The court would not discharge its duty to follow the law if it were to decline to correct earlier precedent on the basis that the legislature could at some point alter the law once again. In this case, the question is whether qualified immunity is a correct interpretation of the code or not. Whether or not Amash proposes to alter the law in such a way as to clearly change the law to preclude qualified immunity, the court should consider the cases before it on the basis of the law as it is (or will be, if Amash decided to remove qualified immunity with retrospective effect.)