[Ray76]

That’s not a law, that’s a judicial diktat.

“The Court, in this decision, holds same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry in all States.” This goes too far. This commandeers the legislative process of the States. The federal government has no say in marriage laws, laws which have always been within the purview of the States. No court, least of all the USSC, has the authority to legislate.

There is no federal marriage law. The author’s babble about the “supremacy clause” is bogus.

[Ray76]

The author I refer to is the author of the washington post article in 46

[Tau Food]

Your theory can be tested by the first state to repeal all their marriage laws. That would avoid the equal protection problem. But, for now, right now, all states have marriage laws.

Your argument seems to be that the Supreme Court shouldn't say that homosexuals can marry in all states because there may be some state that doesn't recognize any marriages and therefore doesn't violate the equal protection clause. The problem with your argument is that there really aren't any states that don't license and recognize marriages. When there is such a state, they'll have a pretty good argument.

But, of course, that is an empty threat because any politicians who voted to end all marriages would soon be unelected politicians. So, don't count on that.

We'll probably need an amendment if we're going to change this situation.