What part of “any person” does Justice Roberts not understand ?

Today the Supreme Court ruled by a 5-to-4 vote that the Constitution guarantees a right to same-sex marriage. In his dissent Justice Roberts suggested that there was nothing relevant in the Constitution. How about the 14th Amendment?

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

What part of “any person” does Justice Roberts not understand? I know Justice Scalia has trouble with concepts such as “all persons” or “any person” but I thought Justice Roberts was better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.