General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Clarence Thomas says marriage equality ruling should be overturned [View all]TomSlick
(11,098 posts)However, Thomas J.'s citation to Roberts C.J.'s dissent in Obergefell had nothing to do with the ruling in that case. Rather, the citation was for the purpose of making his argument against stare decisis when, in his view, the precedent is erroneous. The argument against stare decisis is dangerous to the very foundation of our legal system. However, as dangerous as Thomas, J's position seems clearly to be, it is not a direct attack on Obergefell (at least no more than any other precedent with which he disagrees).
The dissent by Ginsburg, J. also alarms me. I can make the argument that the separate sovereigns rule in double jeopardy cases can have a seemingly unjust result. However, the rule is the result of venerable precedent. To abandon such precedent puts the concept of stare decisis at risk. If stare decisis fails, so does the concept of equal justice under the law.
While I am concerned anytime I disagree with Ginsburg, J., it should alarm her when she agrees with Thomas, J.