On Oct. 7, the U.S. Supreme Court smacked down Ken Cuccinelli's latest lawsuit by refusing to hear his appeal of the Fourth Circuit's decision finding unconstitutional the Virginia "crimes against nature" law, which Mr. Cuccinelli saved in its present form from being amended when he was a freshman state senator.
That makes it official! Our attorney general has lost every major lawsuit he has brought as attorney general of the commonwealth.
Supposedly, he continued to be attorney general while he ran for governor because he wanted to shepherd this lawsuit through the Supreme Court. This was to be the one he would win and become his legacy as attorney general. But, alas, he could not convince four very conservative justices of the Supreme Court to take up his cause. No one knows what the internal vote on the court was, but my guess is that not one of them, least of all Clarence Thomas, wanted to revisit this issue of criminalizing fellatio.
It amazes me that Mr. Cuccinelli is so concerned that the government must be able to regulate the private sex lives of consenting adults that he risked exactly what happened. The adult who solicited fellatio from a child is free to do so again. Why would Mr. Cuccinelli risk that ending?
Then there is another contradiction that is puzzling as well. Why would he champion government intervention and regulation of one the most private of personal interactions on the one hand, and on the other hand champion the cause of deregulating corporations such that they can run roughshod over us less important persons? Why are corporate "persons" more important? What kind of leader is this?
Michael Cash, Fort Valley