ADVERTISEMENT

Justice Clarence Thomas Wants SCOTUS to 'Correct the Error' of Legal Gay Marriage

Morrison71

HR Legend
Nov 10, 2006
15,728
12,983
113
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a Friday opinion that the nation's top judicial body should overrule a previous decision legalizing LGBTQ marriage nationwide and a former ruling that determined criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional.

Thomas issued a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision overturning abortion rights as established by Roe v. Wade on Friday. The conservative justice, who was appointed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush, took aim at the Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.


In his Friday concurring opinion with the majority decision to overturn abortion rights, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." The justice contended that those precedents were "demonstrably erroneous."

 
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a Friday opinion that the nation's top judicial body should overrule a previous decision legalizing LGBTQ marriage nationwide and a former ruling that determined criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional.

Thomas issued a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision overturning abortion rights as established by Roe v. Wade on Friday. The conservative justice, who was appointed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush, took aim at the Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.


In his Friday concurring opinion with the majority decision to overturn abortion rights, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." The justice contended that those precedents were "demonstrably erroneous."

Shouldn't be any national law regarding marriage, period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklinman
Million dollar question... is this just an abortion thing? Does the GOP, as a whole, really find gay marriage problematic enough that they'll have the necessary support to go after it?
 
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a Friday opinion that the nation's top judicial body should overrule a previous decision legalizing LGBTQ marriage nationwide and a former ruling that determined criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional.

Thomas issued a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision overturning abortion rights as established by Roe v. Wade on Friday. The conservative justice, who was appointed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush, took aim at the Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.


In his Friday concurring opinion with the majority decision to overturn abortion rights, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." The justice contended that those precedents were "demonstrably erroneous."

its one person, democrats have 3 justices that would vote to ban guns, relax
 
At least Kavanaugh and Alito (majority opinion) disagree explicitly on this.

 
Million dollar question... is this just an abortion thing? Does the GOP, as a whole, really find gay marriage problematic enough that they'll have the necessary support to go after it?

On the national level I doubt it, given it polls pretty highly even among Republicans. I think nationally Republicans have been way, way more willing to say the issue is settled than they ever have on abortion.

On the state level though...who knows.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BelemNole
At least Kavanaugh and Alito (majority opinion) disagree explicitly on this.

I'm going to suggest that is a stretch....one Kavanaugh also said Roe was settled law in his confirmation hearing and two this is dicta because the case didn't deal with those issues. But Dobbs did severely restrict, possibly eliminate, the right to privacy which is the basis of Griswald and the court has created a "historical test" in place of scrutiny tests which would attack Obergefell and gay marriage protection under the EP.
 
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a Friday opinion that the nation's top judicial body should overrule a previous decision legalizing LGBTQ marriage nationwide and a former ruling that determined criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional.

Thomas issued a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision overturning abortion rights as established by Roe v. Wade on Friday. The conservative justice, who was appointed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush, took aim at the Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.


In his Friday concurring opinion with the majority decision to overturn abortion rights, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." The justice contended that those precedents were "demonstrably erroneous."

I thought only white men were full of hate and prejudice??

Lmfao Bahaha
 
You believe the liberal judges would ban guns? JFC.
When was the last time a liberal Supreme Court Justice voted to uphold the 2nd amendment? Heller and McDonald all were conservative in the majority, no liberals.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris
Million dollar question... is this just an abortion thing? Does the GOP, as a whole, really find gay marriage problematic enough that they'll have the necessary support to go after it?
I don’t think they’ll get enough justices to go along, but, as others have pointed out, it doesn’t seem like Thomas is incorrect here from a legal perspective. The other justices seem to differentiate abortion because there’s an interest of the fetus but not sure that’s a legal distinction as much as a line they are drawing currently.

Bottom line, the only reason to go after same sex marriage is cruelty and hatred of LGBTQ people. There’s no other justification.
 
On the national level I doubt it, given it polls pretty highly even among Republicans. I think nationally Republicans have been way, way more willing to say the issue is settled than they ever have on abortion.

On the state level though...who knows.

That's my feeling... but you start wonder. I mean even the Texas GOP platform... it'll be interesting if that really stands, or if it's just a bunch of hot air from their extremists. (although if they capture power... who knows... although the response to them might be to moderate, which would be nice)
 
Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a Friday opinion that the nation's top judicial body should overrule a previous decision legalizing LGBTQ marriage nationwide and a former ruling that determined criminalizing sodomy is unconstitutional.

Thomas issued a concurring opinion with the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 decision overturning abortion rights as established by Roe v. Wade on Friday. The conservative justice, who was appointed by former Republican President George H.W. Bush, took aim at the Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas and its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges.


In his Friday concurring opinion with the majority decision to overturn abortion rights, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell." The justice contended that those precedents were "demonstrably erroneous."

I'm sure its already been posted but also based on the right to privacy was legalizing interracial marriage. And, no where is it specifically mentioned in the constitution. Somehow I doubt he'll bring that one up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiderland
That's my feeling... but you start wonder. I mean even the Texas GOP platform... it'll be interesting if that really stands, or if it's just a bunch of hot air from their extremists. (although if they capture power... who knows... although the response to them might be to moderate, which would be nice)

Exactly.
 
On the national level I doubt it, given it polls pretty highly even among Republicans. I think nationally Republicans have been way, way more willing to say the issue is settled
But will they proactively vote for it on the state level? Nope...
 
I don’t think they’ll get enough justices to go along, but, as others have pointed out, it doesn’t seem like Thomas is incorrect here from a legal perspective. The other justices seem to differentiate abortion because there’s an interest of the fetus but not sure that’s a legal distinction as much as a line they are drawing currently.

Bottom line, the only reason to go after same sex marriage is cruelty and hatred of LGBTQ people. There’s no other justification.
And you don’t think thee are folks who hate the LGBTQ lifestyle and believe It is their duty to outlaw it at all costs? They call themselves Christians….. Evangelical Christians.
 
And you don’t think thee are folks who hate the LGBTQ lifestyle and believe It is their duty to outlaw it at all costs? They call themselves Christians….. Evangelical Christians.
Hate the sin not the sinner,
 
ADVERTISEMENT