Clarence Thomas Admits Defeat in the Right Wing’s War on Marriage Equality

clarencethomas-460

When the Supreme Court of the United States declined  to stay a Federal Injunction allowing same sex marriages in Alabama on Monday it was a given that Clarence Thomas (joined by Justice Alito) would raise his objections in a dissenting opinion.

Thomas, Alito (and Scalia) have voiced their opposition to marriage equality in previous opinions, so there is little reason to believe this time would be any different.

However, Thomas did much more than that.  He practically admitted that the fight against marriage equality may be on its last legs.

Yet rather than treat like applicants alike, the Court looks the other way as yet another Federal District Judge casts aside state laws without making any effort to preserve the status quo pending the Court’s resolution of a constitutional question it left open in United States v. Windsor, 570 U. S. ___ (2013) (slip op., at 25-26). This acquiescence may well be seen as a signal of the Court’s intended resolution of that question.

In reality, this development shouldn’t surprise anyone.  When the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, Justice Scalia hinted, in his dissent,  that state laws denying marriage equality would come tumbling down.

The majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition,

Indeed, most Federal Courts struck down state laws that banned marriage equality and many of them quoted Scalia’s dissent in their rulings.

In addition, Thomas (rightly) points out that common practice is for the court to suspend these injunctions as a means to maintain the status quo until the legal question has been considered and resolved.  It prevents the sort of chaos and confusion that would be inevitable regarding the legal status of same sex marriages that would occur if Federal Court strikes down a state’s ban on marriage equality and the Supreme Court subsequently upholds that law.

Obviously, all the justices on the Supreme Court are aware of both the Court’s practice and the issues that would arise if the Court were to uphold a state ban on same sex marriage.  The fact that the majority on the Court refused to block same sex marriages in Alabama is the latest indicator that marriage equality is on the verge of being a reality across the United States.

Thomas is on the wrong side of history in his effort to block marriage equality. Today, for all purposes, he admitted it.

If you’re ready to read more from the unbossed and unbought Politicus team, sign up for our newsletter here!

15 Replies to “Clarence Thomas Admits Defeat in the Right Wing’s War on Marriage Equality”

  1. Indeed…what Robyn said. By his own reasoning, he ought not to have married his present wife, however well they deserve each other.

  2. Put a conservative hat in his chair and you will get the same results. He has said his job isn’t hard: of course not when you vote for your political party and don’t consider all the background and arguments of the development of the Constitution.

  3. I love today’s order denying the stay request, which is the strongest indication yet that all remaining state marriage bans are going down this June.

    I would like to point out an inaccuracy in the article – Alito did not join today’s dissenters (Thomas and Scalia). We don’t even know which way he voted. He could have voted to grant the stay, but not have his dissent recorded. Concerning Alito, this has been the case in all previous stay requests – we do not know for sure which way he voted. (I personally seriously doubt that he ever voted to deny a stay when a state official with standing requested one.)

  4. Reich wingers are not normal
    Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. — Milan Kundera

  5. Hahahaha! Although it’s pretty funny as a joke, it’s sad that PoC like Piyush have deluded themselves into thinking that having white skin is preferable to what they were born with.

  6. I believe Scalia would outrank him on that list. His hypocrisy and outright blatant partisanship exceeds even Thomas’, though Scalia may not be as lazy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.