If you are talking about what I wrote, it was not vague, and it was not just an assertion. It is obvious that the Supreme Court has no way to enforce its rulings, as Hamilton noted in Federalist No. 78:and the vague assertions that the SC doesn't have any way to enforce its rulings.
"The judiciary . . . can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."
The people have the final say on everything in our system of government. In Lincoln's famous phrase, which he borrowed from John Wycliff, who had used it in referring to the Bible, we have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people." Although only one Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached, the very fact that remedy is available proves the Judicial Branch is as much a servant of the people as the other two brancjes.Is not the whole purpose of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution, and have the final say in such matters?
That depends on what action you are referring to. Justice Scalia pointed out that dictates like this one can have no effect unless either the states choose to give them one, or the Executive Branch can force them to.Are posters suggesting this ruling will prompt another such action, or series of actions? Seems unlikely at best.
No one knows whether any state will ignore this ruling. But any state could ignore it if it chose to.Desegregation was extremely unpopular among a certain group in society, and this same posturing was attempted then. But eventually, the ruling was enforced. In today's society, it seems an extreme stretch to think that history might repeat itself over this ruling, much less be taken any further. I suppose anything's possible, just seems highly unlikely.
That is as incoherent as any of Anthony Kennedy's gobbledygook. No one's sexual orientation is a "civil right," any more than his tastes in movies, or architecture, or food. And new constitutional rights do not leap into existence by spontaneous generation, whenever a few judges decide to wave their hands.Then the whole thing will blow over when sexual orientation is finally recognized as a civil right.