Is Same Sex Marriage the Next SCOTUS Target?

Many LGBT Americans - including many in Virginia - take cold comfort in the statement in the majority opinion of the Supreme Court striking down Roe v. Wade that the Court's prior rulings in Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell are not fated for a similar fate given that (i) Clarence Thomas has called for their reversal in his concurring opinion, and (ii) Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett apparently lied in their interviews with Senators such as Susan Collins when they claimed Roe was "settled law."  Indeed, I continue to receive inquiries from same sex married couples seeking to either (a) put in place comprehensive estate planning packages and powers of attorney to guard against their marriages becomes void, or (b) update existing documnts to make them more comprehensive and resistant to attack.  Further complicating the issue is the fact that some in the LGBT community got married in states or the District of Columbia where same secx marriage was legal before the Obergefell ruling (the husband and I were married in the District of Columbia in 2014) so our marriages might survive a reversal of Obergefell, but then the question remains as to what recognition such marriages would receive in one's home state or by the federal government in terms of filing tax returns or Social Security survivor benefits.  Here in Virginia, Republicans blocked the repeal of the amendment to the Virginia Constitution banning same sex marriage so the reversal of Obergefell would reactivate that blanket ban on same sex marriage. Numerous legal experts do not believe the majority's claim that their Chrostofascist agenda does not also target the Court's prior rulings in Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell over the longer term.  A piece at Richmond's WTVR and another in People look at the justified fears of many. This from WTVR:

The Supreme Court's ruling giving power over abortion rights to states has led to concerns about other constitutional rights being in jeopardy, including same-sex marriage.

Across a rainbow intersection and underneath a pride flag sits an LGBTQ-focused theater in the heart of Scott's Addition — The Richmond Triangle Players.

“I’d like to think that the stories we've been telling here for 30 years have helped Richmond become a more open and more welcoming and a more inclusive place," said the theater's executive director, Philip Crosby.

While Crosby said the shows that play out on the pink stage have brought entertainment and joy to the community, some members of the audience currently feel anything but.

“I think there's concern at this point," Crosby said.

That concern stemmed from an opinion issued by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas after rulings that would allow states to ban abortions.

We've seen this before, and we're going to see it again," Crosby said. "So I guess the point being, I'm sorry if we have to fight that fight again.”

University of Virginia law professor, Naomi Cahn, said the impact of Thomas' opinion remains unclear.

“I think there has been a concern that the reasoning that was used in the majority could be used when it comes to other well-established rights," Cahn said.

Meanwhile, Crosby encouraged Virginians to use the recent ruling to advocate for changes they'd like to see at the state level.

“Now that the decisions are back to the states, we have to make sure that we have a legislature in Virginia that is going to support what you want to have done," he said.

The following comes from the article in People:

Clarence Thomas writes, in a concurring opinion excerpted on Twitter, that the Supreme Court should reconsider Griswold v. Connecticut, Lawrence V. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodge — the rulings that currently protect the right to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction, the right to a same-sex relationship, and the right to same-sex marriage.

From Thomas' concurring opinion: "... in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is 'demonstrably erroneous,' ... we have a duty to 'correct the error' established in those precedents...”

At a May fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee in Chicago, President Joe Biden said of the leaked opinion: "It's not just the brutality of taking away a woman's right to her body ... but it also, if you read the opinion ... basically says there's no such thing as the right to privacy."

Biden continued: "If that holds ... mark my words: They are going to go after the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage."

I suspect Biden is 100% accurate. LGBT Americans - including those in Virginia - need to mobilize like never before and work for Democrat majorities in Congress and the Virginia General Assembly so that legislation can be enacted to protect contraception, permanently ban of the state sodomy laws, and protect same sex marriage.   Do not fall for Alito's lie in the majority opinion striking down Roe.