In his concurring opinion, justice Clarence Thomas called for an end to all rights that are based on substantive due process. What this means and what he says explicitly by naming cases is that he is now calling for the court to actively overturn all personal rights that do not appear in the literal words of the constitution from interracial and same-sex marriage rights to the right to birth control.
Hell no, Clarence.
EXPAND THE COURT.
Please share widely!
The marriage cases are clearly matters of equal protection, though it’s not news Thomas disagrees with some of these which he voted against the first time.
I invite you to cite relevant legal opinions that support this assertion.
The conservative wing of the Supreme Court bases all of these opinions on “originalism”. That failed superstition (which is really what it is, just like “literal inerrancy” in Biblical criticism) undermines the marriage cases as much as any other.
This Court is a bought-and-paid for tool of the American Apartheid right wing.
It uses precedent and law as a way to justify their imposition of their own fascist, white supremacist, misogynist beliefs on ALL of America.
No legal argument will deter this Court.
The Supreme Court is flagrantly broken. It was destroyed by Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, and the GOP (with significant help from Vladimir Putin).
The urgent and immediate question for every American is what we do about it.
I skip legal opinions and go right to the Constitution. (Conservatives also claim to be textualists, right?) The 14th amendment guarantees to every citizen the equal protections of the law. Our system and society have decided that marriage isn’t just about being roommates, but comes with a whole host of legal protections and obligations vis-a-vis the two people who enter into such a relationship. Given that decision, once such protections are extended they must be extended to everyone equally. Therefore, marriage must be made available to every couple regardless of race or sexual orientation. (Plus, I’m pretty sure Thomas would have a personal interest in keeping interracial marriages legal.)
That’s my common sense interpretation as well but that is not the foundation of law that eventually established the right to same sex marriage. The ruling in Obergefell rests on Lawrence v. Texas which overturned Bowers v. Georgia and decriminalized homosexual acts in the home, and eventually the right to privacy underpins both Roe, Griswald, Miranda which was also gutted today, and Obergefell. So it’s the house of cards on which the Warren Court changed America and it’s been the stated aim of the Federalist Society and it’s justices to tear it down. Roe is the first of many cards that will fall unless we radically change the composition of the court.
While I know what Thomas has said I believe Kavanaugh and Roberts consider this more ad hoc. For abortion some will always make the argument that a fetus is life, the protection thereof trumping other considerations. The other cases do not involve the idea of a separate human life as one of the considerations.
I do not trust that this court will stop at overturning Roe, the reasoning the used to overturn Roe can easily be cross applied to those other cases. I appreciate Thomas for his honesty, the others already lied under oath during their confirmations so we have no reason to believe them now.
I’m not sure what good it would have done in sense of changing any Senate votes, but shouldn’t the records rather than the mere words of the nominees carried more weight during their confirmation hearings?
Only if all the participants in such hearings have a common interest in holding the rule of law above partisan and even venal interests.
The confirmation votes for the three appointees of Donald Trump were driven solely by partisan and venal interests.
I absolutely agree, though like I say I’m not sure how many votes it would have changed since plenty of Senators like those records.
I agree. I am always unsure if Susan Collins was a cynical liar or a gullible moron and last week confirmed it was the latter. Unless that’s what she wants me and pro-choice Mainers to think. Either way a world where her vote is irrelevant to the rights of Americans is a better one than the one we live in.
I don’t buy their BS and neither should you. All of these justices lied under oath and in private conversations with Senators that Roe was established precedence and they would not touch it.
I’m not sure you can prove lying under oath on something like this, and just read an article with their direct quotes and pointed out that they were careful to say that they respect precedent, but did not outright promise they would never overrule Roe.
And if you actually read the Dobbs opinion Alito in his majority and Thomas in his concurrence keep going back to tradition and what the law meant when it was written. If abortion was outlawed and unthinkable in the 1860’s when the 14th was written so was same sex relationships. The original authors would not have conceived of equal protection for sodomites. Now to be fair Gorsuch and Roberts went in your direction on the title VII case, but Alito and Thomas both dissented with the same argument I just made. Kavanaugh silently sided with them. Roberts himself thought gay marriage was a states issues and dissented from the original case, so you only have 3 justices guaranteed to protest gay rights, maybe 4 or 5 if Gorsuch and Roberts join them. This is not sufficient to hang my marriage on.
It would also not surprise me in the slightest if Thomas thought Loving v VA was wrongly decided. It would be the only intellectually consistent way for him to rule. He has already ruled against affirmative action which he was the beneficiary of.
I think your own marriage is politically safe. I can’t imagine anyone actually trying to ban interracial marriage at this point even if the Court says it would be theoretically OK to do so.
I’ve long thought one Justice per circuit makes sense, but it would be nice if Democratic voters cared as much as Republicans do about the Court. Between the abortion and gun rulings this week we have seen the fruits of a one-sided battle that has lasted pretty much my entire lifetime.
For the first time in my life, I’m seriously considering emigrating to a more civilized nation.
I’m not sure how much longer I want to live in today’s “America”.
My relatives in KY are honestly asking me to find them jobs and housing. So we may see a similar exodus occur. I had to tell a doctor in IA to take down a social media post offering help to get abortions since she’s technically a criminal now. I don’t want her license put in jeopardy. This is where we are. It’s not good. And it happened while our President and Congressional majority was asleep at the wheel.
It is no accident that this happened while the compelling evidence against the GOP and Donald Trump is being presented. The same is true for the recent decision about gun control.
This is why I’m so hostile to the LGTBQ announcement — or, for that matter, the chatter about forgiving student debt.
Our party is apparently hoping we don’t notice our collective inability to do anything at all to stop the right-wing takeover of the entire government and society.
I agree with your “asleep at the wheel” characterization, though I’m less generous.
The fascist right-wing Putinists are running circles around us.
As someone wrote today “I’m f’ing sick of high road defeatism. I want our reps to get mad, get nasty, and f’ing fight for us.”
Yup, that sums up the Democratic Party “High Road Defeatism”
Maura Healey was great on Jim and Margery and I am hopeful she can be the next Governor and fight for these rights, but it is also quite apparent a federal ban will be on the horizon if the GOP takes over the federal government again. Mike Pence vowed not to stop until every state has anti abortion laws. I think he speaks for the party more than anyone twisting themselves by calling this a states rights issue.
“Most Americans believe the decision to have a child is one of the most sacred decisions there is, and that such decisions should remain between patients and their doctors. Today’s Supreme Court opinion will live in infamy as a step backward for women’s rights and human rights.” former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
I wish she had put the GOTV ground game resources she sent to New Orleans, LA, and NYC to Detroit, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia. I also wish Obama and Hillary could have convinced RBG to give up her seat when we had a chance to confirm a Democrat to replace her. So I voted for Hillary and am cautiously optimistic this would not have happened on her watch, but losing elections and failing to play effective politics has real world consequences.
In hindsight Obama should have fought harder for Garland including a recess appointment, but I suspect the reasoning at the time was Clinton was going to win anyway and could just re-nominate him (though that doesn’t account for the lame duck period).
Could he have made a recess appointment? It’s a shame he did not.
Even with the recent trend toward keeping the Senate in pro forma session to avoid this, the Senate at very least has to adjourn at the end of its term. Absolutely Obama could have temporarily appointed Garland to the Court, but that commission would expire at the conclusion of the next Senate.
Impeach Justice Thomas. It can be done, has been done and needs to be done. Work on winning the Senate, and keeping the House which means we’ll need to eat some mierda by working on economic matters while pushing forth the social agenda (in other words, chew gum and walk). Expand the Court as well, best argument for that is we have more districts than sitting SC Justices. Finally is clean our own house and hold ourselves accountable…we know we have Dems that don’t hold the same values and we need them to either get on board, or get off the ship.
Thomas deserves to be impeached for not recusing himself in cases directly involving his wife’s role in “stopping the steal”, but not for his judicial philosophy. That aspect should have been covered in his confirmation, but instead we got Anita Hill. There’s no way 2/3 of the Senate would remove him, however.
Impeaching and removing him because he violated federal law by not recusing himself in matters involving his wife is enough.
Since I agree that we will not get the required supermajority of today’s Senate, then we need to do whatever it takes cross that threshold.
Here’s one step that will help: Prosecute and remove every member of the Senate who knowingly received dirty Russian money.
We already know that the NRA was compromised by Russia years ago. The evidence that the NRA was being used by Russia to influence US policy has been public for a very long time, well before the 2020 elections.
What does the Senate look like when every recipient of dirty money from the NRA and similar sources is removed?
Just to be clear do you mean NRA (National Rifle Association) even when you say IRA (which I think of as Irish Republican Army) above? AFAIK, there is constant accountability regarding the legal sources of campaign funds.
One thing we haven’t yet done is PRIORITIZE our values. It will take generations before West Virginia voters will share our values about diversity, choice and science (specifically, the science of climate change).
If we applied your last sentence to today’s Senate, Mitch McConnell would be Senate Majority Leader
If we agree that this is a worse outcome than what we actually have today, then perhaps we’ll agree that we must address our own priorities before imposing such a dichotomy.
I suggest that our top priorities should be preserving the rule of law, reason, and rationality. I would argue that wealth concentration comes next, with climate change following that.
Nearly ALL the things we Democrats are currently talking about are distractions that only further erode our influence and power. This specifically includes:
I agree that these are each important. I personally embrace our party’s positions on all of the above.
I — and people like me — are a minority in today’s America.
We must FOCUS, and the first step of that focus is to prioritize.
The rainbow coalition method has failed to gain results. I would just keep it simple. Should your boss get a tax break or should you? Should billionaires pay their fair share or should you? Should the government be involved in your health care decisions or should you? I think Jared Polis has done a great job of making a leave me alone coalition work by linking abortion rights and gay rights to opposing public health mandates. It’s framing that likely would have been better received by the public during the pandemic and also is useful to our present moment. Bodily autonomy and privacy more broadly are what we are fighting for. Also freedom from religious rule. There are a lot of middle of the road and center right voters who would be attracted by that message.
Far too many Democrats are fearful that should they expand the court to 13, then the Republicans will do the same if they win in 2024 and we’ll have 17 judges, a path that they fear will delegitimize the court. To all of those who think this way:
In 1869, Congress set the number of Supreme Court justices at 9 to align with the 9 circuit courts at that time.
There are now 13 circuit courts.
So, Congress? DO YOUR JOB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!