3 ms·
Based on the reasoning used by the dissent in this case, they would have similarly dissented in Loving v. Virginia.
by js2 6y ago
Based on the reasoning used by the dissent in this case, they would have similarly dissented in Loving v. Virginia.
- rayiner 6y agoThis is superficially true, but very different considerations applied in the two contexts. Loving was a 14th amendment case, while this was a statutory case. In statutory cases the Supreme Court is more deferential to what Congress intended to say, because Congress can easily change the statute if it wants to change the outcome. Moreover, in Loving there was the issue that marriage has long been considered one of the most fundamental rights in the Anglo-American tradition.
- scarface74 6y agoAnd the right to work and provide a living for yourself isn’t?
- tptacek 6y agoNo. We extensively regulate commerce.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- scarface74 6y agoUntil this ruling passed, employers were legally allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ in many states because the “majority” elected officials that thought that was okay.
- tptacek 6y agoI'm not sure what that has to do with my point or anything upthread.