Harvard Law professor and Bloomberg columnist Noah Feldman just did an Ask Me Anything on Reddit to help untangle the meaning of this week’s landmark Supreme Court decisions on the Voting Rights Act and DOMA. A few exchanges follow.

____________________________

Question:

In your opinion what will congress do in regard to the voting rights act & make it whole again or will we continue to see red states suppress the vote. 

Noah Feldman:

Hard to imagine the politics that would allow for a new VRA coverage definition.

____________________________

Question: 

Justice Antonin Scalia, reading from his dissent, said, “The error in both springs from the same diseased root: an exalted notion of the role of this Court in American democratic society.” 

He also said, “In my view a perfectly valid justification for this statute is contained in its title: the Defense of Marriage Act.” 

This second quote makes it plain that Scalia’s understanding of marriage adopts the Biblical premise that it should be between one man and one women. It seems conservative thought in general on this issue shares the same diseased root: that somehow the language of the constitution should be interpreted from a Christian perspective.

What happened to separation of church and state? How can a supreme court justice in 2013 get away with making so many outrageous and purposefully inflammatory statements?

Noah Feldman:

Well, strictly speaking the Bible contemplates marriage between one man and several women, but we will pass over that. Short answer is that the justices can say whatever they like! The Ct once said we are a Christian nation.

____________________________

Question:

Will gay couples be included in the immigration reform bill after the rulings today? 

Noah Feldman:

Yes if their marriage is legally recognized in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage.

____________________________

Question:

Will the court ever decide to legalize gay marriage or will it always be a state choice?

Noah Feldman: 

I would guess they will eventually have to — perhaps 3 to 5 years depending on the progress of the litigation and of course the composition of the Court.•