Scalia on Peter Robinson's "Uncommon Knowledge"

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

This quote from one of the judges was interesting:



Is it written in the Iowa Constitution that anyone - straight or gay - has a right to marry? If not, how can he claim insufficient constitutional justification.

Archaea? You're opinion is one that I respect. Perhaps you could explain this to a non-lawyer.

I am quite a few years removed from being in touch with it, but the language sounds similar to Equal Protection Clause arguments I vaguely remember.

Basically, if laws are creating classes, then they are subject to certain scrutiny. And the level of scrutiny depends upon the category of activity legislated. Categories involving race, gender, ethnic origin and creed are inherently suspect. I can't remember where age falls and the justices appear to be making a similar argument for marriage on the basis of sexual practices and orientation.

But I'd have to read the entire opinion to make certain. Most of the stronger constitutional arguments in the arena of private relations originate in the Equal Protection Clause, not in the Due Process Clause, despite Justice Blackmun's opinon to the contrary.