Court Case Number 15: Bowers V. Hardwick (june 30, 1986) :: essays research papers

Court Case Number 15 Bowers v. Hardwick (June 30, 1986)In overbearing of 1982, Michael Hardwick was charged with violating theGeorgia statute criminalizing anal intercourse by committing that act with another(prenominal) adultmale in the bedroom of Hardwicks home. Hardwick then brought suit in thefederal official District Court, therefore challenging the constitutionality of thestatute as it criminalized sodomy. Hardwick insist that he was a practicinghomosexual, that the Georgia statute, as administered by the defendants, placedhim in imminent danger of arrest and that the statute for several reasonsviolates the Federal Constitution.I oppose the Court of Appeals decision that Michael Hardwicks complaintwas dismissed by curtilage seen through rights readily identifiable in theConstitutions text involved untold more that the imposition of the Justices ownchoice of values on the States and the Federal Government, the Court sought toidentify the nature of rights for heightened ju dicial protection. Such enclosurecourt decisions as Palko v. Connecticut stated this category holds those cardinal liberties that atomic number 18 implicit in the concept of ordered certify,such that neither liberty nor justice would exist if any fundamental libertieswere sacrificed. In Moore v. East Cleveland, fundamental liberties arecharacterized as those liberties that are deeply rooted in this Nations memoir and tradition.Proscriptions against a fundamental right to homosexuals to engage inacts of consensual sodomy have ancient roots. Sodomy was a criminal offense atcommon impartiality and was forbidden by the laws of the original thirteen States whenthey canonic the Bill of Rights. In 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment wasratified, all but five of the xxxvii States in the Union had criminalsodomy laws. In fact, until 1961, all fifty dollar bill States and the District of Columbiacontinue to provide criminal penalties for sodomy performed in private andbetween consenti ng adults.As his honorable Justice butt Paul Stevens opinion stated, sodomy wascondemned as an odious and sinful character reference of behavior during the formative periodof the common law. That condemnation was equally damn for heterosexual andhomosexual sodomy. Moreover, it provided no special exemption for marriedcouples. The license to cohabit and to produce legitimate offspring simply didnot include any permission to engage in sexual conduct that was considered a crime against nature.One the more prominent features of Bowers v. Hardwick involved theGeorgia statute, the presumed public opinion of a majority of the electorate in Georgiathat homosexual sodomy is evil and unacceptable. The Georgia electorateenacted a law that presumably reflects the belief that all sodomy is immoral andunacceptable. Unless the Court is prepared to conclude that such a law is