Skip to main content

View Diary: I rarely say this, but Maureen Dowd is a must-read! (179 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think the case essentially boils down to this (7+ / 0-)

    1.  A few of the judges on the bench don't want to issue what effectively would be an anti-Loving ruling.
    2. These same judges suspect that extending Loving will be less controversial with each year that passes.

    They will punt on Prop 8 and restrict DOMA.

    It is worth remembering that Loving was decided 13 years after Brown.

    The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

    by fladem on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 07:23:23 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  And it is also worth remembering (4+ / 0-)

      that Loving was unanimous.  My guess is the court would not extend Loving on anything less than a 6-3 vote.

      The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

      by fladem on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 07:26:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ah but that was a Warren Court (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RichM, FindingMyVoice, pgm 01

        with every Justice on it appointed by someone who would be totally unacceptable to today's Republican party.  Remember, the justices on Loving were appointed by FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson,  not by Reagan or the Bushes, and not even by Nixon.

        Look at the majority of the Court today

        Scalia & Kennedy by Reagan
        Thomas by GHW Bush
        Ginsburg & Breyer by Clinton
        Roberts & Alito by GW Bush
        Sotomayor & Kagan by Obama

        "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

        by teacherken on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 07:47:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not so sure you are right here (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Clem Yeobright

          White was in the minority on Roe, but in the majority on Loving, and remained hostile to Substantive Due Process cases (and yet he was appointed by Kennedy).

          White would have been acceptable to a Tea Party supporter now.

          The bitter truth of deep inequality has been disguised by an era of cheap imported goods and the anyone-can-make-it celebrity myth - Polly Toynbee

          by fladem on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 08:31:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  he would not be acceptable to Tea Party (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            orlbucfan, davidincleveland

            he was both conservative and a product of a very different environment

            but he would probably, had he lived through the recent decades, be to the left of at least the four conservative Justices and on many issues to Kennedy as well.  I am pretty sure he would have voted with minority in Citizens United, for example.

            "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

            by teacherken on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 08:35:53 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site