A ‘Kagan Doctrine’ on Gay Marriage

by on

Elena Kagan seems to be saying that protecting minority rights is the Supreme Court's job description, but also that a civil rights claim doesn't automatically trump majority preferences. This is something absolutists on both sides of the gay marriage debate don't like to hear. (Link to New York Times column)

One Comment for “A ‘Kagan Doctrine’ on Gay Marriage”

  1. posted by Throbert McGee on

    Shortly before we married, we visited a lawyer who explained that it would cost thousands of dollars to draw up documents protecting us in states that, like Virginia, treat us as legal strangers — documents making Michael my heir, giving him access to my hospital room, allowing him to make financial decisions should I be incapacitated. Even so, our pricey paperwork could replicate only a few of the perquisites of marriage, and only imperfectly at that. This is how second-class citizenship feels.

    Hrrrm… I call shenanigans on this “costing thousands of dollars” claim. Didn’t your momma tell you that you betta shop, shop around, Mr. Rauch?

    I don’t doubt that it’s possible to spend thousands of bucks on lawyer’s fees when you draw up a will or give someone durable power of attorney. But I question whether it’s necessary to spend thousands of bucks to make these documents legally binding.

Comments are closed.