Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF
I will also fall on my sword in that I thought this was a conservative pipe-dream that the Justices, no matter who or how appointed, would ever endorse/enact/effect.
That said, no one is talking about how this leaked draft was entitled "First
Draft" and dated February 22nd, with no indication of whom, if anyone, signed off on it. It seems as if Alito had five votes at conference and was assigned the majority, and this might have been his first draft. If so, I suspect he may have pushed his then-majority too far. I can only hope.
|
I think we're all hoping on this. I have seen discussion from several - including Biden - on this point.
But I'm going to take this opportunity to say that next comes Obergefell, after that either Lawrence or Griswold. Along the way some lesser decisions. As someone exposed, unfortunately, to a lot of the right wing Catholics, who play a huge role in the Federalist Society, I cannot tell you how much they are lusting after Griswold. It keeps them up at night. We have a lot of right wing Catholics on the bench right now.
There are dozens of cases already in the system setting up various challenges to rights we all take for granted.
I know you really hate virtually all religion, and we've sparred on that. But this is an example to support your view there, I cannot fully describe how bat shit crazy and obsessive right wing Catholics have gotten. Most believe there is a "natural law" with its roots and greatest expression in the Bible and the medieval Catholic Church, and that the enlightenment began a period of great evil which needs to be reversed (yes, the whole damn enlightenment). Some, and an increasing number, believe in "integralism", where the State becomes subject to and governed by the Church, like a medieval state gave fealty to the Pope. When you hear these people say we are a Christian nation, that is what they mean. But for the right wing Catholic world, the discussion is between "natural law" and "integralism", not over things like originalism and textualism, and I don't think many in the legal media or many liberals have picked up on this.
Bill Barr is aggressively on the natural law side; Alito is a natural law type with integralist curiosity, and Thomas is more integralist. Barrett Coney is very quiet about where she falls, but at Notre Dame she lived in the heart of the integralist world and many of the people around her are integralists. If you don't learn some of the buzzwords and historical fantasies that motivate each group, you're not going to really understand what they are saying in these opinions.
