My Argument to the Supreme Court

My argument is addressed principally to Chief Justice Roberts (although, of course, you -- Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy -- can listen in). I'm only going to cite one precedent -- Dred Scott.
This post was published on the now-closed HuffPost Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and posted freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email.

May it please the Court:

My argument is addressed principally to Chief Justice Roberts (although, of course, you -- Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy -- can listen in).

I'm only going to cite one precedent -- Dred Scott. You know, the case where the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Roger Taney (an extremely capable jurist who was, unfortunately, also an ardent supporter of slavery) ruled that African-Americans were property and when one escaped to a free state, it was obligatory that he be returned to his "owner," as though he were a found billfold.

In ruling on the president's health care bill, Mr. Chief Justice, you ultimately came down on the side that the administration could proceed to develop a new approach to health care for the 21st century. It was reported that you made this decision because you didn't want to go down in history as opposing a change that must ultimately be made. You didn't want to place yourself -- and the Court -- in the position of being antedeluvian behemoths who had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, after the fact, into the reality of the modern world.

Good for you! (Although that this was a big choice for you certainly should make the rest of us Americans sit up and take notice.)

Now, back to the gay marriage cases.

Every awake human being (and nobody, Mr. Chief Justice, imagines that you are not a hyper-aware entity, unlike some others sitting here in robes) knows that America is headed towards the "emancipation" of gay people. Opinion polls indicate a rapidly expanding acceptance of same-sex relationships -- an avalanche of acceptance, really, when we look at younger Americans.

For your Court to decide against gay marriage -- even in some fancy-dancy decision that doesn't actually declare your support squarely for allowing gay people to form legally recognized marriages -- is to consign you to the dustbin of history. You will become an object of derision -- somebody to be cited as an example of just how blind, biased, and stupid even well-educated, smart people can be.

Do you dare risk having that place in history, Sir?

I rest my case.

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot