Theres been alot of talk today about weather or not Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg planted what some are calling a “time bomb,” often favored by Justice William J. Brennan Jr who used to write innocuous or casual statements or footnotes — seeds that would be and were exploited to their logical extreme in a later case., that’ll force the Court’s hand when it deals with gays — and their marriage rights when she wrote her opinion on Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (UC Hastings), where the University of California was told it could continue denying recognition to a Christian student group.
“Our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context,” wrote Ginsburg But thecontext MIGHT matter. If Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the majority, was talking about laws affecting gay men and lesbians
From The New York Times:
Justice Ginsburg’s bland talk about status and conduct was significant because courts are more apt to protect groups whose characteristics are immutable. Calling sexual orientation a status may not require the conclusion that being gay is immutable rather than a choice, but it certainly suggests it.
There was something broader going on, too, said Suzanne B. Goldberg, a law professor at Columbia. “The court is talking about gay people, not homosexuals, and about people who have a social identity rather than a class of people who engage in particular sex acts,” Professor Goldberg said.
“The tone bodes well,” Professor Goldberg said of the decision. “The analysis bodes well. The great question is whether the tone and analysis will carry over when the court confronts marriage head-on.”
Let’s cross our fingers and hope so. SCOTUS is the best shot that we have!