data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ed6f1/ed6f1baf142e88186a0967167f3cb85a298e6020" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f2f93/f2f939022ffae29e4decb326a98f4493d0a2e13e" alt=""
In his concurring opinion on Dobbs (eliminating constitutional protection for abortion), Thomas wrote:
The Court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine’s application in other, specific contexts. Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex marriage), are not at issue.
This is basically a list of precedent cases he wants the court to revisit. The conspicuously absent case is Loving v. Virginia, which is what protects interracial marriage. There’s also a pretty obvious reason why: he’s in an interracial marriage.
Read the article, but didn’t see anything about how much thrust is expected. Guessing this is going to be a better ion engine of low thrust/high specific impulse. Which is useful, but mostly for robots.