In ''Crime in the Bedroom'' editorial, July 2 you say of the Supreme Court decision upholding Georgia's law on sodomy that ''the Court crudely rejects as 'facetious' the argument that such a law invades privacy and strikes at deeply personal, basic liberties. White is quoted, ''to claim that a right to engage in such conduct is 'deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition' or 'implicit in the concept of ordered liberty' is, at best, facetious. The interpretation I draw from Justice White's words is entirely different from the meaning I believe you attempt to infer.
The Supreme Court issued a sweeping declaration of constitutional liberty for gay men and lesbians today, overruling a Texas sodomy law in the broadest possible terms and effectively apologizing for a contrary decision that the majority said ''demeans the lives of homosexual persons. Gays are ''entitled to respect for their private lives,'' Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said for the court.
Jump to navigation. After being charged with violating the Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy by committing that act with another adult male in the bedroom of his home, respondent Hardwick respondent brought suit in Federal District Court, challenging the constitutionality of the statute insofar as it criminalized consensual sodomy. The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.
By including same-sex couples within the constitutional right to marry, the decision of the U. Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges 26 th June is of great practical significance.
Jump to navigation Skip navigation. Illinois became the first state in the U. It did so inwhen it adopted an overall revision of its criminal laws.
Suzanne Goldberg Guest. Perry and was among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in United States v. Neither decision is surprising but both are gratifying.
Next week the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in four cases presenting the question whether the Constitution requires states to license and recognize same-sex marriage. As I noted in my Verdict column when the Justices agreed to hear these cases earlier this year, the result is essentially a foregone conclusion: Nearly all well-informed observers expect the Court to find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Important legal questions will undoubtedly remain open, including some for legislators—such as whether to grant LGBT Americans protection against private discrimination, and if so, whether to provide exceptions from compliance with such anti-discrimination laws to people motivated by religious or other objections to same-sex marriage or homosexuality.
The Supreme Court's decisions in United States v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perrythe first major gay rights rulings in a decade, are a one-two punch to the nation's most prominent anti-gay laws.
Jump to navigation. The successful push to win marriage equality was the product of a strategic legal campaign and an emerging social movement. Marriage equality has been just one in a series of affirmative battles fought by the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender LGBT rights movement over the past half-century. The successful push to win marriage equality in all 50 states was, in part, a strategic legal campaign played out through litigation and legislative advocacy in courthouses and legislatures across the country.