This attitude is not helpful.
Meagan Hatcher-Mays
meaganhatchermays
I think the argument to the FF+C argument is that a marriage isn't a "legal judgment" for the purposes of FF+C. My understanding is that states that recognize the validity of other states' marriages don't do so under FF+C—they rely on their own definitions of "domestic relations." Read more
Yes, I think it's a matter of time! I'm curious to see how the marriage equality movement will proceed from here.
Yeah, it sounds like there's a large administrative mess to work out here. I don't know the specifics of the whole thing. It'll be interesting to see how the feds work all this stuff out, or if couples will have to file future lawsuits.
I think I'm a little nervous about this approach. RBG wrote a killer law review article about this in the context of abortion. Basically her argument is that relying on the courts to promote the pro-choice agenda actually hindered the movement. She argued (this was before she became a SCOTUS justice) that pursuing a… Read more
The answer to your question re: Scalia is "all of the above."
This is a good question—I'm not 100% clear on the answer. But I don't see how a state can prevent the federal government from doling out benefits to people.
That's a good question. First, I think that it's probably impossible for them to make that determination without reviewing the entire record, reading the briefs, and hearing oral argument. They can't do that without agreeing to hear the case. Read more
I didn't do that—I was talking about him as a specific human being. As a man who has faced his share of racial discrimination, I find it mind-boggling that he would consistently rule on cases that makes discriminatory practices more and more common.
I think his lack of qualifications probably has more to do with the racism he himself faced as a student at Yale and as a graduate. In all honesty, I do not think Clarence Thomas is dumb—I think his ideological stance is horrific and incredibly damaging to other racial minorities who want to take advantage of the same… Read more
The point of this rant—and that's what it is, not a comprehensive breakdown of today's decisions—is to point out how bizarre it is that Thomas's past experiences have manifested themselves into his current ideology. I find it sickening that someone who has experienced so much discrimination in his lifetime would… Read more
I did link to his majority opinions and his concurrences—you can check above. I think one of his most egregious opinion was in Connick v. Thompson, which I also linked to above.
Alito is really working his way up my shit list. I've always disliked him, but his recent behavior towards my girl RBG is really inexcusable.
I agree that's inarticulately stated. What I meant was, how messed up do you have to be to go out of your way to oppress people the way he does? This goes beyond a personal belief system because his attitude contributes to the systemic subordination of racial minorities (not just other black people).
Also, Section 2 is basically worthless when it comes to combating historical, widespread, systemic voter suppression. RBG talks about this in her dissent—Section 4 was so effective because it eliminated the need for voters to bring individual (expensive) suits against the state for violating their rights.
THE formula, as it currently existed in Section 4 was found unconstitutional. This procedure was incredibly effective in promoting voter turnout and ending discriminatory practices at the voting booth. That is what I said. That is not wrong. That is not inconsistent with SCOTUSblog's analysis, although I will admit… Read more
What I said and what SCOTUSblog said are not inconsistent with each other.
Worst current. Probably not worst ever.