3 ms·
Equal protection is not substantive due process. Gay marriage & interracial marriage are on far firmer ground because of the right to "equal protection of the
by treis 4y ago
Equal protection is not substantive due process. Gay marriage & interracial marriage are on far firmer ground because of the right to "equal protection of the laws". Not that the conservative wing won't try but they're going to have to torture logic to do it.
Substantive due process is far shakier. It's Justices deciding what rights they think people should have and then working backwards as best they can to justify them. The back to back gun rights & abortion rulings lays it bare. There's just no intellectually honest way of finding a right to an abortion but not a right to bear arms.
IMHO, the substantive due process was the wrong way about this. It was a shaky foundation and as more rights were found the logic got shakier. They should have used the right to peacefully assemble and based most of these substantive due process cases on them.
- pmoriarty 4y ago"they're going to have to torture logic to do it" This is literally 99% of a Supreme Court justice's job.
- MisterBastahrd 4y agoThey just tortured logic in the past few days. They removed Roe because they decided that amendments that have been interpreted for decades to give people the right to privacy don't actually do that textually at the same time that they struck down a NY law because they claim that people have the right to defend themselves, which is nowhere to be found anywhere in the Constitution.
- djbebs 4y agoDid you miss the second amendment?
- judge2020 4y agoOnly District of Columbia v. Heller decided that the right to bear arms was independent of an official militia. No doubt such ruling could eventually be overturned by SCOTUS if they so choose.
- MisterBastahrd 4y agoNo. Here it is in its entirety: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Please point out the part of that amendment that references the right of people to have concealed carry for the purposes of self defense. Because it seems to me that they tried to be as obtuse and textualist as can possibly be with regards to Roe, but apparently the second amendment grants all sorts of rights that don't actually exist in the Constitution.