Blogs
Featured Image
 Shutterstock.com

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 28, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – For all intents and purposes, three Supreme Court justices just blurted out how they will vote on key issues today.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the most blunt. Sotomayor harshly contradicted James J. Bursch, the special assistant attorney general for the state of Michigan, after he said that the state's only interest in marriage is uniting children to their biological fathers and mothers.

“I don't actually accept your starting premise,” Sotomayor said. The right to marriage is, I think, embedded in our constitutional law. It is a fundamental right. We've said it in a number of cases.”

Sotomayor also bluntly denied that marriage links people together. “Marriage doesn't do that on any level,” she replied, citing the high divorce and abandonment rate. “How many married couples do fathers with the benefits or the requirements of marriage walk away from their children?”

Justice Elena Kagan said she believed laws against same-sex “marriage” were analogous to laws banning interracial marriage. She explicitly stated that this case is linked to Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court case that struck down Virginia's miscegeneration laws. “Loving was exactly what this case is,” she said. “It's a case that shows how liberty and equality are intertwined.”

Justice Stephen Breyer rejected another of Bursch's arguments. When Bursch said that the state had a compelling interest in sustaining marriage because of the soaring out-of-wedlock birthrate, Breyer said, “If your argument depends upon that, I'm stuck.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy also replied, “I think the argument cuts quite against you.” However, he gave mixed signals throughout the hearing. 

Featured Image

Ben Johnson is U.S. Bureau Chief of LifeSiteNews.com. The author of three books, Ben was Managing Editor of FrontPage Magazine from 2003-10. He is also a regular guest on the AFR Talk network's “Nothing But Truth with Crane Durham.” 

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.