Monday, October 05, 2020

The Problem with "Prevailing Orthodoxy"

There was a time, before Loving v. Virginia, when "prevailing orthodoxy" included prohibitions against mixed-race marriages.  Like Justice Thomas's.  Many churches could bring that back in a heartbeat, if necessary.

That's the thing about "orthodoxy."  It changes, too.  Sometimes it even follows the courts.

2 comments:

  1. Thomas and Alito are totally nuts. Davis was a public official who refused to fulfill her public duties because they conflicted with her religious beliefs. This is well beyond having to sell a cake. As you point out, does that mean that if a mixed race couple wants a marriage license she can deny them if her conflicts with her religious belief? What if one is protestant and the other Roman Catholic? Not that long ago that would have been considered forbidden. Does Davis get to decide they can't get married either? If Davis a health inspector, could she unilaterally decide that she won't issue the necessary permits to an abortion clinic? (I am guessing Thomas and Alito would be fine with this one). Can she refuse to issue permits to a bakery run by a gay couple? A Catholic? A Jew? This is personal negation of any law just be claiming religious belief. If I am a pacifist by religious belief, can I refuse a business permit to a gun shop? (I bet Thomas and Alito would feel differently about that one). The exception will swallow the rule, it would be madness. These comments alone prove that neither is any longer capable of serving on the court.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "These comments alone prove that neither is any longer capable of serving on the court."

    "Lifetime appointment" is more and more looking like the problem, not the solution.

    ReplyDelete