MakingADumbPoint

Two questions:

(1) The majority declined to explain what scrutiny analysis it used to strike down the marriage laws. How do you think future litigants should approach other discriminatory statutes in the absence of a clear scrutiny analysis?

(2) What percentage of your argument preparation would you say focused on Justice Kennedy in particular? 50%? 90%? Did you assume that he would be the deciding vote?

I love the work of PG Wodehouse. What do you think of him? What are some other authors that I might like in that vein?