I was saying even if you were technically correct, the original poster was implying that now the supreme court is the only one who can make nationwide policy on stopping illegal nationwide federal actions and your reply implied normal legitimacy and remedy powers, as though it's not that bad.

and if you only meant to provide a narrow technical correction, then you shouldn't consider my reply as criticism, but rather my perspective on the broader perspective.

i wasn't calling you racist, or disagreeing on ideological grounds, i was saying that your limited technical answer so grossly missed the larger situation that it undercut the actual legitimacy crisis that does and should exist for this branch. it is not business as usual, some of the conditions for these detainees are terrible and reminiscent of nazi-regime treatment of others, and the fact that nothing can be done about it at any federal level except at 1 court that refuses to hear most things and is extremely slow to hear matters means that it's not the same situation as it once was

this is not ideological framing that muddies the waters. your narrow technical analysis nit-picking at the literal meaning and missing the implication is unintentionally or intentionally implying there's still some legitimate functional system that is working correctly instead of something completely broken.

it's not muddying the discussion to point on the bigger perspective. Your thinking is similar to a statement like "Many black people frequently broke Jim Crow laws and thus were criminals." Yes, that might be technically true, but saying it like that with no contextualization unintentionally suggests things in a problematic manner. A literal denotative view of words and their meaning and a technical analysis that misses things does not mean someone pointing out the larger perspective is clouding the situation and there is a risk in someone using erudition to distract from the fact of how horrible things are, and that's what you were doing, possibly unintentionally. I can tell you're smart, but a technical correction of something like that risks implying there's no crisis of legitimacy.