Based black

I mean if people vote against gay marriage and win plurality then is that not the will of the people in motion?

tyranny of the majority sucks

tired of this bullshit

Attached: 1632415116279.jpg (735x767, 179.69K)

>How can that be democratic when minorities aren't represented?
Because right wingers are too stupid to understand that a healthy democracy is when all groups of people are equally represented in positions of powers. They unironically believe democracy is the rule of the majority. That's why they get so mad at things like quotas or affirmative action. They live stuck in the middle ages.

It does, which is why direct democracy sucks and it's the reason why we have representatives to begin with

It doesn't if you're in the majority though. If you're in the majority, what sucks is the tyranny of the minorities.

>It doesn't if you're in the majority though
you won't be in the majority on every single issue, that's the thing

Not so nice now that the boot isn't on your feet now, is it?

tyranny by nine unelected judges is worse, which is what shitlibs want

>uuuuh what the writers of the 14th amendment ACTUALLY meant was that gays can marry, I swear guys please trust me on this

how are liberals even allowed to sit on the supreme court, it's just blatant subversion of the process

I wonder if the dems would do literally anything at all if he succeeds. My bet is on no

lets see this jogger overturn the interracial marriage case founded on the same basis, and then we can talk about the heckin process

>"The liberals made my life miserable for 43 years," a former clerk remembered Thomas – who was 43 years old when confirmed – saying, according to The New York Times. "And I'm going to make their lives miserable for 43 years."

Imagine seething this hard

Polls show that most people don't think abortion is a pressing issue. Like 80% is worried about inflation and crime though.

Thomas would revive the privileges and immunities clause of the 14th amendment which would basically have the same outcome (but with different reasoning) as Loving. Also for Loving to even be a case you'd need to have a state reimpose miscegenation laws which absolutely none of them would.