Jacob Sullum on the Fuzzy Logic of the Supreme Court's Ruling Against the Defense of Marriage Act

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.
Hide Comments (0)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post commentsMute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?