*****

From Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896):

So far, then, as a conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment is concerned, the case reduces itself to the question whether the statute of Louisiana is a reasonable regulation, and, with respect to this, there must necessarily be a large discretion on the part of the legislature. In determining the question of reasonableness, it is at liberty to act with reference to the established usages, customs, and traditions of the people, and with a view to the promotion of their comfort and the preservation of the public peace and good order. Gauged by this standard, we cannot say that a law which authorizes or even requires the separation of the two races in public conveyances is unreasonable, or more obnoxious to the Fourteenth Amendment than the acts of Congress requiring separate schools for colored children in the District of Columbia, the constitutionality of which does not seem to have been questioned, or the corresponding acts of state legislatures.

*****

Plessy, of course, was overturned in 1954 by Brown v. Board of Education and its following cases, in which the Supreme Court ruled there was no rational basis for government-sponsored racial discriminination.

The New York court’s decision today reads like a summer rerun of the Plessy opinion.

I don’t believe it will take 58 years for this unfortunate New York decision to be overturned, nor do I think it will need to be.

The opponents of equal rights for unmarried couples are
fighting a rear-guard action – with the support of judges advocating positions discredited over 50 years ago – in a vain attempt to halt societal progress. Voters in New York – and voters in Virginia – are smarter than that.

Activists judges in another state won’t influence Virginia voters when they reject the so-called marriage amendment.