To Redefine Marriage, Judges Disregard History, Will of the People, Themselves
June 26, 2015
Quin Hillyer at NRO has the first thought on today’s U. S. Supreme Court decision redefining marriage.
There is absolutely no way for Justice Anthony Kennedy to square today’s decision with his ten pages of paeans to states’ authority over marriage in the 2013 case of U.S. v. Windsor. None. The damage done to the Constitution and the rule of law . . . incalculably high.
Update (June 26th, 2015): I am reminded that according to Maggie Gallagher, Kennedy also said this, albeit not in the context of this case:
On March 7 [2013], Justice Anthony Kennedy, when a library was named in his honor at a Sacramento federal courthouse, made the case that too many moral issues are being referred to the courts:
[“]I think it’s a serious problem. A democracy should not be dependent for its major decisions on what nine unelected people from a narrow legal background have to say,” Justice Kennedy said.
Well put! But again, no way to square that with what he did today.
Enjoyment and Contemplation 
June 26, 2015 at 12:38 PM
[…] today’s Supreme Court decision, the blog Intellectual Prostitution (“Love Rules and So Does SCOTUS”) […]
June 26, 2015 at 1:03 PM
[…] (“(Marriage) Equality but at What Cost?”) emphasizes that she is in favor of today’s Supreme Court decision (“Let me be clear, I completely agree with the fact that gays and lesbians should have the […]
June 26, 2015 at 2:11 PM
[…] today’s Supreme Court decision, My Friday Blog is at pains to emphasize that the Civil War was […]
June 26, 2015 at 4:08 PM
[…] Hot Air, Ed Morrissey has great further discussions of how today’s Supreme Court decision threatens conservatives’ and Christians’ freedom, and what Republicans in Congress are […]
January 1, 2018 at 9:55 PM
What does it matter if one person wants to marry another person of the same biological sex? Marriage is defined as an interpersonal union. There is no “redefining marriage.” Anyone who makes the argument that U.S. Supreme Court is trying to redefine marriage by ruling some bans on same-sex marriage as Unconstitutional is being absurd, since the Dictionary clearly spelled out the definition of the word marriage.