J. Harvie opines in the Times:
The risks of continuing our present constitutional course are grave. One faction risks damage to the nation at large, the other to the vital roles of smaller communities. All factions owe their fellow citizens the hope and the prospect of democratic change, not the message that their views have been constitutionally condemned and their opponents’ views carved in the stone of our founding charter. Restraint has much to commend it as a judicial value, not least of which is that it extends the hand of tolerance and respect to those whose views we may not share, but whose citizenship we do share and whose love of family, community and country burns no less brightly than our own.
Update: Ed Whelan thinks Wilkinson’s Op-Ed violates the code of conduct, because he opines on Prop 8 and PPACA:
Many people, myself included, will agree with one or the other (or even both) of Wilkinson’s assessments. But that agreement shouldn’t divert attention from the fact that, under the Code of Conduct, Wilkinson shouldn’t have publicly offered those assessments.