Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,986 posts)
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 10:31 AM Mar 2013

Supreme Court Arguments We'd Like to See

Supreme Court Arguments We'd Like to See

JB



JUSTICE SCALIA: You -- you've led me right into a question I was going to ask. . . . I'm curious, when -when did -- when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted? . . .

MR. OLSON: Well, according to your dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, the Court decided that issue in 2003.




Posted 8:30 PM by JB
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2013/03/supreme-court-arguments-wed-like-to-see.html
Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, nine years later
http://equalityontrial.com/2012/06/26/a-look-back-at-justice-scalias-dissent-in-lawrence-v-texas-nine-years-later/

and:

If you’re looking for an excellent, analytical response to Justice Scalia’s question, see Elizabeth Wydra’s piece on Huffington Post in which she explains:

The simple answer to Justice Scalia is that laws banning same-sex couples from marrying were unconstitutional the moment when the American people, in 1868, wrote the guarantee of equality for all persons into the Constitution. As the exchange this morning demonstrates, Justice Scalia seems to accept this proposition with respect to laws prohibiting couples from different races from marrying one another, which the Supreme Court found unconstitutional in the late 1960s. He should acknowledge the same constitutional truth in the Prop. 8 case. The text of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment makes clear that the freedom to marry should be equally available to all, whether black or white, heterosexual or gay, rich or poor.

http://angryblackladychronicles.com/2013/03/27/an-equal-protection-primer-for-supreme-court-justices-who-may-be-confused/
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Supreme Court Arguments W...