Scalia described how to handle these cases very clearly. If the court overreached but there is broad consensus on the issue, it’s water under the bridge. If the issue is still controversial, it’s fair game. Nobody thinks we should revisit interracial marriage, and so under this interpretation it won’t be revisited.
The people in that video still exist in the county. They just have been overrun by professionals moving in as builders took advantage of abundant land and built houses over the last ten years.
It’s just not as acceptable to espouse those views in modern society. I’m sure some of the family members of the White girls my (step)son dates (the county is still only 3.8% Black) would not approve of their relative dating my son. Don’t get me wrong, by “relatives”, I mean grandparents, older relatives, etc. I’ve never sensed any hostility from parents. But that could be because they think we “are one of the good ones”
Which is of course odd since it flies directly in the face of Scalia's "originalism", and lays bare that the constitution is a living document. It also means that by the very act of objecting to the ruling, I am creating precedent to repeal, since I am "creating controversy".
