imagine the problematic between the abstract Top and the concrete Bottom. Something has to be done, government must close the gap between the abstract Top and the concrete Bottom. Thats where the changes must occur. The States don't have a choice,they have to follow; they exist by virtue of the Constitution. If they don't abide by the Supreme Court's decisions, the States are violating the Constitution. Can we put them in Jail? You know the answer. A more controversial issue would be the extent of the legality of the existence of corporations? How can an abstract entity that exists "only in contemplation of law" wield so much power? It already had lots of power because of its "economic grasp", so why increase that power by attributing to a fiction a "freedom of speech" that it can't possibly have. Thats not to mention all the other "perks" it gets from the government. What about real people, "We the People""...,that are not fictions? The entire bottom is constituted by millions of real people. Where are they in the structure created in the Constitution? The Bottom is real, its number, every individual must be computed into the equation of democracy. Can we put a corporation in jail? You know the answer. Can we put a human being in jail? Everyone knows the answer.