Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 51,124
- 14,807
- 2,180
They offered the Loving decision as an example. That's what 'e.g.' means. It was a case that demonstrated that state marriage laws are subject to judicial review....and if they violate rights, the laws are invalid.
Odd then that they'd end up saying in Windsor that gay marriage was made legal by a statewide consensus weighing the pros and cons and by that route that gay marriage was only legal in "some States"..
Only if we apply your interpretation is it 'odd'. Just as the lifting of the stays are 'strange' if we use your interpretation. But if we recognize that your interpretation is invalid and imaginary, their citation of loving is neither strange nor odd. But pretty predictable. As are the lifting of the stays.