Pavan v. Smith

Calm down, people; Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement does not spell the end of same-sex marriage.

American citizens enjoy the freedom to marry who they want and to have kids with whom they want -- for the most part.

* Very interesting piece by Mark Joseph Stern on Justice Neil M. Gorsuch’s dissent in Pavan v. Smith (aka the “LGBT parents on birth certificates” case). It seems to me that Justice Gorsuch’s statement is technically correct — the Arkansas Department of Health (1) was okay with giving the named plaintiffs their birth certificates and (2) conceded that in the artificial-insemination context, gay couples can’t be treated differently than straight couples (see the Arkansas Supreme Court opinion, footnote 1 and page 18) — but it’s either confusing, at best, or misleading and disingenuous, at worst (the view of Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, counsel to the plaintiffs). [Slate]

* Speaking of Justice Gorsuch, Adam Feldman makes some predictions about what we can expect from him in the future, based on his first few opinions. [Empirical SCOTUS]

* Professor Rick Hasen has made up his mind on this: “Gorsuch is the new Scalia, just as Trump promised.” [Los Angeles Times]

* The VC welcomes a new co-conspirator: Professor Sai Prakash, a top scholar of constitutional law and executive power. [Volokh Conspiracy / Washington Post]

* Now that Harvard Law School will accept GRE scores in lieu of LSAT scores, what do law school applicants need to know about the two tests? [Law School HQ]

* And what do Snapchat users need to know about the app’s new “Snap Map” feature? Cyberspace lawyer Drew Rossow flags potential privacy problems. [WFAA]

What do you call it when the law treats gay women worse than straight men, for no good reason? Unconstitutional.