Senior Editor Jacob Sullum agrees with the Supreme Court that the federal government should recognize state-approved gay marriages, but he is not persuaded by the Court's rationale for concluding that such a policy is constitutionally required. For supporters of gay marriage, Sullum says, the fuzziness of the Court's reasoning can be seen as an advantage, since it opens the door to requiring state as well as federal recognition of same-sex unions. But if and when the Court takes that step, he argues, the lack of a clear and convincing constitutional argument will invite discord and disrespect.
A Trump Judicial Appointee's Blistering Opinion Is a Reality Check for Republicans Who Still Think Biden Stole the Election
"The Campaign cannot win this lawsuit," the 3rd Circuit says. "The Campaign's claims have no merit."
Which leaves the U.S. without a major party even slightly inclined to leave people alone to manage their own affairs.
Trump: If the President Doesn't Have Standing to Pursue Wild, Unsubstantiated Claims of Election Fraud, Who Does?
Fox News interviewer Maria Bartiromo uncritically accepts Trump's outlandish conspiracy theory.
Is this the Supreme Court’s next big gun rights case?