Justices Kennedy and Scalia and their divide on gay rights

[mahatmakanejeeves]

Justices Kennedy and Scalia and their divide on gay rights

Courts & Law
By Robert Barnes April 26 at 5:25 PM
@scotusreporter

Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Antonin Scalia were born in the same year, chosen by the same president, live on the same Northern Virginia street and, in serving together on the Supreme Court longer than any other current pair of justices, have many times voted the same conservative way.

But one issue — how the Constitution protects gay citizens — divides and defines the two like no other. This week’s historic hearing on same-sex marriage is both the logical extension and ultimate showdown in a decades-long argument that so far Kennedy has always won.

{Questions about the hearing? Join reporter Robert Barnes on Facebook at 1 p.m. and ask them.}*

Each of Kennedy’s bold and lyrical rulings on behalf of gays — “times can blind us to certain truths and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress,” he wrote in Lawrence v. Texas — has been just as reliably followed by a meticulous and fiery denunciation from Scalia.

“The court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed,” Scalia answered in the Lawrence case.

* That is, ask the questions; not ask the justices.

[DonViejo]

1. Last October, the Supreme Court blocked Wisconsin from putting its new voter ID

into effect. The Supremes didn't issue a reason for blocking the law, but;

...Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that they cannot block an appeals court unless it “clearly and demonstrably erred in its application of accepted standards.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2014/10/09/voter-id-law-struck-down-in-tx-wi.html

That rationale would appear to be behind, in part, the Court not overturning more than a few of the SSM cases that reached it on appeal. It will be interesting to see which appeals court, the pro SSM decision or the no SSM one, in making their final decision.