Reading a lot of, what I would view as, #badanalysis vis-a-vis marriage, of Kerry v. Din, which I just finished reading.
-
-
And the right that three justices determined Din lacked is NOT a right to marriage. Scalia, w Roberts & Thomas:pic.twitter.com/vgFuB8E1gN
-
The three-justice opinion later notes how different it sees this case is from marriage rights themselves:pic.twitter.com/L51XG5mT7Y
-
And then, again, details the right it viewed as being at issue:pic.twitter.com/cjhP7nol1C
-
Kennedy's opinion concurring in judgment, joined by Alito, assumes even ~this expansive liberty interest~ exists:pic.twitter.com/2GCFiNdYIj
-
Then, the Breyer dissent goes even further, finding that the expansive liberty interest here ~does~ exist:pic.twitter.com/Vuzsau6BGv
-
So, while I don't think one can read much of anything about Obergefell into Din, if you ~insisted~ on doing so, it goes the other way.
-
BREAKING:
@chrisgeidner says SCOTUS will rule in favor of fundamental right to gay marriage, Alito to join Kennedy and liberals in 6-3 vote. - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@chrisgeidner [Quick aside: I found it quite interesting that Alito did not join the Scalia opinion].Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.