Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Eric Kingery
A brief description of you.
A brief description of you.


Post has attachment
Rambling about software development and the Meetup group Refactor::Chicago.

Post has attachment
Attended an engaging panel on prototyping last night. This is my takeaway:

Thank you, 5/9ths of SCOTUS! For future reference, it's more fun if you only stress the So in 'It is so ordered'. 

Opinion of the Court 
                  * * * 
The power the Constitution grants it also restrains.
And though Congress has great authority to design laws to
fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot 
deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of
the Fifth Amendment. 

What has been explained to this point should more than 
suffice to establish that the principal purpose and the 
necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons
who are in a lawful same-sex marriage. This requires
the Court to hold, as it now does, that DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. 

The liberty protected by the Fifth Amendment’s Due
Process Clause contains within it the prohibition against 
denying to any person the equal protection of the laws.
See Bolling, 347 U. S., at 499–500; Adarand Constructors, 
Inc. v. Peña, 515 U. S. 200, 217–218 (1995). While the 
Fifth Amendment itself withdraws from Government the 
power to degrade or demean in the way this law does, 
the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment makes that Fifth Amendment right all the more
specific and all the better understood and preserved.

The class to which DOMA directs its restrictions and 
restraints are those persons who are joined in same-sex 
marriages made lawful by the State. DOMA singles out a
class of persons deemed by a State entitled to recognition
and protection to enhance their own liberty. It imposes a
disability on the class by refusing to acknowledge a status 
the State finds to be dignified and proper. DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with
whom same-sex couples interact, including their own 
children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others. The federal statute is invalid, for no 
legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to 
disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity.
By seeking to displace this protection and treating those 
persons as living in marriages less respected than others,
the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment. 
This opinion and its holding are confined to those lawful

The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit is affirmed. 

It is so ordered

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
How a Working-Class Couple Amassed a Priceless Art Collection #twt

Post has attachment
Dear empty googleverse,

I'm trying this music sharing service in case anyone is interested in checking it out. I really like the idea, it's simple. Also, I'm on

Post has attachment
If you enjoy this, consider a job at my company. "Upping incentives for university technology commercialization is poor public policy."

From the referenced paper: "Quality is found to be inversely related to the share of license income allotted to faculty."

"But academics, like everyone else, respond to incentives. Reward them with more money, promotions, or fame for developing new commercial technologies instead of conducting basic research and they will do less basic research, undermining the technological advances necessary for other people to develop new products, businesses, and industries."


Post has attachment
Contextualization in two layers? "This guy tried to destroy half of Paris and build the same building 20,000 times" #twt  

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Nice feature, too bad I have to use it for #googlereader
Wait while more posts are being loaded