Will Obama be remembered in the top 10 of Presidents?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I don't know if he will, but he should.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If one considers gay marriage a noteworthy success, how much credit does Obama really deserve? He appointed Sotomeyor, but any Democrat would've appointed a 5th vote justice. It's like giving Ike credit for the Brown school desegregation decision.

Edit: And he appointed Kagen too.

That's a good point. I'm honestly not sure Stevens would have went along with such a ruling. He was, after all, a major advocate for judicial restraint.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If one considers gay marriage a noteworthy success, how much credit does Obama really deserve? He appointed Sotomeyor, but any Democrat would've appointed a 5th vote justice. It's like giving Ike credit for the Brown school desegregation decision.

Edit: And he appointed Kagen too.

That's a good point. I'm honestly not sure Stevens would have went along with such a ruling. He was, after all, a major advocate for judicial restraint.

"Individual decisions by married persons, concerning the intimacies of their physical relationship, even when not intended to produce offspring, are a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment" - John Paul Stevens, Bowers v. Hardwick (dissenting). That's the basic message of Kennedy's opinion, no?

That decision regarded the Texas ban on sodomy, if I'm not mistaken. It's one thing to say that the government has no right to regulate what two consenting adults do in their bedroom, but it's another to say that the government must provide legal recognition to a category of relationships.

Anyway, I don't claim to know how Stevens would have ruled. I'm genuinely wondering.

[Antonio the Sixth]

If one considers gay marriage a noteworthy success, how much credit does Obama really deserve? He appointed Sotomeyor, but any Democrat would've appointed a 5th vote justice. It's like giving Ike credit for the Brown school desegregation decision.

Edit: And he appointed Kagen too.

That's a good point. I'm honestly not sure Stevens would have went along with such a ruling. He was, after all, a major advocate for judicial restraint.

"Individual decisions by married persons, concerning the intimacies of their physical relationship, even when not intended to produce offspring, are a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment" - John Paul Stevens, Bowers v. Hardwick (dissenting). That's the basic message of Kennedy's opinion, no?

That decision regarded the Texas ban on sodomy, if I'm not mistaken. It's one thing to say that the government has no right to regulate what two consenting adults do in their bedroom, but it's another to say that the government must provide legal recognition to a category of relationships.

Anyway, I don't claim to know how Stevens would have ruled. I'm genuinely wondering.

He was interviewed by NPR and said that the rapid change in public opinion might lead people to "accept the merits of some of my arguments," which to me certainly indicates he'd have ruled in favor.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/04/24/306524864/retired-justice-john-paul-stevens-marijuana-should-be-legal

Fair enough.