Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: Constitution Does Not Protect Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination

Speaking to a San Francisco law school on Friday, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee gay people protection against discrimination. And the same goes for women.

"If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, you have legislatures," Scalia said during a 90-minute question-and-answer session with a professor at UC Hastings College of the Law. He said the same was true of discrimination against gays and lesbians. The 74-year-old justice, leader of the court's conservative wing, is also its most outspoken advocate of "originalism," the doctrine that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the original meaning of those who drafted it. The court has ruled since the early 1970s that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws applies to sex discrimination, requiring a strong justification for any law that treated the genders differently. That interpretation, Scalia declared Friday, was not intended by the authors of the amendment that was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War.

In the landmark 2003 Supreme Court ruling overturning laws against sodomy, Lawrence vs. Texas, Scalia was the most vehement dissenting vote.

EARLY REPORT: Supremes "Skeptical" About Protect Marriage's Argument

According to early reports from today's Supreme Court hearing of the Referendum 71 case, justices on both sides of the ideological aisle are rather skeptical of Protect Marriage's claim that violent homosexuals will rain down retribution on the signers of the anti-gay petition. Even Scalia seems to be on the correct side.

Supreme Court justices from the left and the right were skeptical Wednesday as a lawyer for religious conservatives argued that Washington State has no right to release the names of the 138,000 residents who signed ballot petitions to overturn a same-sex domestic partnership law. Associate Justice John Paul Stevens dismissed the arguments as "touchy feely" and Justice Antonin Scalia said "Democracy requires a certain amount of civic courage." James Bopp Jr., a lawyer for Protect Marriage Washington, argued that those who signed the petition for Referendum 71 faced harassment and intimidation from gay rights groups if their names were released and maintained the right to privacy trumped the public's right to know. Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna, who argued for the state, also faced tough questioning as he maintained the voter approved Public Disclosure Act required the release of the names and there has been no evidence of harassment or intimidation.

The Court's decision could affect the transparency of the referendum process in every state.