[Sherman Logan]

Do you think that "prescrib(ing) the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof" allows Congress to decide which "public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of (a) state" do not have to be given "full faith and credit" by other states?

I don't read it that way.

As far as the court issue goes, I hope you are right.

However, a couple more appointments of liberals to the SC, and all bets are off.

I think it is pretty clear to a reasonable person, whether they agree with the result or not, that the Supremes have functioned for about 50 years as a "super legislature." Personally, I will be quite surprised if within 20 years the Supremes have not only invalidated the DOMA, but discovered a positive right in the Constitution for gay people to marry each other.

[MACVSOG68]

I don't read it that way.

Then look up the cases. There are several.

However, a couple more appointments of liberals to the SC, and all bets are off.

The next two appointments will be replacing liberals. And the court will be dependable for the next 30 years before any shift in the balance.

I think it is pretty clear to a reasonable person, whether they agree with the result or not, that the Supremes have functioned for about 50 years as a "super legislature."

Most of those I think you are referring to have been interpretations of the 14th Amendment right to due process and equal protection of the law. The recognition of rights for those previously denied such protection has traditionally brought out cries of anguish from those already protected. From my perspective, most of that legislation from the bench comes out of the district court and the 9th Circuit. And most of it is reversed.