An opinion piece in the Washington Post by famed law professor Jonathan Turley has been making the rounds on social media this week. In it, while celebrating the “historic ruling” by the U.S. Supreme Court that “found” a right to same-sex unions in the Constitution which he calls a “liberating moment,” Turley cautions about the philosophy used by Justice Anthony Kennedy to reach his conclusion. A philosophy that’s built on the concept of the “dignity of marriage.” Turley worries that dignity is a “rather elusive and malleable concept compared with more concrete qualities such as race and sex,” on which he is more comfortable with basing law (Turley clearly hasn’t spoken with the Fairfax County School Board about the whole “sexuality is fluid” thing, but I digress). The article is certainly an interesting read, and conservatives have been quick to pass it along as proof that the Supreme Court was wrong in it's decision.
But there was another aspect of Turley’s article that I found just as chilling as Kennedy’s bizarre notion of “dignity rights.”
Turley celebrates what Justice Antinon Scalia in his blistering dissent referred to as “the end of all morals legislation.” After all, basing law on some kind of moral code (i.e. Christianity) is just so yesterday, not very evolutionary, and just downright boring.
Of course, if you don’t base law on a moral code, on what should law be based?
Well, the other option is majority rule, but Turley seems no fan of that either. He laments that, “Obergefell would be a tragic irony if it succeeded in finally closing the door on morality and speech codes only to introduce an equally ill-defined dignity code. Both involve majoritarian values, enforced by the government,…” Of course, history has proven to be a better critic of “might makes right” legal codes than even Turley, but at least he’s a bit concerned that the majority isn’t always right.
So, if law can’t be based on morality or on majority, on what can it be based? Well here’s Turley’s disturbing answer: “…the justices can certainly tailor their new right in the coming years.”
Catch that: it’s up to the moral code of the majority of Supreme Court justices! They determine what is right and wrong. Their beliefs and philosophies are the basis for law. The legal elites – you know, those super-duper enlightened attorneys who know better than God or the people. I’m sure the Justices will take their lead from those law professors who are just as super enlightened. So we can forget the legislature; forget the Constitution; forget any concrete basis for law, the attorneys have it covered for us.
Such self-deification should come as no surprise. The secular left has seen itself as the only true source of truth for quite some time, and now they have five Supreme Court justices and more than a handful of Jonathan Turley’s to enforce it.
Pardon me if I prefer God’s moral code to theirs.