Now that Roe is gone, what’s next? Mixed marriages?

Now that the Supreme Court has overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide in 1973, could same-sex marriage be next?

Or even interracial marriage? I’m not too worried about interracial marriage since, to coin an old phrase, the justices themselves have skin in the game.

Justice Clarence Thomas and recently confirmed Ketanji Brown Jackson, for example, are African Americans married to white spouses, which, at the very least, would make for awkward deliberations if the issue were to be brought back to the court.

Yet the issue returned, if somewhat accidentally, during Judge Jackson’s confirmation hearings when GOP senators suggested that the historic 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage should be revisited.

After GOP Sen. Mike Braun suggested that such matters as same-sex marriage should be left up to the states, he was asked if he thought the Supreme Court should also leave interracial marriage to the states. He responded affirmatively, saying the diversity of views is part of “the beauty of the system.”

Indeed, that was the not-so-beautiful system until 1967 when 16 states, still retained so-called anti-miscegenation laws. The case involved Mildred Loving, a woman of color, and her white husband, Richard Loving, who had been sentenced to a year in prison for marrying each other.

But, after his statement drew a blizzard of unwelcome attention, Braun vigorously backpedaled. He had “misunderstood a line of questioning,” he said, “that ended up being about interracial marriage, and let me be clear on that issue — there is no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind based on race.”

Ah, yes, how America’s racial etiquette has changed since the 1960s — and for the better. By 2013, a Gallup poll found that 87% of adults approved of marriage between the races.

That, I would argue, is how the system is supposed to work. Over time, history shows, most of the public tends to become more tolerant of diversity and respectful of individual rights, including abortion rights.

But not without some pushback that sometimes spills over into other still-simmering issues. Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health abortion decision tried to draw distinct lines between its holdings and other rulings.

But in a separate opinion, Justice Thomas, called explicitly for the court to “reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell,” referring respectively to decisions on contraception, sodomy and same-sex marriage. The court’s conservative wing is feeling its new muscle, now that former President Donald Trump’s appointees have a 6-3 majority.

And, for advocates of bodily rights and freedoms, more bad news could be on its way. But nobody on either side had reason to expect anything different. Anti-abortion conservatives have been working for this day since Roe was decided.

Now the left and persuadable folks in the middle are waking up. Calls for a “Summer of Rage” have emerged. I hope they keep it civil. The militant tone of that slogan reminds me of the “Black Lives Matter” movement, which has allowed itself to be demonized by right-wing media and activists that its positive message gets buried.

The pro-abortion rights movement can best fight back initially by supporting abortion funds that can help women access critical care when they need it. Too many on the pro-abortion rights side have been snoozing for too long, too complacent about past victories. Now it’s wake-up time.