Joan Walsh is absolutely correct.
The slipshod result-driven "originalism" of Scalia in saying --- despite it's express language --- that the 14th Amendment provides no protection to women or gays means that should Congress or a State legislature pass a low allowing women to be beaten, the 14th Amendment would not protect them.
Want to prevent gays from being allowed to drive -- or hanging out in a public location? It's perfectly legal for the legislature to do so.
Want to pass a low outlawing women in the workplace?
No problem.
The man is not a brilliant jurist, he's a wretched scholar and a worse ideologue.
Of course, in Bush v. Gore he had no problem using the 14th Amendment to give George Bush the Presidency.