Previewing same-sex “marriage”

Responding to my post below regarding the Supreme Court’s Friday order vacating a Kansas criminal conviction apparently on equal protection grounds, reader Dafydd ab Hugh criticizes my distinction between the Court’s asserted due process reasoning in Lawrence and the Court’s apparent extension of the reasoning to equal protection challenges like the one in Limon regarding the Kansas statute.
Among other points, Mr. ab Hugh criticizes the distinction here as “inside baseball” — a kind of formalistic quibbling. To get a preview of the potential importance of the Court’s extension of its reasoning in Lawrence, consider Nathaniel Stewart’s column on the issues raised by Canada’s legalization of same-sex marriage: “Oh Canada, we stand on guard for thee.”

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses