the right to an abortion. contraception. treating the slaves as chattal property? i don t quite remember the basis for the dread scott opinion but i ll trust you that the fact is, is it not, that you can use substantive due process to justify any result, whether conservative, liberal, libertarian, whatever you would like to call, it s a mode of analysis by the court that allows the court to substitute its opinion for the elective representatives of the people and would you agree? the court has identified standards for the determination of rights under the 14th amendment substantive due
0 of marriage, correct? i am aware there are various religious faiths that define marriage in a traditional way. do you see that when the supreme court makes a dramatic pronouncement about the invalidity about state marriage laws, it will inevitably set in conflict between those who ascribe to the supreme court s edict and those who have a firmly held religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman? well, senator, these issues are being litigated, as you know, throughout the courts i as people raise issues and so, i m limited in what i can say about them. i m aware there are cases i m not asking you to decide a case or predict how you would decide in the future. i m asking isn t it apparent that when the supreme court decided something that is not even in the constitution is a fundamental right and no state can pass any law that conflicts with the supreme court s edict, particularly in an area where people have sincerely held religious believes, doesn t that effec