ipl-logo

Supreme Court Case Analysis

581 Words3 Pages

On 02 October 2003, The Court of Appeals found John Geddes Lawrence, the defendant guilty due to the fact that it is against state law Tex. Penal Code Ann. 21.06(a) (2003). It provides: “A person commits an offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex” (Kemp & Skelton, 2015). A Supreme Court decision eventually overturned the Texas state law prohibiting consensual, private sexual activity between gays and lesbians. The reason the Supreme Court accepted the case for adjudication was because they felt three questions needed to be considered.
“1. Whether Petitioners' criminal convictions under the Texas "Homosexual Conduct" law--which criminalizes sexual intimacy by same-sex couples, but not identical …show more content…

This case originated in the Court of Appeals of Texas, the question was the validity of a Texas statute making it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in certain intimate sexual conduct, but not identical behavior by different sex couples violate the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of laws. Under the Fourteenth Amendment the Equal Protection Clause is the laws of a state they must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances. The Supreme Court also had to answer the question of whether or not the criminal petitioners convictions for adult consensual sexual intimacy in the home violate their vital interests in liberty and privacy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Under the Due Process Clause, "First, it incorporates [against the States] specific protections defined in the Bill of Rights....Second, it contains a substantive component, sometimes referred to as ‘substantive due process.'...Third, it is a guarantee of fair procedure, sometimes referred to as ‘procedural due process'..." (Ely Jr., 2015 ). Nonetheless, it did violate the Due Process Clause because liberty protects the person from unwarranted government intrusions and both individuals were adults, their conduct was consensual, as well as, the right to

Show More
Related
820 Words | 4 Pages

The decision that the Supreme Court should have made was to give the right to Michael H. to gain paternity over his daughter. Gerald D. and his wife Carole had a daughter, or so he thought. Carole had a secret which was an affair with a man by the name of Michael H. Gerald’s name was on the birth certificate, however, the blood tests taken claimed that Michael was the father. Michael argued to the Court that he has the right to be in his daughter’s life no matter the circumstances. Gerald argued to the Court that a child born into a marriage is considered correct and traditional.

Read More
281 Words | 2 Pages

Did these laws indeed violate the Fourteenth Amendment? When the Lovings’s case reached the Supreme Court of Appeals, the Court supported the anti-miscegenation statutes and thus confirmed the convictions. This raises the question whether or not if the Supreme Court of Appeals violated the 14th Amendment too? The two people whose lives were most affected by the outcome of the decision were the Lovings’s.

Read More
667 Words | 3 Pages

The case was implied a Magistrate Judge, whose brief discoveries and recommendation completed up, and "the Pledge does not slight the Establishment Clause. " The District Court grasped that proposition and released the protestation on July 21, 2000. The Court of Appeals turned around and issued three separate choices talking about the benefits and Newdow 's standing. As it would see it, the offers court consistently held that Newdow has remaining as a watchman to challenge a practice that meddles with his qualification to facilitate the religious direction of his daughter. That holding managed Newdow 's remaining to challenge not only the game plan of the school locale, where his young lady still is enrolled, moreover the 1954 Act of

Read More
162 Words | 1 Pages

In 1986, the U.S. supreme court ruled to uphold the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law criminalizing anal and oral sex in private between consenting adults, marking a legal precedent allowing individual states to freely enforce sodomy statutes of their own. This supreme court case, Bowers v. Hardwick, began when Michael Hardwick was found by police having oral sex with another man when they entered his home. Hardwick was charged with sodomy, a felony in Georgia. A preliminary hearing was held with Hardwick, as a self-described practicing homosexual, asserting that the anti-sodomy statute placed him in imminent danger of arrest. He filed suit in Federal District Court, arguing the statute was unconstitutional.

Read More
1141 Words | 5 Pages

Maynard v. Hill was used to argue that while marriage is under the social jurisdiction of State police this is not so when the regulation goes against that of the U.S. Constitution (Loving v. Virginia). The prosecution attempted to state that this case was not applicable due to the fourteenth amendment excluding marriage from its limitations but the Supreme Court refuted this notion (U.S. Supreme Court, 2014). Lastly, the ruling of Pace v. Alabama, which established

Read More
968 Words | 4 Pages

The new precedent used the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees equal protection to all Americans regardless of state laws, to expand the right to counsel for all Americans. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to counsel at the federal level, but this new precedent applied to the state level. The Supreme Court decision was clearly uncontroversial because it was an unanimous decision: 9-0 majority (Oyez). All the Justices believed the Constitution placed a high importance on the right to a proper defense for the accused, as stated in the Sixth Amendment, and that it was unconstitutional for a court to deny proper defense for anyone charged. “The Constitution guarantees the right to counsel as a protection of due process” (Oyez), which does not limit due process just to those who can afford it, but rather all

Read More
1269 Words | 6 Pages

Texas was a success not only for the convicted John Lawrence and Tyron Garner but a success for the entirety of the LGBT community. The reason for this is because I believe it laid the foundation for other changes and ordinances set in place by the United States government to insure more freedom to individuals who identify as something other than heterosexual, such as same sex marriage. In terms of the verdict I believe the Supreme Court rightfully defended the rights of the people by ensuring that their freedoms could not be removed from them based on something as sexuality. However there were some issues with the case that I would like to identify that should have been touched upon when this occurred. First is that when the police enter Lawrence’s apartment they did not in fact have a search warrant, which is needed to enter the home.

Read More
169 Words | 1 Pages

: Per KENNEDY. In a 5-4 opinion the court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Justice Kennedy stated “DOMA seeks to injure the very class New York seeks to protect. DOMA violates basic due process and equal protection principles applicable to the Federal Government. The Constitution’s guarantee of equality must at the very least mean that a bare congressional desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot justify disparate treatment of that group.”

Read More
1112 Words | 5 Pages

I believe this particular decision was one made in haste and based solely on political preference rather than based on having a fair and impartial electoral process that would benefit society rather than the justices. The Supreme Court stepped in and decided the election for the voters, which was an

Read More
685 Words | 3 Pages

The case began when several same-sex couples filed lawsuits from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. They challenged the constitutionality of state bands on same-sex marriage. These lawsuits went through the federal district court and then the circuit courts along with appeals. They eventually made it to the Sixth Circuit, where it upheld the state bans. In the end, DeBoer v. Snyder, one of the several cases ended in a 2–1 decision, ruled Ohio's ban on same-sex marriage did not violate the U.S. Constitution.

Read More
297 Words | 2 Pages

Holding Yes, Amendment 2 prevents protects for homosexuals or bisexuals was struck down because it was not rationally related to a legitimate state interest. Rule Of Law Supreme Court ruling made it clear that lesbians, gay men and bisexuals have the same rights

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right. ”(Martin Luther King, Jr.) Most people were racist but now since the civil rights have been established most have stopped being racist and moved on. Three supreme court case decisions influenced the civil rights movements by letting more and more poeple know what the Supreme Court was doing to African Americans,and of the unfair him crow laws:(Dred Scott v. Sanford,Plessy v. Ferguson,Brown v. Board of Education). Dred Scott v. Sanford Is a case that most people felt that Dred Scott had an unfair charge against him.

Read More
2139 Words | 9 Pages

The principle of equal protection of (and from) the law is a central concept of democratic citizenship as established in the fourteenth amendment in the United States Constitution. It predominantly protects minorities, those with the least voices to shout in opposition to injustices. The constitution upon which our nation’s fundamental principles and laws are founded on states that “all persons shall be equal before the law,” and that “no person shall be favored or disfavored because of sex, parentage, race, language, homeland and origin, faith, or religious or political opinions. ” I add sexual orientation as a natural addition to the list of traits that should not be discriminated against and not sway the universal application the amendments of the United States Constitution.

Read More
809 Words | 4 Pages

Zachary M. Zapata @01450686 zmzapata1@gmail.com or kbn739@my.utsa.edu CRJ 4013-901 Alexis de Tocqueville Assignment In the DeLeon v. Perry same sex marriage case we learned of the diversity and disparity in individual rights. As of recent, same sex marriage has become a major issue in the United States and the development of equality for all. Although there are many opposed to same sex marriage suggesting the validity of constitutionality not one individual is against the due process of law. The due process of law is derived from the 5th and 14th Amendments and were established to protect individuals civil liberties and basic rights to life.

Read More
937 Words | 4 Pages

Leonard talked about the history behind why Congress added “sex” to Title VII of the Civil Right Acts and its impact on the interpretation of the courts. Congressman Howard Smith “added sex and the amendment carried” but “very little was said about why they added it.” Therefore, over the subsequent decade, there were mixed ruling on what Congress meant by “sex.” One early Supreme Court case ruled that “discrimination against pregnant women did not count” so Congress responded by “amending Title VII to include it.” However, when LGBTQ employees sued, the courts said that “Congress did not intent to include them because nothing was ever said.

Read More

More about Supreme Court Case Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document