Re-listening to the Obergefell oral arg with my students and boy, it's remarkable how an argument can be exposed as terrible and crumble before one's eyes when someone has to stand up and defend it in open court.
As of last June, Americans' support for legal same-sex marriage was as high as opposition to it was 25 years earlier.
John Bursch told the justices that opening marriage to gay couples would irreparably harm the institution by decoupling it from procreation. Children would doubt their parents would stay together if marriage is just about an "emotional commitment."
One of the silliest claims I've heard at the Court and one of the most entertainingly ruthless dismantlings by the justices—complete with a Scalia attempted rescue & a Kagan diss that made the audience erupt in laughter.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
My favorite detail so far in the foul-mouthed cheerleader 1A case coming to SCOTUS next Wednesday: the cheer team advisor who isn't sure what viewpoint was behind "fuck cheer" and insists she would've kicked her off for saying "cheer is fucking awesome", too 🙄
💥 Major abortion decision today @ 6th circuit: 9–7 majority permits Ohio to bar doctors from providing abortions to women who want to end their pregnancies because the fetus has Down Syndrome.
Prohibition applies before viability, undercutting the abortion right in Roe/Casey.
Much of the highly contentious discussion in the concurrences and dissents concerns how to think about women aborting fetuses with Down Syndrome. The majority calls them modern-day eugenicists while dissenters deplore this characterization. Here's Judge Karen Moore:
And they have done so on the emergency docket with limited briefing, no oral argument and a rushed, sloppy ruling.
I would not be surprised if Roberts agrees in principle (and we will learn that soon when the Fulton decision arrives) but cannot fathom the impropriety and absence of judicial craft in this radical shift of First Amendment jurisprudence.
BREAKING: Court votes 5-4 to grant the religious plaintiffs’ request. Chief Justice Roberts notes his dissent. Justice Kagan writes a dissent joined by Justices Breyer and Sotomayor