I admit that at some point I decided that The Law was mostly silly and stopped bothering my beautiful mind trying to decipher the holy texts of Supreme Court decisions. There are people more qualified to do that than I am, obviously, but more than that I find the whole subject to be an elaborate pantomime to avoid acknowledging the fact that the important decisions are basically expressions of the political outcomes desired by a majority of the justices, tempered only by the minor restraint that they don't make themselves look like complete hacks by contradicting their previous decisions in obvious ways. Though that, too, is just a game for clever clerks to figure out. But here's some analysis for those
who want it. And the
(big pdf) decision.
Apparently Alito's dissent is funny. I don't have time at the moment to scan it but someone flagged this:
But can it be seriously argued that one of the aims of Title
VII is to outlaw employment discrimination against employees, whether heterosexual or homosexual, who engage
in necking?
