Say a pair of Boston newlyweds goes to Georgia to visit the in-laws. One of the women drops dead from a heart attack. The county coroner refuses to let her wedded spouse ship the body home to Boston, insisting that under Georgia law the two were not legal kin. Such outrages already happen, but now, because it's about marriage--a certified political issue--the story will hit the news. Which side do you think most people will take: the cold-hearted state's or the weeping widow's?I think he's right, which leaves me optimistic. Still, the legal concerns resonate. Whether or not Goodridge is successful as policy is not my concern. I think it's a rotton precedent, set by judicialists wishing to advance the social ball irrespective of the rules of the game. Graff says, in effect, Goodridge will be less culturally troublesome than Roe. Like I said, I'm optimistic. But that doesn't make it any better of a decision, judicially, than Roe.
Technicalities aside, mazel tov to the newlyweds.