Supreme Court Case Romer v. Evans

1494 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Law

In the 1996 Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans, the voters of the state of Colorado approved a second amendment to their state Constitution through a referendum, in order to prevent homosexuals from becoming a protected minority. Before the referendum occurred, many of the major cities in Colorado passed laws prohibiting people to be discriminated against based on their sexuality, including whether or not they are homosexual. The citizens of Colorado who disapprove of homosexuality then created a petition to put the second amendment to a vote, and won with a majority of 53% of the votes. Richard Evans, with the support of many others, took the amendment to court claiming it was unconstitutional, and should be removed from the constitution, going on to win in the Colorado Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court.
The opinion of the court was held by Justice Kennedy, in that the Colorado amendment was held unconstitutional on the basis that it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment on the United States Constitution. Kennedy argued the amendment singles out a specific group in which, it would make it so only homosexuals cannot receive the protective rights that are available to anyone else. This idea makes homosexuals unequal to everyone else because they are not guaranteed the same protection that anyone else could get if they needed it. Furthermore, the amendment burdens the homosexual community by not allowing them to seek protection against discrimination though the use of legislation. Additionally, Kennedy claims “In and ordinary case, a law will be sustained if it can be said to advance a legitimate government interest…” (632) By this he means that a law will be considered valid as long as it has a ...

... middle of paper ...

... argument because it shows the problems with the amendment and his argument complies with the constitution. Furthermore, Kennedy brings up more valid points, whereas Scalia mostly relies on the reasoning that Kennedy’s argument lacks the evidence of enough legal citation. Also, Kennedy believes the amendment is unconstitutional on the basis that it violates the equal protection clause because it denies homosexuals special rights that any other minority has access to, and it singles out one class that it affects instead of creating a general law that affects everyone. Thus, Kennedy’s argument should prevail because it relies on the constitution as its main evidence to show that the amendment is invalid and should not be permitted, and Kennedy believes that the amendment violates the rights of homosexuals, which is clearly does by singling them out as a specific class.

Show More
Related

  • Case Brief On Bland V. Roberts

    607 Words  | 2 Pages

    Legal Case Brief: Bland v. Roberts (4th Cir. 2013). Olivia Johnson JOUR/SPCH 3060 April 1, 2014. Bland v. Roberts, No. 12-1671, Order & Opinion (4th Cir., Sept. 18, 2013), available at:http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/121671.pdf (last visited Apr. 4, 2014). Nature of the Case: First Amendment lawsuit on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News, seeking compensation for lost front/back pay or reinstatement of former positions. Facts: Sheriff B.J. Roberts ran for reelection against opponent, Jim Adams, in 2009.

    Read More

  • Arizona V. Hicks

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Case of Arizona v. Hicks took place in 1986; the case was decided in 1987. It began on April 18th 1984, with a bullet that was shot through the floor in Hick’s apartment; it had injured a man in the room below him. An investigation took place. Officers were called to the scene. They entered Mr. Hicks’ apartment and discovered three weapons and a black stocking mask.

    Read More

  • Adair v. U.S. and Coppage v. Kansas Analysis

    654 Words  | 2 Pages

    Adair v. U.S. and Coppage v. Kansas became two defining cases in the Lochner era, a period defined after the Supreme Court’s decision in Lochner v New York, where the court adopted a broad understanding of the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. In these cases the court used the substantive due process principle to determine whether a state statute or state’s policing power violated an individual’s freedom of contract. To gain a better understanding of the court’s reasoning it is essential to understand what they disregarded and how the rulings relate to the rulings in Plessy v. Ferguson, Lochner v. New York and Muller v. Oregon.

    Read More

  • The Case Of Deshaney V. Winnebago Court Case

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    Her little boy wasn't expected to make it through the night, the voice on the line said (“Determined to be heard”). Joshua Deshaney had been hospitalized in a life threatening coma after being brutally beat up by his father, Randy Deshaney. Randy had a history of abuse to his son prior to this event and had been working with the Department of Social Services to keep custody over his son. The court case was filed by Joshua's mother, Melody Deshaney, who was suing the DSS employees on behalf of failing to protect her son from his father. To understand the Deshaney v. Winnebago County Court case and the Supreme courts ruling, it's important to analyze the background, the court's decision, and how this case has impacted our society.

    Read More

  • Kansas V. Cheever Supreme Court Case

    805 Words  | 2 Pages

    Most Americans would claim a cop killer should be put to death which is what Scott D Cheever will face if he loses in the Supreme Court of the United States. Scott D Cheever and the state of Kansas argued before Supreme Court of the United States on October 16, 2013. The question posed before the court was when a criminal defendant affirmatively introduces expert testimony that he lacked the requisite mental state to commit capital murder of a law enforcement officer due to the alleged temporary and long-term effects of the defendant’s methamphetamine use, does the state violate the defendant’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination by rebutting the defendant’s mental state defense with evidence from a court-ordered mental evaluation of the defendant? The answer is no, the United States Supreme Court should reverse the decision of the Kansas Supreme Court because his fifth amendment’s rights were not violated.

    Read More

  • Miscegenation Case Analysis

    991 Words  | 2 Pages

    A unanimous Supreme Court decision overturned the Lovings convictions on June 12, 1967. The Supreme Court ruled that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute violated the Fourteenth Amendment, specifically the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause. Chief Justice Warren’s opinion stated that the Constitution provide citizens “the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.”

    Read More

  • Obergefell V. Hodges: Case Analysis

    1298 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), the court determined gay marriage to be a constitutional right, striking down several dozen state laws against SSM. While there has been some residual pushback against this decision, overall there has been broad complacence due to a high level of public support for the decision. Little scholarship has been done on how this decision has been implemented because the discussion was made so recently, but some measures show that “99.87 percent of the U.S. population [lives] in a county where same-sex marriage licenses are available” ("Local Government Responses to Obergefell v. Hodges." n.d.). While there are some pockets of resistance it is clear that there is broad local compliance with this decision, likely because of its broad popularity. Instances in which local bodies choose to disregard the Obergefell decision are highly publicized, and generally receive a great deal of public criticism. Thus, the SSM marriage example has fulfilled the two conditions for successful policy, as interest groups were able to use the courts to accomplish a set of aims, and local support has allowed for the implementation of the policy. While there has been some pushback along the way, this pushback has only served to further raise awareness of issue in the minds of the American people, and helped this cause gain

    Read More

  • Roper V Simmons Case Study

    1474 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the United States Supreme Court case of Roper v. Simmons of 2005 the Supreme Court ruled in a five to four ruling that the death sentence for minors was considered “cruel and unusual punishment,” as stated by the Eighth Amendment, according to the Oyez Project online database. Christopher Simmons, the plaintiff, was only seventeen at the time of his conviction of murder. With the Roper v Simmons, 2005 Supreme Court ruling against applying the death penalty to minors, this also turned over a previous 1989 ruling of Stanford v. Kentucky that stated the death penalty was permissible for those over the age of sixteen who had committed a capital offense. The Roper v. Simmons is one of those landmark Supreme Court cases that impacted, and changed

    Read More

  • Lawrence V. Texas

    1308 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the case Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558, 2003) which was the United States Supreme Court case the criminal prohibition of the homosexual pederasty was invalidated in Texas. The same issue has been already addressed in 1989 in the case Bowers v. Hardwick, however, the constitutional protection of sexual privacy was not found at that time. Lawrence overruled Bowers and held that sexual conduct was the right protected by the due process under the Fourteenth Amendment. The effects of the ruling were quite widespread and led to invalidation of the similar laws throughout the United States that tried to criminalize the homosexual activity of adults which were acting in privacy. The case attracted much of the public attention and quite a large number of briefs were filed in the cases.

    Read More

  • Judicial Restraint And Judicial Activism?

    1818 Words  | 4 Pages

    On June 26, 2015, The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right in the decision on Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health, et al. This controversial decision overturned the law of more than 17 states. In the 5-4 decision, Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan voted with the majority and Justices Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and Alito were dissenting. At the heart of the controversy is the philosophy of judicial restraint and judicial activism. Was the Obergefell decision an example of judicial activism? Certainly, because it declared state laws banning same-sex marriages as unconstitutional. The Court’s decision, which was based on precedent and interpretation of the Constitution, was just.

    Read More

  • The Fourteenth Amendment

    730 Words  | 2 Pages

    For some background, this case escalated to the Supreme Court since several groups of same-sex couples from different states, sued state agencies when their marriage was refused to be recognized. As it escalated through appeals, the plaintiffs argued that the states were violating the Equal Protection clause and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Equal Protection, according to the Constitution refers to the fact that, “any State [shall not] deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” (23). The opposition of this case was that, 1) The Constitution does not address same-sex marriage as a policy, and 2) The sovereignty of states regarding the decision. Ultimately, and according to the Oyez project, the Court held that “[the Amendment] guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies to same-sex couples,” and therefore, same-sex marriage is a fundamental liberty.

    Read More

  • Coker V. Georgia Supreme Court Case Study

    1287 Words  | 3 Pages

    In 1974, Ehrlich Coker escaped from prison. While on the run Coker encountered the Carver’s during a burglary of their residence. Coker pistol whipped Mr. Carver taking his vehicle keys. Coker kidnapped and raped Mrs. Caver before being caught. Coker was placed on trial and was found guilty and sentenced to death for the rape of Mrs. Carver. Coker’s case was heard by the Georgia Supreme Court where Coker’s sentence was upheld; however, the United Supreme granted certiorari on the basis that Coker’s sentence violated eighth amendment of the United States Constitution, cruel and unusual punishment.

    Read More

  • Jaffree v. Wallace Supreme Court Case: Analysis

    3073 Words  | 7 Pages

    In 1971 in Mobile County Alabama the School Board created a state statute that set aside time at the beginning of each day for silent ’meditation’ (statute 6-1-20), and in 1981 they added another statute 16-1-20.1 which set aside a minute for ‘silent prayer’ as well. In addition to these, in 1982 the Mobile County School Board enacted statute 16-1-20.2, which specified a prayer that teachers could lead ‘willing’ students in “From henceforth, any teacher or professor in any public educational institution within the State of Alabama, recognizing that the Lord God is one, at the beginning of any homeroom or any class, may pray, may lead willing students in prayer, or may lead the willing students in the following prayer to God… “ (Jaffree By and Through Jaffree v. James). Ishmael Jaffree was the father of three students, Jamael Aakki Jaffree, Makeba Green, and Chioke Saleem Jaffree, who attended a school in Mobile County Alabama. Jaffree complained that his children had been pressured into participating in religious activities by their teachers and their peers, and that he had requested that these activities stopped. When the school did nothing about Jaffree’s complaints he filed an official complaint with the Mobile County School Board through the United States District Courts. The original complaint never mentioned the three state statutes that involved school prayer. However, on June 4, 1982 Jaffree changed his complaint. He now wanted to challenge the constitutionality of statutes 16-1-20, 16-1-20.1 and 16-1-20.2, and motioned for a preliminary injunction. The argument against these state laws was that they were an infringement of the Establishment Clause within the First Amendment of the Constitution, which states that Congr...

    Read More

  • Justice Fortas And Tinker V. Des Moines Case

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Separate but equal, judicial review, and the Miranda Rights are decisions made by the Supreme Court that have impacted the United States in history altering ways. Another notable decision was made in the Tinker v. Des Moines Case. Ultimately the Supreme Court decided that the students in the case should have their rights protected and that the school acted unconstitutionally. Justice Fortas delivered a compelling majority opinion. In the case of Tinker v Des Moines, the Supreme Court’s majority opinion was strongly supported with great reasoning but had weaknesses that could present future problems.

    Read More

  • Importance Of Constitutional Amendments

    1724 Words  | 4 Pages

    Hodges. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the fourteenth amendment, equal protection under the law, and prohibited state bans on same-sex marriage in the United States, in which according to dissenters of same-sex marriage, will reduce their right to religious freedoms. The change in rulings from the Hobby Lobby case to the Obergefell v. Hodges has brought an increase of intensity to this conflict between the first, and fourteenth amendments, reiterating there is no solution for the turmoil between the first and fourteenth amendments when the Supreme Court opinions wavers. According to David Savage, The Author Of Battles Over Religious Freedom Are Sure To Follow Same-Sex Marriage Ruling, “[t]he close divide among the justices almost ensures that new legal battles lie ahead. This divide reflects the inherent conflict between the first and fourteenth amendment.” The Supreme Court is trying to balance the conflict, however, with an unsuspected outcome—the Religious Freedom Restoration

    Read More

More about Supreme Court Case Romer v. Evans

Open Document