Houston Garner ,as the petitioners, filed the claims

Houston police officers received a call about a weapons disturbance at the Lawrence residence. Upon entering the private home of John Lawrence, officers witnessed Lawrence engaging in sexual-acts with Tyron Garner. Lawrence and Garner were then arrested and convicted of violation of Texas law. The law in particular made it illegal for two adults of the same gender to engage in sodomy. Lawrence and Garner ,as the  petitioners, filed the claims that the law is against the liberties given under the 14th amendment to Texas, as the respondents. The State Court of Appeals claimed it to be constitutional under the Due Process Clause, using the Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), decision. Both appealed to U.S Supreme Court. Issue(1) Under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, is it a violation to have the “Homosexual Conduct” law in Texas, which makes sodomy between adults of the same gender illegal, but not for adults of different genders? (2)   Also under the due process clause of the 14th amendment, is it a violation of a citizens liberties for private sexual intercourse in their private home to get arrested? (3) When the two issues get answered, should the Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) be overturned by this decision? Reasoning In the Bowers v Hardwick (1986) case, Georgia made private sodomy illegal and was viewed as a case that allowed homosexual couples to have sexual intercourse and if the Constitution allowed the act. The case decision was that it wasn’t allowed under the Constitution, but the ruling made it impossible for homosexuals to have any said private life.  The Lawrence Court found there to be no precedent for the case involving criminalizing  private consensual intercourse. In comparison to how the Bowers case had been decided, the Justices used their person morals and didn’t interpret from the Constitution itself. These personal views led to a biased holding and not a lawful holding. The Court reasoned that certain states have laws against such sexaul acts, but that don’t criminalize those participating in the acts. The Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) case was cited for the evidence for laws being in place, but not being prosecuted due to new social acceptances.

x

Hi!
I'm Victor!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out