Contraception and gay marriage are next, says clarence thomas

[NightWatcher]

Link to tweet

[unblock]

1. Thomas, repeatedly citing his own concurring opinions as precedent

[2naSalit]

2. Along with the right to say "NO" to...

Sexual advances.

[snowybirdie]

3. Perhaps Clarence

will write the opinion against interracial marriage, and we can watch him throw Ginny out of the house?

[Irish_Dem]

5. Of course the elite are totally exempt from their draconian laws.

Also protected from gun violence.

[Irish_Dem]

4. My daughter and her girlfriend are planning their wedding for next year.

My daughter is going to pop the question this coming Christmas to make the engagement official.
Then the wedding next summer. They have already picked out their rings.

I am wondering now if they will actually be able to get married.

[evolves]

6. What about "Loving," Clarence??

Oh, because it affects YOU, it's off limits?

[AngryOldDem]

7. I'm telling my kids to GTFO of this fascist country.

They’re in their 20s and early 30s who don’t deserve to spend the rest of their lives dealing with this shit.

Both of my sons are gay, and what this group of assholes has in mind for gay rights scares me.

We should be flying flags upside down. We. Are. In. Trouble.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

8. You're intoxicated by the smell of your own farts Thomas

[RANDYWILDMAN]

9. The jan 6th committee should interview him

What did his wife know and when did she know it ???

[question everything]

10. But not Loving vs. Virginia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[1][2] Beginning in 2013, it was cited as precedent in U.S. federal court decisions holding restrictions on same-sex marriage in the United States unconstitutional, including in the 2015 Supreme Court decision Obergefell v. Hodges.[3]

[keep_left]

11. It really speaks volumes by omission...

...that Thomas doesn't mention that case, but does cite all the others (Griswold, Obergefell, etc.).

[LuckyCharms]

12. Why do they try to punish something as natural as love and sex?

Because they get neither of those things, so they attempt to make sure nobody else get those things either.

I've expressed the following sentiment, in different ways, in about 10 different responses so far.

TO THE SUPREME COURT MAGA JURISTS:

Unintended consequences, fuckers.

Domino effect.

You fucked up.

[AntiFascist]

13. Thomas is an embarrassment and should have been impeached long ago...

he can draft as many solo opinions as he wants. His Loving wife needs to go to prison.