Ginni Thomas isn't on the Court. Do we know what every justice's spouse is texting to people? Her husband believes in the rule of law more than anyone else on the Court. That's my main concern.
Coach, did you actually read the concurrence, or are you just relying on a Zoom call with Jeffrey Toobin? This is what he actually says.
For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,” Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U. S. ___, ___ (2020) (THOMAS, J., concurring in judgment) (slip op., at 7), we have a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents, Gamble v. United States, 587 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (THOMAS, J., concurring) (slip op., at 9). After overruling these demonstrably erroneous decisions, the question would remain whether other constitutional provisions guarantee the myriad rights that our substantive due process cases have generated.
He's calling for the doctrine to be overruled. He's not saying the ultimate results should change on the underlying issues. In the case of gay marriage, the equal protection argument could still be raised, and that has more merit than the SDP argument ever had.
Click to expand...