tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4735835170009193143.post6151878090428551770..comments2023-07-17T03:58:57.125-07:00Comments on Roland Nikles Dot Com: Obergefell v. Hodges: The Constitution Lives!Roland Nikleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11901484182608550735noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4735835170009193143.post-52661794825409754372015-06-28T22:27:19.470-07:002015-06-28T22:27:19.470-07:00Thanks, Don. I agree with you that Roberts has a ...Thanks, Don. I agree with you that Roberts has a sound head for politics and wants to bolster the reputation of the court. I'm not sure he "tanked" this dissent. His audience is the country, not Scalia, Alito, and Thomas. The reputation for the court--which is what he cares about--would be helped if this decision were 6-3. He's got a lot of emotion in this dissent. <br /><br />Regarding Kennedy's majority opinion, see Jack Balkin's analysis which I've summarized in a separate post. Roland Nikleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11901484182608550735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4735835170009193143.post-31865208516371561752015-06-28T18:31:08.467-07:002015-06-28T18:31:08.467-07:00I think Roberts takes his job as Chief very seriou...I think Roberts takes his job as Chief very seriously. He seems very political. In my unlettered opinion, he had to stretch to find a way to support the Affordable Care Act. His vote on gay rights was a sop to the very religious people who don't believe that the constitution is secular document. If Kennedy had gone against it, Roberts would have been for it. He tanked in a very shrewd way. I would like to think that although the Chief went to Harvard, he's still a practical kid from Indiana. There are deep divisions politically in this country and the Chief understands and respects it. Not sure about the rest of them but I think Kennedy is losing something off his fastball. Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03333510249276382724noreply@blogger.com