Can you correctly fill in the blank in this sentence (I'll even make it easier by making it a multiple choice test):
Let's be clear about what has just happened. Five unelected, life-tenured [Justices] ... declared that ___________. They did so, without a trace of irony, by striking down ... a key provision of a federal law.... [The decision] will be viewed by future scholars on a par with the Court's odious Dred Scott and Plessy decisions ....
- the formula used to determine which states and locales must get preclearance under the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutionally outdated
- the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, opening the door to requirements that the federal government provide benefits to same-sex couples
- Proposition 8 was not properly before them, but in a way that left the lower courts' rulings invalidating the Proposition standing and thereby freeing up Governor Brown to declare same-sex marriages are again valid under the law of California
My point is simply this: We're not seeing much respect for neutral principles by anybody this week. Instead, whether you think they are 5 unelected old farts in robes or heroes depends on which side of the case you're on. It's pretty hypocritical.
