Andrew floats a compromise: a constitutional amendment guaranteeing that states wouldn’t have to recognize one another’s same-sex marriages. (He says he doesn’t support it but offers it as a suggestion. I’m not sure on what grounds he does not support it wholeheartedly, given the federalist case he makes for it.) I might support his modified marriage amendment if it were modified again, to reach down to bar state judiciaries from imposing same-sex marriage. Andrew doesn’t seem to object to such judicial activism.
He writes, “Much bigger majorities opposed inter-racial marriage in 1967, when it was finally protected, than now oppose same-sex marriage. But then those evil judicial activists imposed equal marriage rights on an unwilling populace.” Does anyone have any numbers on this? Had no states democratically lifted their prohibitions on interracial marriage in 1967? Did sizable majorities think that interracial marriage was not only something to be avoided, but something to ban?