> How Dismantling Roe Puts Interracial Marriage at Risk...
Wouldn't the right of people to marry someone of any race be assured under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment?
Wouldn't the right of people to marry someone of any race be assured under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment?
(It's all bullshit! The court will rule ideologically how they want, regardless of precedent.)
Regardless, Loving v Virginia (1967) was decided by unanimous decision--and that's back in the 60's--just three years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act. I don't know of anyone seriously suggesting that the holding in Loving is in jeopardy today; it's literally the direct application of the 14th Amendment.
The parent asked why equal protection is not sufficient to protect interracial marriage. I answered. You don't like the answers, either:
a) Make a legal argument. To the extent you agree with this current decision, "it's old" lends it strength. But "it's old" isn't actually a legal argument, despite what the Supreme Court thinks. (That's how you know their purported theories of jurisprudence are bullshit.)
b) Make a real moral argument not rooted in made-up shit like textualism - and admit moral arguments for abortion rather than hiding behind "this is just jurisprudence."