![gay hentai rape marriage gay hentai rape marriage](http://images7.memedroid.com/images/UPLOADED233/596b8b8561fa2.jpeg)
That is the same argument the draft opinion makes about the right to abortion. Hodges,” the statement said, “the court read a right to same-sex marriage into the 14th Amendment, even though that right is found nowhere in the text.” In 2020, when the court turned down an appeal from a county clerk who had been sued for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, he joined a statement written by Justice Clarence Thomas that called the decision at odds with the Constitution. Hodges, the 2015 decision on same-sex marriage. “None of us are safe from the extreme anti-women and anti-LGBTQ ideology that now dominates this court,” Sarah Kate Ellis, president of GLAAD, said in a statement.Īlito, for his part, has made no secret of his hostility to Obergefell v. But the reasoning in the draft has alarmed supporters of gay rights, who say they fear that the final opinion, if it resembles the draft, could imperil hard-won victories. “I’m not sure how your answer makes any sense,” she said.Īlito’s draft opinion is 3 months old, and it is all but certain that later drafts have clarified and sharpened his arguments. Sotomayor was unimpressed, saying all of the cases were grounded in the same kind of constitutional reasoning. Stewart tried to distinguish the three other rulings from Roe, saying they were clearer, had given rise to more public reliance and did not “involve the purposeful termination of a human life.” “I just think you’re dissimilating when you say that any ruling here wouldn’t have an effect on those.”
![gay hentai rape marriage gay hentai rape marriage](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/54/71/f0/5471f0836938cf367534a4dc1210c95f.jpg)
“I’m not trying to argue that we should overturn those cases,” she said of the other decisions. The same could be said, using the draft opinion’s general reasoning, for contraception, gay intimacy and same-sex marriage, rights established by three Supreme Court decisions that were discussed at some length in the argument in December.Īt the argument, Sotomayor sparred with Scott Stewart, Mississippi’s solicitor general, who was defending a state law banning most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It said a right to abortion cannot be found in the Constitution or inferred from its provisions. On the other hand, the logic of the opinion left plenty of room for debate. “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.” “To ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right,” he wrote. On the one hand, he asserted, in a sort of disclaimer that struck a defensive tone, that other rights would remain secure. The opinion, by Justice Samuel Alito, provided conflicting signals about its sweep and consequences. Digital Replica Edition Home Page Close Menu