” This is not something that the Supreme Court made up. It’s the right to decide who you would get to be married, which the Supreme Court repeatedly said is a fundamental right.”
He’s not a dumb man. He knows he’s making an entirely circular argument.
How can a ‘fundamental right’ be such if one needs a state issued license to exercise it?? Does it not then become just a state granted ‘privilege’ who’s rules and concepts can change on the prevailing public opinion/conciseness?