supreme Court says YES! to 3rd Input

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-01-23 12:53am

Because the only thing people on this board love more than video games and Star Wars is back door entry....

http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/02/scotus.sodomy/

In a case that tests the constitutionality of sodomy laws in 13 states, the justices will review the prosecution of two men under a 28-year-old Texas law making it a crime to engage in same-sex intercourse.

At issue is the constitutionality of anti-sodomy laws currently in force in a handful of states.

In 1986, the court on a 5-4 vote upheld the prosecution of two gay men under a Georgia anti-sodomy law in the case of Bowers v. Hardwick. That case focused on the right to privacy.

The Lambda Legal Defense Fund in New York, a gay-rights group, is urging the court to revisit the Bowers decision and to rule that prosecuting same-sex couples, but not heterosexuals, for sodomy violates the equal-treatment standard.

The latest case, Lawrence v. Texas, arose when two men, John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, were arrested in a Houston-area apartment in 1998 by officers who were responding to a false report of an armed intruder. Instead, police arrested the men, and they were fined $200 for having sex.

The men were charged under Texas' "homosexual conduct" law. The Texas law criminalizes "deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex."

Although only 13 states now criminalize consensual sodomy, a Texas state appeals court found the law "advances a legitimate state interest, namely, preserving public morals."

Much has changed since 1986, say gay rights supporters, including changes in public attitudes, and the fact that such laws are rarely enforced. Texas prosecutors argue government can and has the right to enforce public morality.

But the court could be faced with grappling with the issue of whether homosexual sex should be treated differently than couples engaging in heterosexual sex, and if such laws should apply to adults in the privacy of their own homes.

"The state should not have the power to go into the bedrooms of consenting adults in the middle of the night and arrest them," said Ruth Harlow of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, who is representing the two Texas men. "These laws are widely used to justify discrimination against gay people in everyday life; they're invoked in denying employment to gay people, in refusing custody or visitation for gay parents, and even in intimidating gay people out of exercising their First Amendment rights."

State sodomy laws have been on the books for a century or more, and define the act as abnormal sex, including oral and anal sex. By the time of Bowers v. Hardwick, only half the states carried criminal sodomy laws, and now only a fourth do. In a 1996 decision, Romer v. Evans, the court voted 6-3 to overturn a Colorado amendment that barred local governments from enacting ordinances to protect gays.

The Supreme Court has struggled with how much protection the Constitution offers in the bedroom. The court ruled 5-4 in 1986 that consenting adults have no constitutional right to private homosexual sex, upholding laws that ban sodomy.

Arguments in the case will be heard early next year and a decision is expected by June.

The case is: Lawrence and Garner v. Texas (No. 02-102).

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/14/unmar ... index.html

ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) -- The Georgia Supreme Court has struck down a 170-year-old law that made it a crime for unmarried people to have sex.

The ruling Monday came in the case of a 16-year-old boy discovered having sex with his girlfriend in the bedroom of her home. The young woman's mother made the discovery.

"Our opinion simply affirms that ... the government may not reach into the bedroom of a private residence and criminalize the private, noncommercial, consensual sexual acts of two persons legally capable of consenting to those acts," Chief Justice Norman Fletcher wrote.

Under Georgia law, the age of consent is 16.

Fletcher also wrote that nothing in the ruling should be read to address parents' rights "to regulate what occurs inside their home, including who enters their house and under what circumstances."

Fornication laws remain on the books in about 10 states and the District of Columbia. Courts have struck down such statutes in Florida, Virginia and New Jersey.

Following his conviction, Jesse McClure, now 17, was ordered to pay a fine and write an essay explaining why he should not have had sex. He wrote that it wasn't the court's business.

"Invading personal privacy just isn't right," McClure said Monday. "It now goes that way for everybody."

In 1998, the state Supreme Court overturned an anti-sodomy law, ruling it violated the Georgia Constitution's guarantee of a right to privacy

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/17/findl ... index.html

this third article is a weird one involving consent that raises some interesting legal questions for those who are interested. Its long though and it gets old after a point for me seeing as how I know when to keep my pants zipped.....usually.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-01-23 04:39pm

Speaking of silly anti-sex laws, it is now legal to fornicate in the state of Georgia. Yay.

^^ · Post by ^^ » 2003-01-23 04:55pm

Sexxor plz.

Ashcroft and the coalition aren't going to like this~

Post by **Lagmonster** » 2003-01-23 05:03pm

FORNICATION laws?

Funny thing is, this is the first I've heard of it. Given my track record of girlfriends when I was in my twenties, I am ONE HELL of a moral criminal in half the United States. Freaky, that. I always thought I was on the up-and-up, but now I know that all that unmarried blowjob activity was making me a criminal in the eyes of the law.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2003-01-23 05:23pm

*sighs*

Oh well. I hope the homosexuals win this.