MARRIAGE EQUALITY NATIONWIDE

[Anima]

I doubt Chief Justice John Roberts is acting as if the 14th Amendment does not exist.  Rather he is saying

I didn't bring up the 14th amendment for Roberts' elucidation or consideration, but as counterpoint to your argument centered on the Commerce and Supremacy clauses. Your previous post came off as if Obergefell didn't even warrant standing.

I think Roberts' invoking "it's always been this way" is a poor defense for his concern. I don't think we really need to unpack the various other traditions whose gaping wounds have been closed by the courts in order that they may heal, some leaving significant scars. I think Roberts' biggest concern was the conference of fundamental right via due process meaning any future law will have to pass strict scrutiny requirements. This combined with changed public opinion on the matter definitively settles the matter.

Is now a good time to again state the obvious in that Roberts' was writing for the minority?  

Jesus will have to make a personal appearance if this bit of religiously motivated prohibition is to be resurrected and I have my doubts he would show much interest.

Actually it may be said that Obergfell did not warrant standing. As ruled by the Supreme Court numerous times and even in US V. Windsor, "The entirety of domesticity issues is and has always been under the jurisdiction of the States." Even now the people wanting to get married go to the State clerc, justice, and courthouse. The Federal govenment is not nor has it even been in a position to marry people.

Roberts is not invoking it has always been this way. Roberts is saying the Federal government does not have the right to force the States to change their way (except under the commerce or supremacy clause).

Though I would definitely not say public opinion and laws have settled the matter. After all democracy enacted the bans in the first place and public opinion was staunchly opposed (and may still be so secretly). Just like that did not settle the matter then it is unlikely this will settle the matter now. It is going to be interesting to see who else uses the Obergfell argument and how the court will have to trip over itself to keep it that ruling and not accept the rest.