[Skywalk]

I have a question for everyone who thinks this is a federal power grab(by the judiciary in this case):

What if there were no 14th Amendment? Would affirmative action policies then be constitutional when enacted by state institutions?

Really, is there anyone here who would say "The state has a right to make racially biased laws, provided the electorate(composed of a potentially biased group) vote in officials that enact these laws!"

Sorry, the 14th isn't necessary to the anti-AA argument, though it is helpful.

If I'm correct, then people just prefer to read or not read into the Constitution what they will when it suits them?

Many people on this board would have had no problem if the court unanimously ruled in favor of this law AND issued an opinion supporting laws against sodomy, masturbation, adultery etc.

There are a few who are legitimately concerned about the overreach here, but most are really more interested in laws against homosexuals.

[jwalsh07]

Look, it boils down to this. Kennedy wrote the decision and his opinion is that sodomy is a fundamental right while the life of the unborn isn't.

Libertarian whackoism.

Up is down, down is up. If sodomy is a fundamental right, then health care, a home in the burbs and a college education most certainly are as well.

With Kennedy's reasoning anything is possible because one can argue that without those the "dignity of the those indivduals is not respected".

Assinine.