The Volokh Conspiracy

Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent

Volokh Conspiracy

Today in Supreme Court History: June 26, 2003, June 26, 2013, and June 26, 2015

|

6/26/2003: Justice Kennedy writes the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas.

6/26/2013: Justice Kennedy writes the majority opinion in U.S. v. Windsor.

6/26/2015: Justice Kennedy writes the majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Justice Anthony Kennedy

NEXT: The Remedies in Arthrex and Collins

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they 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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Ivy infested, mealy mouthed little worm lawyer scumbag gets to overturn laws enacted by democratically elected legislatures, and deny reality. He makes national policy legalizing butt banging, that killed 20 million people through AIDS. He legalizes as a marriage what will never, ever be anything more than a friendship, no matter what the lawyer pretends.

    The sole purpose of all life is reproduction. Marriage is to legally support that purpose. This group will never do it. Their fake marriages are a denial of reality. Nor, was this ever a homosexual idea or aspiration. It has been rejected by them since that time, and remains rare across the world, where legalized.

    Family Law business was devastated after they killed marriage. They were desperate for business, and tried to victimize the homosexual community. It has a lot more money, and is far more unstable in its relationships, ideal for the family lawyer. The homosexual is also intelligent, and has refused to fall into this trap. From the Census:

    https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2019/same-sex-households.html

    If you hate homosexuals, want to make them suffer like everyone else, but for no legitimate purpose, get them married.

    1. "Marriage is to legally support that purpose."

      I'm surprised you take such a short-sighted wrong view of marriage. As is usual for everything government does, at the behest of lawyers of course, is ban something, then provide "legal" exceptions. That is all marriage is, a legal loophole to government banning sex as immoral unless it produces children.

      What about all the sex that does not produce children? What about contraceptives? What about old folks who cannot produce children?

      Go ahead, Mr I-hates-lawyers, start complaining about marriage for people who are too old or incompatible to have fertile sex which produces children.

      1. "What about all the sex that does not produce children? What about contraceptives? What about old folks who cannot produce children?"

        Those are not the legal goals of legal marriages, nor of family law. Those are friendships. Any privileges a party wants to confer on the other can be done in contracts, wills, testaments, trusts.

        1. What about marriage between old folks who literally cannot reproduce? Don't pull that lawyer dodge. Answer the question, counselor.

          1. If they had children, they fulfilled the aims of marriage. If they are getting married at an old age, they are nuts, especially the productive male. You are totally entrapped, and the legal system is 100% biased against the productive male, to plunder his assets. The male is entering a waking nightmare from which there is no escape. It would be crazy to get married past child bearing age. In addition, today's women are horrible people, bossy, entitled, selfish, non-nurturing, shrewish, protected by the legal system.

            If you do get married to have children, perhaps with a still human, recent immigrant, it is quite unfair to any children. They will lose their father in childhood, if the guy is old.

            https://hernorm.com/pros-and-cons-of-marriage/

            One purpose of the marriage exemption to inheritance taxation is to not have government support widows. That is obsolete, since most women work, and have their own retirement benefits. If they had put in the SSA contributions of their employer and of themselves into an Index Fund with no decision making allowed, the monthly Social Security payment would be triple what it is from the worthless government, a wholly owned subsidiary of the hateful, toxic lawyer profession.

            1. "In addition, today’s women are horrible people, bossy, entitled, selfish, non-nurturing, shrewish, protected by the legal system. "

              And they won't take even a tiny shred of your bullshit.

            2. Q: What does Daivd use for birth control?

              A: His personality.

              1. KryKry. You really hurt my feelings.

      2. "short-sighted wrong view of marriage"

        Its an exaggeration but its not a "wrong" statement. The primary purpose of all life is to reproduce itself.

        Marriage was created and existed for ten thousand years to corral the sex drive and provide for orderly inheritance.

        1. "The primary purpose of all life is to reproduce itself."

          Explain this to a (live) mule.

          "Marriage was created and existed for ten thousand years to corral the sex drive and provide for orderly inheritance."

          Sort of. The problem is that motherhood is an observable fact, while, for most of human history, fatherhood was a strongly-held opinion. The only way to tell for sure was to limit access to the mother. So, we built a way that mostly works for that. Nowadays, we have Maury.

        2. There's actually quite a bit of research showing that when organisms live in large communities, you need a certain number of them to not reproduce because the species has other needs that also need to be met. It's actually beneficial, for communal animals, to have a certain number of homosexuals. Obviously you wouldn't want everyone to be gay or the species will die out, but, on the other hand, if Michelangelo had been straight he'd have wallpapered the Sistine Chapel.

    2. "The sole purpose of all life is reproduction."

      It's a shame your life is so meaningless.

      1. Hey, it’s not his fault he’s an incel.
        .
        .
        .
        .
        Okay, maybe it is his fault.

        1. strike "maybe".

      2. You are in denial. Life is driven by the reproductive tendencies of DNA. It does not care if you are cockroach or a dinosaur. All your achievements were to impress a bitch in heat, and to get the best deal for your future children. The feminism of lawyer propaganda has made American women unmarriageable.

        For full disclosure, my American born, raised, and educated daughter out achieved me, and is a great mother, as her mother was. Both were married. My claim is rebutted by my house, and I probably could not have married someone who could not carry her weight. I would have felt exploited, my being an uncaring, exploitive jerk.

        1. " The feminism of lawyer propaganda has made American women unmarriageable."

          My daughter is married. Perhaps the problem isn't that your life is meaningless, but rather that you no longer perceive objective reality.

          "For full disclosure, my American born, raised, and educated daughter out achieved me"

          I can believe this. Doesn't seem too hard.

          1. She will never save the lawyer profession, as I will.

  2. If he had been nominated 50 days later, on Jan. 1, 1988, the Democratic Senate, following the McConnell Rule, would have taken no action, leaving the seat vacant until the new Senate was sworn in on Jan. 3, 1989. Senate rules can seem strange to outsiders.

    1. " the Democratic Senate, following the McConnell Rule"

      I don't think so.

      1. "Unconstitutional statutes are void ab initio."
        Maybe a 'how many angels' question -
        What if a statutory scheme is implemented, has certain ICC violations, goes unnoticed, then terminates by its own terms? Period of time passes, still the whole affair fades into memory?

        1. What if you asked God for a working time machine, and then tried to use your time machine to travel to a time before God existed?

          1. You would have to get past the dumbass, information free, super super massive black hole from which, all this meaningless nothing came in an accelerating explosion. You would not make it. Yes, this hell is freezing over. Even our black holes will evaporate and disappear. Meanwhile, lawyer rent seeking will go on.

      2. I forgot to add the tag!

        1. P.S. The [sarcasm] tag, that is.

  3. I suppose Gaysixth will be a holiday one day too.

    1. Like we need a holiday in January.

    2. Perhaps we could establish December 25 as a joint holiday -- Christmas and Gaysixth. Or move the joint holiday to June 26 . . . which would be halfway historically accurate, with far better weather for the day off in most of America.

  4. Who knew the defeat of Robert Bork would lead to the destruction of America?

    Say what you will about Democrats, they will use any means necessary.

Please to post comments