Replies

But to say that private sexual transactions between consenting adults may be criminalized, is to ignore the 9th Amendment and give it no effect whatsoever.

You have to wonder if incest cannot be outlawed after this ruling. The ruling in this case is very applicable to incest. It IS still private sexual transactions between consenting adults.

Then you must follow Scalia's argument that the State cannot discriminate against these couples in the matter of marriage if the underlying behavior that caused the cultural approbation in the first place is no longer a compelling State interest to ban.

Even I, a conservative, can see that there is no foundation whatsoever to ban same sex marriages or (non-procreative) incestual marriage or multiple partner marriages if this ruling is used as precedent. Scalia sees it also. They are now privacy matters that the State has no compelling interest to ban. If it has no compelling interest to ban then it has no compelling interest to discriminate by denying the monetary and social benefits of marriage.

By this ruling, the court has opened the door for the Jerry Springer show to come knocking at their door. When it does, they will have to either have a hypocritical double standard or apply this precedent. The choice of undermining traditional society as we know it, or undermining the consistency of the law. Great choice for the Supreme Court of the United States.

Is there a lot of incest going on? I don't remember ever hearing about adults charged with incest.

If kids are involved, this ruling is not applicable, as it's not consensual privacy.

Does anyone believe that even if this could be applied to incest, consensual adult incest would become a problem.

Really there is nothing to get excited about. The dirty legal secret of the Supreme Court is that nothing is absolute. There is no such thing as strict construction from any Justice, ever. It's really impossible to "strict construct" 18th Century intent into modern times. The Court form opinions that mirror the times.

That is why with both this decision and Roe, private, out of sight, consensual prostitution laws should be easily unconstitutional, but they won't be. The Court will find a rationale for the laws, because the American public will not now accept such acts being legal. The Court's decisions are full of hypocrisy.

"You have to wonder if incest cannot be outlawed after this ruling. "

That topic arouses much hyperbole from both sides, but- they certainly have claimed the power to rule one way or some other on the issue.

On the other controversial topic of minors' sexual rights, at most I expect the Supreme Court to just demand those laws be uniform throughout the states- for now. From this ruling they will apparently be made uniform with those in Europe- unless Africa or Asia or some other region is in vogue with the law school community when a case comes before them.