Tenth Circuit: Gay marriage protected by the Constitution

[CountryClassSF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

[SteveRogers]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

[Barnes]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

Or public transportation?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

Or public transportation?

Article I Section 8 Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

If we aren't going to require amending the constitution so as to allow us to have an air force in addition to an army and a navy, I say that clause can easily be interpreted broadly enough to justify any sort of transportation expenditure.

[Barnes]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

of course. But I don't see anything in there about marriage.

Do you see anything in there about public schools?

Or public transportation?

Article I Section 8 Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

If we aren't going to require amending the constitution so as to allow us to have an air force in addition to an army and a navy, I say that clause can easily be interpreted broadly enough to justify any sort of transportation expenditure.

The point of the argument was the maintainence of equal protection under laws - such as in public schools and in access to transportation (Browder v. Gayle, 1956). The section on post roads would have had no relevance to that case and to my knowledge hasn't in any rate been used as the main justification for public infrastructure and transport projects.