lawrence
et
al
texas
argued
march
decided
june
responding
reported
weapons
disturbance
private
residence
houston
police
entered
petitioner
lawrence
apartment
saw
another
adult
man
petitioner
garner
engaging
private
consensual
sexual
act
petitioners
arrested
convicted
deviate
sexual
intercourse
violation
texas
statute
forbidding
two
persons
sex
engage
certain
intimate
sexual
conduct
affirming
state
appeals
held
inter
alia
statute
unconstitutional
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
considered
bowers
hardwick
controlling
point
held
texas
statute
making
crime
two
persons
sex
engage
certain
intimate
sexual
conduct
violates
due
process
clause
pp
resolution
case
depends
whether
petitioners
free
adults
engage
private
conduct
exercise
liberty
due
process
clause
inquiry
deems
necessary
reconsider
bowers
holding
bowers
initial
substantive
statement
issue
presented
whether
federal
constitution
confers
fundamental
right
upon
homosexuals
engage
sodomy
discloses
failure
appreciate
extent
liberty
stake
say
issue
bowers
simply
right
engage
certain
sexual
conduct
demeans
claim
individual
put
forward
demean
married
couple
said
marriage
right
sexual
intercourse
although
laws
involved
bowers
purport
prohibit
particular
sexual
act
penalties
purposes
consequences
touching
upon
private
human
conduct
sexual
behavior
private
places
home
seek
control
personal
relationship
whether
entitled
formal
recognition
law
within
liberty
persons
choose
without
punished
criminals
liberty
protected
constitution
allows
homosexual
persons
right
choose
enter
upon
relationships
confines
homes
private
lives
still
retain
dignity
free
persons
pp
misapprehended
liberty
claim
presented
bowers
stated
proscriptions
sodomy
ancient
roots
nation
laws
traditions
past
half
century
relevant
show
emerging
awareness
liberty
gives
substantial
protection
adult
persons
deciding
conduct
private
lives
matters
pertaining
sex
see
county
sacramento
lewis
pp
bowers
deficiencies
became
even
apparent
years
following
announcement
laws
prohibiting
conduct
referenced
bowers
reduced
enforce
laws
homosexual
conduct
including
texas
still
proscribe
sodomy
whether
heterosexual
conduct
pattern
nonenforcement
respect
consenting
adults
acting
private
casey
supra
confirmed
due
process
clause
protects
personal
decisions
relating
marriage
procreation
contraception
family
relationships
child
rearing
education
romer
evans
struck
legislation
directed
homosexuals
cast
bowers
holding
even
doubt
stigma
texas
criminal
statute
imposes
moreover
trivial
although
offense
minor
misdemeanor
remains
criminal
offense
imports
dignity
persons
charged
including
notation
convictions
records
job
application
forms
registration
sex
offenders
state
law
case
foundations
sustained
serious
erosion
criticism
sources
greater
significance
criticism
bowers
substantial
continuing
disapproving
reasoning
respects
historical
assumptions
extent
bowers
relied
values
shared
wider
civilization
case
reasoning
holding
rejected
european
human
rights
nations
taken
action
consistent
affirmation
protected
right
homosexual
adults
engage
intimate
consensual
conduct
showing
country
governmental
interest
circumscribing
personal
choice
somehow
legitimate
urgent
stare
decisis
inexorable
command
payne
tennessee
bowers
holding
induced
detrimental
reliance
sort
counsel
overturning
compelling
reasons
casey
supra
bowers
causes
uncertainty
precedents
contradict
central
holding
pp
bowers
rationale
withstand
careful
analysis
dissenting
opinion
bowers
justice
stevens
concluded
fact
state
governing
majority
traditionally
viewed
particular
practice
immoral
sufficient
reason
upholding
law
prohibiting
practice
individual
decisions
concerning
intimacies
physical
relationships
even
intended
produce
offspring
form
liberty
protected
due
process
analysis
controlled
bowers
controls
bowers
correct
decided
correct
today
hereby
overruled
case
involve
minors
persons
might
injured
coerced
might
easily
refuse
consent
public
conduct
prostitution
involve
two
adults
full
mutual
consent
engaged
sexual
practices
common
homosexual
lifestyle
petitioners
right
liberty
due
process
clause
gives
full
right
engage
private
conduct
without
government
intervention
casey
supra
texas
statute
furthers
legitimate
state
interest
justify
intrusion
individual
personal
private
life
pp
reversed
remanded
kennedy
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
scalia
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
thomas
joined
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
john
geddes
lawrence
tyron
garner
petitioners
texas
writ
certiorari
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
june
justice
kennedy
delivered
opinion
liberty
protects
person
unwarranted
government
intrusions
dwelling
private
places
tradition
state
omnipresent
home
spheres
lives
existence
outside
home
state
dominant
presence
freedom
extends
beyond
spatial
bounds
liberty
presumes
autonomy
self
includes
freedom
thought
belief
expression
certain
intimate
conduct
instant
case
involves
liberty
person
spatial
transcendent
dimensions
question
validity
texas
statute
making
crime
two
persons
sex
engage
certain
intimate
sexual
conduct
houston
texas
officers
harris
county
police
department
dispatched
private
residence
response
reported
weapons
disturbance
entered
apartment
one
petitioners
john
geddes
lawrence
resided
right
police
enter
seem
questioned
officers
observed
lawrence
another
man
tyron
garner
engaging
sexual
act
two
petitioners
arrested
held
custody
night
charged
convicted
justice
peace
complaints
described
crime
deviate
sexual
intercourse
namely
anal
sex
member
sex
man
app
pet
cert
applicable
state
law
tex
penal
code
ann
provides
person
commits
offense
engages
deviate
sexual
intercourse
another
individual
sex
statute
defines
eviate
sexual
intercourse
follows
contact
part
genitals
one
person
mouth
anus
another
person
penetration
genitals
anus
another
person
object
petitioners
exercised
right
trial
de
novo
harris
county
criminal
challenged
statute
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
like
provision
texas
constitution
tex
art
contentions
rejected
petitioners
entered
plea
nolo
contendere
fined
assessed
costs
app
pet
cert
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
considered
petitioners
federal
constitutional
arguments
equal
protection
due
process
clauses
fourteenth
amendment
hearing
case
en
banc
divided
opinion
rejected
constitutional
arguments
affirmed
convictions
tex
app
majority
opinion
indicates
appeals
considered
decision
bowers
hardwick
controlling
federal
due
process
aspect
case
bowers
authoritative
proper
granted
certiorari
consider
three
questions
whether
petitioners
criminal
convictions
texas
homosexual
conduct
law
criminalizes
sexual
intimacy
couples
identical
behavior
couples
violate
fourteenth
amendment
guarantee
equal
protection
laws
whether
petitioners
criminal
convictions
adult
consensual
sexual
intimacy
home
violate
vital
interests
liberty
privacy
protected
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
whether
bowers
hardwick
overruled
pet
cert
petitioners
adults
time
alleged
offense
conduct
private
consensual
ii
conclude
case
resolved
determining
whether
petitioners
free
adults
engage
private
conduct
exercise
liberty
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
constitution
inquiry
deem
necessary
reconsider
holding
bowers
broad
statements
substantive
reach
liberty
due
process
clause
earlier
cases
including
pierce
society
sisters
meyer
nebraska
pertinent
beginning
point
decision
griswold
connecticut
griswold
invalidated
state
law
prohibiting
use
drugs
devices
contraception
counseling
aiding
abetting
use
contraceptives
described
protected
interest
right
privacy
placed
emphasis
marriage
relation
protected
space
marital
bedroom
griswold
established
right
make
certain
decisions
regarding
sexual
conduct
extends
beyond
marital
relationship
eisenstadt
baird
invalidated
law
prohibiting
distribution
contraceptives
unmarried
persons
case
decided
equal
protection
clause
respect
unmarried
persons
went
state
fundamental
proposition
law
impaired
exercise
personal
rights
ibid
quoted
statement
appeals
finding
law
conflict
fundamental
human
rights
followed
statement
true
griswold
right
privacy
question
inhered
marital
relationship
right
privacy
means
anything
right
individual
married
single
free
unwarranted
governmental
intrusion
matters
fundamentally
affecting
person
decision
whether
bear
beget
child
opinions
griswold
eisenstadt
part
background
decision
roe
wade
well
known
case
involved
challenge
texas
law
prohibiting
abortions
laws
affected
well
although
held
woman
rights
absolute
right
elect
abortion
real
substantial
protection
exercise
liberty
due
process
clause
cited
cases
protect
spatial
freedom
cases
go
well
beyond
roe
recognized
right
woman
make
certain
fundamental
decisions
affecting
destiny
confirmed
protection
liberty
due
process
clause
substantive
dimension
fundamental
significance
defining
rights
person
carey
population
services
confronted
new
york
law
forbidding
sale
distribution
contraceptive
devices
persons
years
age
although
single
opinion
law
invalidated
eisenstadt
carey
well
holding
rationale
roe
confirmed
reasoning
griswold
confined
protection
rights
married
adults
state
law
respect
relevant
cases
considered
bowers
hardwick
facts
bowers
similarities
instant
case
police
officer
whose
right
enter
seems
question
observed
hardwick
bedroom
engaging
intimate
sexual
conduct
another
adult
male
conduct
violation
georgia
statute
making
criminal
offense
engage
sodomy
one
difference
two
cases
georgia
statute
prohibited
conduct
whether
participants
sex
texas
statute
seen
applies
participants
sex
hardwick
prosecuted
brought
action
federal
declare
state
statute
invalid
alleged
practicing
homosexual
criminal
prohibition
violated
rights
guaranteed
constitution
opinion
justice
white
sustained
georgia
law
chief
justice
burger
justice
powell
joined
opinion
filed
separate
concurring
opinions
four
justices
dissented
opinion
blackmun
joined
brennan
marshall
stevens
jj
opinion
stevens
joined
brennan
marshall
began
substantive
discussion
bowers
follows
issue
presented
whether
federal
constitution
confers
fundamental
right
upon
homosexuals
engage
sodomy
hence
invalidates
laws
many
still
make
conduct
illegal
done
long
time
statement
conclude
discloses
failure
appreciate
extent
liberty
stake
say
issue
bowers
simply
right
engage
certain
sexual
conduct
demeans
claim
individual
put
forward
demean
married
couple
said
marriage
simply
right
sexual
intercourse
laws
involved
bowers
sure
statutes
purport
prohibit
particular
sexual
act
penalties
purposes
though
consequences
touching
upon
private
human
conduct
sexual
behavior
private
places
home
statutes
seek
control
personal
relationship
whether
entitled
formal
recognition
law
within
liberty
persons
choose
without
punished
criminals
general
rule
counsel
attempts
state
define
meaning
relationship
set
boundaries
absent
injury
person
abuse
institution
law
protects
suffices
us
acknowledge
adults
may
choose
enter
upon
relationship
confines
homes
private
lives
still
retain
dignity
free
persons
sexuality
finds
overt
expression
intimate
conduct
another
person
conduct
one
element
personal
bond
enduring
liberty
protected
constitution
allows
homosexual
persons
right
make
choice
misapprehended
claim
liberty
presented
thus
stating
claim
whether
fundamental
right
engage
consensual
sodomy
bowers
said
proscriptions
conduct
ancient
roots
academic
writings
many
scholarly
amicus
briefs
filed
assist
case
fundamental
criticisms
historical
premises
relied
upon
majority
concurring
opinions
bowers
brief
cato
institute
amicus
curiae
brief
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
amici
curiae
brief
professors
history
et
al
amici
curiae
need
enter
debate
attempt
reach
definitive
historical
judgment
following
considerations
counsel
adopting
definitive
conclusions
upon
bowers
placed
reliance
outset
noted
longstanding
history
country
laws
directed
homosexual
conduct
distinct
matter
beginning
colonial
times
prohibitions
sodomy
derived
english
criminal
laws
passed
first
instance
reformation
parliament
english
prohibition
understood
include
relations
men
women
well
relations
men
men
see
king
wiseman
eng
interpreting
mankind
act
including
women
girls
commentators
similarly
read
american
sodomy
buggery
statutes
criminalizing
certain
relations
men
women
men
men
see
bishop
criminal
law
chitty
criminal
law
ed
desty
compendium
american
criminal
law
may
law
crimes
ed
absence
legal
prohibitions
focusing
homosexual
conduct
may
explained
part
noting
according
scholars
concept
homosexual
distinct
category
person
emerge
late
century
see
katz
invention
heterosexuality
freedman
intimate
matters
history
sexuality
america
ed
modern
terms
homosexuality
heterosexuality
apply
era
yet
articulated
distinctions
thus
early
american
sodomy
laws
directed
homosexuals
instead
sought
prohibit
nonprocreative
sexual
activity
generally
suggest
approval
homosexual
conduct
tend
show
particular
form
conduct
thought
separate
category
like
conduct
heterosexual
persons
laws
prohibiting
sodomy
seem
enforced
consenting
adults
acting
private
substantial
number
sodomy
prosecutions
convictions
surviving
records
predatory
acts
consent
case
minor
victim
assault
one
purpose
prohibitions
ensure
lack
coverage
predator
committed
sexual
assault
constitute
rape
defined
criminal
law
thus
model
sodomy
indictments
presented
treatise
see
chitty
supra
addressed
predatory
acts
adult
man
minor
girl
minor
boy
instead
targeting
relations
consenting
adults
private
sodomy
prosecutions
typically
involved
relations
men
minor
girls
minor
boys
relations
adults
involving
force
relations
adults
implicating
disparity
status
relations
men
animals
extent
prosecutions
acts
question
evidence
rules
imposed
burden
make
conviction
difficult
obtain
even
taking
account
problems
always
inherent
prosecuting
consensual
acts
committed
private
standards
man
convicted
sodomy
based
upon
testimony
consenting
partner
partner
considered
accomplice
partner
testimony
however
admissible
consented
act
minor
therefore
incapable
consent
see
wharton
criminal
law
ed
wharton
criminal
law
ed
rule
may
explain
part
infrequency
prosecutions
events
infrequency
makes
difficult
say
society
approved
rigorous
systematic
punishment
consensual
acts
committed
private
adults
longstanding
criminal
prohibition
homosexual
sodomy
upon
bowers
decision
placed
reliance
consistent
general
condemnation
nonprocreative
sex
established
tradition
prosecuting
acts
homosexual
character
policy
punishing
consenting
adults
private
acts
much
discussed
early
legal
literature
infer
one
reason
private
nature
conduct
despite
absence
prosecutions
may
periods
public
criticism
homosexuals
insistence
criminal
laws
enforced
discourage
practices
far
possessing
ancient
roots
bowers
american
laws
targeting
couples
develop
last
third
century
reported
decisions
concerning
prosecution
consensual
homosexual
sodomy
adults
years
always
clear
details
significant
number
involved
conduct
public
place
see
brief
american
civil
liberties
union
et
al
amici
curiae
state
singled
relations
criminal
prosecution
nine
done
see
ark
acts
sess
laws
acts
mo
laws
mont
laws
stats
pub
acts
ch
tex
laws
ch
see
also
post
state
crim
app
sodomy
law
invalidated
applied
couples
even
adhere
policy
suppressing
homosexual
conduct
course
last
decades
prohibitions
moved
toward
abolishing
see
jegley
picado
ark
gryczan
state
mont
campbell
sundquist
app
commonwealth
wasson
see
also
stats
repealing
rev
stat
summary
historical
grounds
relied
upon
bowers
complex
majority
opinion
concurring
opinion
chief
justice
burger
indicate
historical
premises
without
doubt
least
overstated
must
acknowledged
course
bowers
making
broader
point
centuries
powerful
voices
condemn
homosexual
conduct
immoral
condemnation
shaped
religious
beliefs
conceptions
right
acceptable
behavior
respect
traditional
family
many
persons
trivial
concerns
profound
deep
convictions
accepted
ethical
moral
principles
aspire
thus
determine
course
lives
considerations
answer
question
us
however
issue
whether
majority
may
use
power
state
enforce
views
whole
society
operation
criminal
law
obligation
define
liberty
mandate
moral
code
planned
parenthood
southeastern
casey
chief
justice
burger
joined
opinion
bowers
explained
views
follows
decisions
individuals
relating
homosexual
conduct
subject
state
intervention
throughout
history
western
civilization
condemnation
practices
firmly
rooted
moral
ethical
standards
kennedy
concurring
emerging
recognition
apparent
bowers
decided
american
law
institute
promulgated
model
penal
code
made
clear
recommend
provide
criminal
penalties
consensual
sexual
relations
conducted
private
ali
model
penal
code
comment
justified
decision
three
grounds
prohibitions
undermined
respect
law
penalizing
conduct
many
people
engaged
statutes
regulated
private
conduct
harmful
others
laws
arbitrarily
enforced
thus
invited
danger
blackmail
ali
model
penal
code
commentary
tent
draft
illinois
changed
laws
conform
model
penal
code
soon
followed
brief
cato
institute
amicus
curiae
bowers
referred
fact
outlawed
sodomy
time
decision
district
columbia
sodomy
laws
justice
powell
pointed
prohibitions
often
ignored
however
georgia
instance
sought
enforce
law
decades
history
nonenforcement
suggests
moribund
character
today
laws
criminalizing
type
private
consensual
conduct
sweeping
references
chief
justice
burger
history
western
civilization
moral
ethical
standards
take
account
authorities
pointing
opposite
direction
committee
advising
british
parliament
recommended
repeal
laws
punishing
homosexual
conduct
wolfenden
report
report
committee
homosexual
offenses
prostitution
parliament
enacted
substance
recommendations
years
later
sexual
offences
act
even
importance
almost
five
years
bowers
decided
european
human
rights
considered
case
parallels
bowers
today
case
adult
male
resident
northern
ireland
alleged
practicing
homosexual
desired
engage
consensual
homosexual
conduct
laws
northern
ireland
forbade
right
alleged
questioned
home
searched
feared
criminal
prosecution
held
laws
proscribing
conduct
invalid
european
convention
human
rights
dudgeon
kingdom
eur
authoritative
countries
members
council
europe
nations
nations
decision
odds
premise
bowers
claim
put
forward
insubstantial
western
civilization
constitutional
system
deficiencies
bowers
became
even
apparent
years
following
announcement
laws
prohibiting
relevant
conduct
referenced
bowers
decision
reduced
enforce
laws
homosexual
conduct
sodomy
still
proscribed
whether
heterosexual
conduct
pattern
nonenforcement
respect
consenting
adults
acting
private
state
texas
admitted
date
prosecuted
anyone
circumstances
state
morales
two
principal
cases
decided
bowers
cast
holding
even
doubt
planned
parenthood
southeastern
casey
reaffirmed
substantive
force
liberty
protected
due
process
clause
casey
decision
confirmed
laws
tradition
afford
constitutional
protection
personal
decisions
relating
marriage
procreation
contraception
family
relationships
child
rearing
education
explaining
respect
constitution
demands
autonomy
person
making
choices
stated
follows
matters
involving
intimate
personal
choices
person
may
make
lifetime
choices
central
personal
dignity
autonomy
central
liberty
protected
fourteenth
amendment
heart
liberty
right
define
one
concept
existence
meaning
universe
mystery
human
life
beliefs
matters
define
attributes
personhood
formed
compulsion
state
ibid
persons
homosexual
relationship
may
seek
autonomy
purposes
heterosexual
persons
decision
bowers
deny
right
second
case
principal
relevance
romer
evans
struck
legislation
directed
homosexuals
violation
equal
protection
clause
romer
invalidated
amendment
colorado
constitution
named
solitary
class
persons
homosexuals
lesbians
bisexual
either
orientation
conduct
practices
relationships
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
deprived
protection
state
antidiscrimination
laws
concluded
provision
born
animosity
toward
class
persons
affected
rational
relation
legitimate
governmental
purpose
alternative
argument
case
counsel
petitioners
amici
contend
romer
provides
basis
declaring
texas
statute
invalid
equal
protection
clause
tenable
argument
conclude
instant
case
requires
us
address
whether
bowers
continuing
validity
hold
statute
invalid
equal
protection
clause
might
question
whether
prohibition
valid
drawn
differently
say
prohibit
conduct
participants
equality
treatment
due
process
right
demand
respect
conduct
protected
substantive
guarantee
liberty
linked
important
respects
decision
latter
point
advances
interests
protected
conduct
made
criminal
law
remains
unexamined
substantive
validity
stigma
might
remain
even
enforceable
drawn
equal
protection
reasons
homosexual
conduct
made
criminal
law
state
declaration
invitation
subject
homosexual
persons
discrimination
public
private
spheres
central
holding
bowers
brought
question
case
addressed
continuance
precedent
demeans
lives
homosexual
persons
stigma
criminal
statute
imposes
moreover
trivial
offense
sure
class
misdemeanor
minor
offense
texas
legal
system
still
remains
criminal
offense
imports
dignity
persons
charged
petitioners
bear
record
history
criminal
convictions
term
rejected
various
challenges
state
laws
requiring
registration
sex
offenders
smith
doe
connecticut
dept
public
safety
doe
advised
texas
convicted
adult
private
consensual
homosexual
conduct
statute
question
convicted
person
come
within
registration
laws
least
four
subject
jurisdiction
pet
cert
citing
idaho
code
cum
supp
la
code
crim
proc
west
miss
code
ann
lexis
code
ann
west
underscores
consequential
nature
punishment
condemnation
attendant
criminal
prohibition
furthermore
texas
criminal
conviction
carries
collateral
consequences
always
following
conviction
notations
job
application
forms
mention
one
example
foundations
bowers
sustained
serious
erosion
recent
decisions
casey
romer
precedent
thus
weakened
criticism
sources
greater
significance
criticism
bowers
substantial
continuing
disapproving
reasoning
respects
historical
assumptions
see
fried
order
law
arguing
reagan
revolution
firsthand
account
posner
sex
reason
courts
five
different
declined
follow
interpreting
provisions
state
constitutions
parallel
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
see
jegley
picado
ark
powell
state
gryczan
state
mont
campbell
sundquist
app
commonwealth
wasson
extent
bowers
relied
values
share
wider
civilization
noted
reasoning
holding
bowers
rejected
elsewhere
european
human
rights
followed
bowers
decision
dudgeon
kingdom
see
kingdom
app
eur
modinos
cyprus
eur
norris
ireland
eur
nations
taken
action
consistent
affirmation
protected
right
homosexual
adults
engage
intimate
consensual
conduct
see
brief
mary
robinson
et
al
amici
curiae
right
petitioners
seek
case
accepted
integral
part
human
freedom
many
countries
showing
country
governmental
interest
circumscribing
personal
choice
somehow
legitimate
urgent
doctrine
stare
decisis
essential
respect
accorded
judgments
stability
law
however
inexorable
command
payne
tennessee
stare
decisis
inexorable
command
rather
principle
policy
mechanical
formula
adherence
latest
quoting
helvering
hallock
casey
noted
asked
overrule
precedent
recognizing
constitutional
liberty
interest
individual
societal
reliance
existence
liberty
cautions
particular
strength
reversing
course
see
also
liberty
finds
refuge
jurisprudence
doubt
holding
bowers
however
induced
detrimental
reliance
comparable
instances
recognized
individual
rights
involved
indeed
individual
societal
reliance
bowers
sort
counsel
overturning
holding
compelling
reasons
bowers
causes
uncertainty
precedents
issuance
contradict
central
holding
rationale
bowers
withstand
careful
analysis
dissenting
opinion
bowers
justice
stevens
came
conclusions
prior
cases
make
two
propositions
abundantly
clear
first
fact
governing
majority
state
traditionally
viewed
particular
practice
immoral
sufficient
reason
upholding
law
prohibiting
practice
neither
history
tradition
save
law
prohibiting
miscegenation
constitutional
attack
second
individual
decisions
married
persons
concerning
intimacies
physical
relationship
even
intended
produce
offspring
form
liberty
protected
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
moreover
protection
extends
intimate
choices
unmarried
well
married
persons
footnotes
citations
omitted
justice
stevens
analysis
view
controlling
bowers
control
bowers
correct
decided
correct
today
remain
binding
precedent
bowers
hardwick
overruled
present
case
involve
minors
involve
persons
might
injured
coerced
situated
relationships
consent
might
easily
refused
involve
public
conduct
prostitution
involve
whether
government
must
give
formal
recognition
relationship
homosexual
persons
seek
enter
case
involve
two
adults
full
mutual
consent
engaged
sexual
practices
common
homosexual
lifestyle
petitioners
entitled
respect
private
lives
state
demean
existence
control
destiny
making
private
sexual
conduct
crime
right
liberty
due
process
clause
gives
full
right
engage
conduct
without
intervention
government
promise
constitution
realm
personal
liberty
government
may
enter
casey
supra
texas
statute
furthers
legitimate
state
interest
justify
intrusion
personal
private
life
individual
drew
ratified
due
process
clauses
fifth
amendment
fourteenth
amendment
known
components
liberty
manifold
possibilities
might
specific
presume
insight
knew
times
blind
us
certain
truths
later
generations
see
laws
thought
necessary
proper
fact
serve
oppress
constitution
endures
persons
every
generation
invoke
principles
search
greater
freedom
judgment
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
john
geddes
lawrence
tyron
garner
petitioners
texas
writ
certiorari
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
june
justice
concurring
judgment
today
overrules
bowers
hardwick
joined
bowers
join
overruling
nevertheless
agree
texas
statute
banning
sodomy
unconstitutional
see
tex
penal
code
ann
rather
relying
substantive
component
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
base
conclusion
fourteenth
amendment
equal
protection
clause
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
essentially
direction
persons
similarly
situated
treated
alike
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
see
also
plyler
doe
rational
basis
standard
review
legislation
presumed
valid
sustained
classification
drawn
statute
rationally
related
legitimate
state
interest
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
supra
see
also
department
agriculture
moreno
romer
evans
nordlinger
hahn
laws
economic
tax
legislation
scrutinized
rational
basis
review
normally
pass
constitutional
muster
since
constitution
presumes
even
improvident
decisions
eventually
rectified
democratic
processes
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
supra
see
also
fitzgerald
racing
assn
central
iowa
ante
williamson
lee
optical
consistently
held
however
objectives
bare
desire
harm
politically
unpopular
group
legitimate
state
interests
department
agriculture
moreno
supra
see
also
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
supra
romer
evans
supra
law
exhibits
desire
harm
politically
unpopular
group
applied
searching
form
rational
basis
review
strike
laws
equal
protection
clause
likely
apply
rational
basis
review
hold
law
unconstitutional
equal
protection
clause
challenged
legislation
inhibits
personal
relationships
department
agriculture
moreno
example
held
law
preventing
households
containing
individual
unrelated
member
household
receiving
food
stamps
violated
equal
protection
purpose
law
hippies
refused
sanction
law
discriminated
married
unmarried
persons
prohibiting
distribution
contraceptives
single
persons
likewise
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
supra
held
irrational
state
require
home
mentally
disabled
obtain
special
use
permit
residences
like
fraternity
houses
apartment
buildings
obtain
permit
romer
evans
disallowed
state
statute
impos
ed
broad
undifferentiated
disability
single
named
group
specifically
homosexuals
dissent
apparently
agrees
cases
stare
decisis
effect
texas
sodomy
law
pass
scrutiny
equal
protection
clause
regardless
type
rational
basis
review
apply
see
post
opinion
scalia
statute
issue
makes
sodomy
crime
person
engages
deviate
sexual
intercourse
another
individual
sex
tex
penal
code
ann
sodomy
partners
however
crime
texas
texas
treats
conduct
differently
based
solely
participants
harmed
law
people
sexual
orientation
thus
likely
engage
behavior
prohibited
texas
statute
makes
homosexuals
unequal
eyes
law
making
particular
conduct
conduct
subject
criminal
sanction
appears
prosecutions
texas
sodomy
law
rare
see
state
morales
tex
noting
probability
enforced
private
consensual
conduct
adults
case
shows
however
prosecutions
occur
penalty
imposed
petitioners
case
relatively
minor
consequences
conviction
notes
see
ante
petitioners
convictions
upheld
disqualify
restrict
ability
engage
variety
professions
including
medicine
athletic
training
interior
design
see
tex
occ
code
ann
pamphlet
physician
athletic
trainer
interior
designer
indeed
petitioners
move
one
four
convictions
require
register
sex
offenders
local
law
enforcement
see
idaho
code
cum
supp
la
stat
ann
west
cum
supp
miss
code
ann
west
code
ann
west
cum
supp
cf
ante
effect
texas
sodomy
law
limited
threat
prosecution
consequence
conviction
texas
sodomy
law
brands
homosexuals
criminals
thereby
making
difficult
homosexuals
treated
manner
everyone
else
indeed
texas
previously
acknowledged
collateral
effects
law
stipulating
prior
challenge
action
law
legally
sanctions
discrimination
homosexuals
variety
ways
unrelated
criminal
law
including
areas
employment
family
issues
housing
state
morales
tex
app
texas
attempts
justify
law
effects
law
arguing
statute
satisfies
rational
basis
review
furthers
legitimate
governmental
interest
promotion
morality
bowers
held
state
law
criminalizing
sodomy
applied
homosexual
couples
violate
substantive
due
process
rejected
argument
rational
basis
existed
justify
law
pointing
government
interest
promoting
morality
question
front
bowers
whether
substantive
component
due
process
clause
protected
right
engage
homosexual
sodomy
bowers
hold
moral
disapproval
group
rational
basis
equal
protection
clause
criminalize
homosexual
sodomy
heterosexual
sodomy
punished
case
raises
different
issue
bowers
whether
equal
protection
clause
moral
disapproval
legitimate
state
interest
justify
statute
bans
homosexual
sodomy
heterosexual
sodomy
moral
disapproval
group
like
bare
desire
harm
group
interest
insufficient
satisfy
rational
basis
review
equal
protection
clause
see
department
agriculture
moreno
supra
romer
evans
indeed
never
held
moral
disapproval
without
asserted
state
interest
sufficient
rationale
equal
protection
clause
justify
law
discriminates
among
groups
persons
moral
disapproval
group
legitimate
governmental
interest
equal
protection
clause
legal
classifications
must
drawn
purpose
disadvantaging
group
burdened
law
texas
invocation
moral
disapproval
legitimate
state
interest
proves
nothing
texas
desire
criminalize
homosexual
sodomy
equal
protection
clause
prevents
state
creating
classification
persons
undertaken
sake
texas
rarely
enforces
sodomy
law
applied
private
consensual
acts
law
serves
statement
dislike
disapproval
homosexuals
tool
stop
criminal
behavior
texas
sodomy
law
raise
inevitable
inference
disadvantage
imposed
born
animosity
toward
class
persons
affected
texas
argues
however
sodomy
law
discriminate
homosexual
persons
instead
state
maintains
law
discriminates
homosexual
conduct
true
law
applies
conduct
conduct
targeted
law
conduct
closely
correlated
homosexual
circumstances
texas
sodomy
law
targeted
conduct
instead
directed
toward
gay
persons
class
hardly
palpable
discrimination
class
making
conduct
defines
class
criminal
scalia
dissenting
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
state
makes
homosexual
conduct
criminal
deviate
sexual
intercourse
committed
persons
different
sexes
declaration
invitation
subject
homosexual
persons
discrimination
public
private
spheres
ante
indeed
texas
law
confirms
sodomy
statute
directed
toward
homosexuals
class
texas
calling
person
homosexual
slander
per
se
word
homosexual
impute
commission
crime
plumley
landmark
chevrolet
applying
texas
law
see
also
head
newton
tex
app
state
admitted
sodomy
law
homosexual
carries
presumption
criminal
see
state
morales
statute
brands
lesbians
gay
men
criminals
thereby
legally
sanctions
discrimination
variety
ways
unrelated
criminal
law
texas
sodomy
law
therefore
results
discrimination
homosexuals
class
array
areas
outside
criminal
law
see
ibid
romer
evans
refused
sanction
law
singled
homosexuals
disfavored
legal
status
harlan
dissenting
state
course
assign
certain
consequences
violation
criminal
law
state
single
one
identifiable
class
citizens
punishment
apply
everyone
else
moral
disapproval
asserted
state
interest
law
texas
sodomy
statute
subjects
homosexuals
lifelong
penalty
stigma
legislative
classification
threatens
creation
underclass
reconciled
equal
protection
clause
plyler
doe
powell
concurring
whether
sodomy
law
neutral
effect
application
see
yick
wo
hopkins
violate
substantive
component
due
process
clause
issue
need
decided
today
confident
however
long
equal
protection
clause
requires
sodomy
law
apply
equally
private
consensual
conduct
homosexuals
heterosexuals
alike
law
long
stand
democratic
society
words
justice
jackson
framers
constitution
knew
forget
today
effective
practical
guaranty
arbitrary
unreasonable
government
require
principles
law
officials
impose
upon
minority
imposed
generally
conversely
nothing
opens
door
arbitrary
action
effectively
allow
officials
pick
choose
apply
legislation
thus
escape
political
retribution
might
visited
upon
larger
numbers
affected
railway
express
agency
new
york
concurring
opinion
law
applied
private
consensual
conduct
unconstitutional
equal
protection
clause
mean
laws
distinguishing
heterosexuals
homosexuals
similarly
fail
rational
basis
review
texas
assert
legitimate
state
interest
national
security
preserving
traditional
institution
marriage
unlike
moral
disapproval
relations
asserted
state
interest
case
reasons
exist
promote
institution
marriage
beyond
mere
moral
disapproval
excluded
group
law
branding
one
class
persons
criminal
solely
based
state
moral
disapproval
class
conduct
associated
class
runs
contrary
values
constitution
equal
protection
clause
standard
review
therefore
concur
judgment
texas
sodomy
law
banning
deviate
sexual
intercourse
consenting
adults
sex
consenting
adults
different
sexes
unconstitutional
john
geddes
lawrence
tyron
garner
petitioners
texas
writ
certiorari
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
june
justice
scalia
chief
justice
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
liberty
finds
refuge
jurisprudence
doubt
planned
parenthood
southeastern
casey
sententious
response
barely
decade
ago
seeking
overrule
roe
wade
response
today
engaged
crusade
overrule
bowers
hardwick
different
need
stability
certainty
presents
barrier
rest
today
opinion
relevance
actual
holding
texas
statute
furthers
legitimate
state
interest
justify
application
petitioners
review
ante
overruling
bowers
extent
sustained
georgia
statute
test
though
discussion
fundamental
proposition
ante
fundamental
decisions
ibid
nowhere
opinion
declare
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
due
process
clause
subject
texas
law
standard
review
appropriate
strict
scrutiny
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
thus
overruling
outcome
bowers
leaves
strangely
untouched
central
legal
conclusion
espondent
us
announce
fundamental
right
engage
homosexual
sodomy
quite
unwilling
instead
simply
describes
petitioners
conduct
exercise
liberty
undoubtedly
proceeds
apply
form
review
implications
beyond
case
ante
begin
surprising
readiness
reconsider
decision
rendered
mere
years
ago
bowers
hardwick
believe
rigid
adherence
stare
decisis
constitutional
cases
believe
consistent
rather
manipulative
invoking
doctrine
today
opinions
support
reversal
bother
distinguish
indeed
even
bother
mention
paean
stare
decisis
coauthored
three
members
today
majority
planned
parenthood
casey
stare
decisis
meant
preservation
judicially
invented
abortion
rights
widespread
criticism
roe
strong
reason
reaffirm
performance
judicial
duties
decides
case
way
resolve
sort
intensely
divisive
controversy
reflected
roe
decision
dimension
resolution
normal
case
carry
overrule
fire
absence
compelling
reason
subvert
legitimacy
beyond
serious
question
today
however
widespread
opposition
bowers
decision
resolving
issue
intensely
divisive
issue
roe
offered
reason
favor
overruling
see
ante
gone
enquiry
sort
conducted
casey
whether
decision
sought
overruled
proven
casey
supra
today
approach
stare
decisis
invites
us
overrule
erroneously
decided
precedent
including
intensely
divisive
decision
foundations
eroded
subsequent
decisions
ante
subject
substantial
continuing
criticism
ibid
induced
individual
societal
reliance
counsels
overturning
ante
problem
roe
today
majority
surely
disposition
overrule
satisfies
conditions
least
degree
bowers
preliminary
digressive
observation
regard
first
factor
claim
planned
parenthood
casey
supra
casts
doubt
upon
holding
bowers
case
matter
withstand
analysis
ante
far
holding
concerned
casey
provided
less
expansive
right
abortion
roe
already
books
bowers
decided
referring
holding
casey
dictum
famed
passage
ante
heart
liberty
right
define
one
concept
existence
meaning
universe
mystery
human
casts
doubt
upon
either
totality
jurisprudence
else
presumably
right
answer
nothing
never
heard
law
attempted
restrict
one
right
define
certain
concepts
passage
calls
question
government
power
regulate
actions
based
one
concept
existence
passage
ate
rule
law
quarrel
claim
romer
evans
eroded
foundations
bowers
holding
see
romer
supra
scalia
dissenting
roe
casey
equally
eroded
washington
glucksberg
held
fundamental
rights
rooted
nation
history
qualify
anything
rational
basis
scrutiny
doctrine
substantive
due
process
roe
casey
course
subjected
restriction
abortion
heightened
scrutiny
without
even
attempting
establish
freedom
abort
rooted
nation
tradition
bowers
says
subject
substantial
continuing
criticism
disapproving
reasoning
respects
historical
assumptions
ante
exactly
nonhistorical
criticisms
whether
even
agrees
left
unsaid
although
cite
two
books
see
ibid
citing
fried
order
law
arguing
reagan
revolution
firsthand
account
posner
sex
reason
course
roe
extension
casey
still
subject
unrelenting
criticism
including
criticism
two
commentators
cited
today
see
fried
supra
roe
prime
example
twisted
judging
posner
supra
opinion
roe
fails
measure
professional
expectations
regarding
judicial
opinions
posner
judicial
opinion
writing
chi
rev
describing
opinion
roe
embarrassing
performanc
leaves
distinguish
unamendable
disposition
roe
readily
overrulable
bowers
third
factor
says
individual
societal
reliance
bowers
sort
counsel
overturning
holding
ante
seems
societal
reliance
principles
confirmed
bowers
discarded
today
overwhelming
countless
judicial
decisions
legislative
enactments
relied
ancient
proposition
governing
majority
belief
certain
sexual
behavior
immoral
unacceptable
constitutes
rational
basis
regulation
see
williams
pryor
citing
bowers
upholding
alabama
prohibition
sale
sex
toys
ground
crafting
safeguarding
public
morality
indisputably
legitimate
government
interest
rational
basis
scrutiny
milner
apfel
citing
bowers
proposition
egislatures
permitted
legislate
regard
morality
rather
confined
preventing
demonstrable
harms
holmes
california
army
national
guard
relying
bowers
upholding
federal
statute
regulations
banning
military
service
engage
homosexual
conduct
owens
state
md
relying
bowers
holding
person
constitutional
right
engage
sexual
intercourse
least
outside
marriage
sherman
henry
tex
relying
bowers
rejecting
claimed
constitutional
right
commit
adultery
relied
extensively
bowers
concluded
barnes
glen
theatre
indiana
public
indecency
statute
furthered
substantial
government
interest
protecting
order
morality
plurality
opinion
see
also
scalia
concurring
judgment
state
laws
bigamy
marriage
adult
incest
prostitution
masturbation
adultery
fornication
bestiality
obscenity
likewise
sustainable
light
bowers
validation
laws
based
moral
choices
every
single
one
laws
called
question
today
decision
makes
effort
cabin
scope
decision
exclude
holding
see
ante
noting
emerging
awareness
liberty
gives
substantial
protection
adult
persons
deciding
conduct
private
lives
matters
pertaining
sex
emphasis
added
impossibility
distinguishing
homosexuality
traditional
morals
offenses
precisely
bowers
rejected
challenge
law
said
constantly
based
notions
morality
laws
representing
essentially
moral
choices
invalidated
due
process
clause
courts
busy
indeed
massive
disruption
current
social
order
therefore
overruling
bowers
entails
overruling
roe
simply
restored
regime
existed
centuries
permissibility
restrictions
upon
abortion
determined
legislatively
casey
however
chose
base
stare
decisis
determination
different
sort
reliance
eople
said
organized
intimate
relationships
made
choices
define
views
places
society
reliance
availability
abortion
event
contraception
fail
falsely
assumes
consequence
overruling
roe
make
abortion
unlawful
merely
permitted
many
unquestionably
declined
prohibit
abortion
others
prohibited
within
six
months
significant
reliance
interests
expired
even
persons
choice
abortion
childbirth
abortion
nearby
abortion
neighboring
state
tell
truth
surprise
surprise
one
chosen
today
revise
standards
stare
decisis
set
forth
casey
thereby
exposed
casey
extraordinary
deference
precedent
expedient
ii
decided
need
adhere
stare
decisis
still
must
establish
bowers
wrongly
decided
texas
statute
applied
petitioners
unconstitutional
texas
penal
code
ann
undoubtedly
imposes
constraints
liberty
laws
prohibiting
prostitution
recreational
use
heroin
matter
working
hours
per
week
bakery
right
liberty
due
process
clause
though
today
opinion
repeatedly
makes
claim
ante
liberty
protected
constitution
allows
homosexual
persons
right
make
choice
ante
matters
central
liberty
protected
fourteenth
ante
right
liberty
due
process
clause
gives
full
right
engage
conduct
without
intervention
government
fourteenth
amendment
expressly
allows
deprive
citizens
liberty
long
due
process
law
provided
state
shall
deprive
person
life
liberty
property
without
due
process
law
amdt
emphasis
added
opinions
applying
doctrine
known
substantive
due
process
hold
due
process
clause
prohibits
infringing
fundamental
liberty
interests
unless
infringement
narrowly
tailored
serve
compelling
state
interest
washington
glucksberg
fundamental
liberty
interests
must
rooted
traditions
conscience
people
ranked
fundamental
internal
quotation
marks
citations
omitted
salerno
see
also
michael
gerald
insisted
merely
interest
denominated
also
interest
traditionally
protected
society
moore
east
cleveland
plurality
opinion
meyer
nebraska
fourteenth
amendment
protects
privileges
long
recognized
common
law
essential
orderly
pursuit
happiness
free
men
emphasis
added
liberty
interests
may
abridged
abrogated
pursuant
validly
enacted
state
law
law
rationally
related
legitimate
state
interest
bowers
held
first
criminal
prohibitions
homosexual
sodomy
subject
heightened
scrutiny
implicate
fundamental
right
due
process
clause
noting
roscriptions
conduct
ancient
roots
odomy
criminal
offense
common
law
forbidden
laws
original
ratified
bill
rights
many
retained
bans
sodomy
bowers
concluded
right
engage
homosexual
sodomy
rooted
nation
history
tradition
today
overrule
holding
describe
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
fundamental
liberty
interest
subject
texas
statute
strict
scrutiny
instead
failed
establish
right
homosexual
sodomy
rooted
nation
history
tradition
concludes
application
texas
statute
petitioners
conduct
fails
test
overrules
bowers
holding
contrary
see
texas
statute
furthers
legitimate
state
interest
justify
intrusion
personal
private
life
individual
ante
shall
address
holding
presently
first
however
address
aspersions
casts
upon
bowers
conclusion
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
even
though
said
boldness
reverse
conclusion
iii
description
state
law
time
bowers
confirms
bowers
right
ante
points
griswold
connecticut
case
expressly
disclaimed
reliance
doctrine
substantive
due
process
grounded
right
privacy
penumbras
constitutional
provisions
due
process
clause
eisenstadt
baird
likewise
nothing
substantive
due
process
invalidated
massachusetts
law
prohibiting
distribution
contraceptives
unmarried
persons
solely
basis
equal
protection
clause
course
eisenstadt
contains
well
known
dictum
relating
right
privacy
referred
right
recognized
griswold
right
penumbral
specific
guarantees
bill
rights
substantive
due
process
right
roe
wade
recognized
right
abort
unborn
child
fundamental
right
protected
due
process
clause
roe
however
made
attempt
establish
right
rooted
nation
history
instead
based
conclusion
fourteenth
amendment
concept
personal
liberty
broad
enough
encompass
woman
decision
whether
terminate
pregnancy
normative
judgment
laws
undesirable
see
since
rejected
roe
holding
regulations
abortion
must
narrowly
tailored
serve
compelling
state
interest
see
planned
parenthood
casey
joint
opinion
kennedy
souter
jj
rehnquist
concurring
judgment
part
dissenting
part
thus
logical
implication
roe
holding
right
abort
unborn
child
fundamental
right
see
joint
opinion
kennedy
souter
jj
describing
abortion
fundamental
right
fundamental
liberty
interest
discussing
history
antisodomy
laws
ante
proclaims
noted
longstanding
history
country
laws
directed
homosexual
conduct
distinct
matter
ante
observation
way
casts
doubt
definitive
historical
conclusion
bowers
relied
nation
longstanding
history
laws
prohibiting
sodomy
general
regardless
whether
performed
couples
obvious
us
neither
formulations
extend
fundamental
right
homosexuals
engage
acts
consensual
sodomy
proscriptions
conduct
ancient
roots
sodomy
criminal
offense
common
law
forbidden
laws
original
ratified
bill
rights
fourteenth
amendment
ratified
union
criminal
sodomy
laws
fact
outlawed
sodomy
today
district
columbia
continue
provide
criminal
penalties
sodomy
performed
private
consenting
adults
background
claim
right
engage
conduct
rooted
nation
history
tradition
concept
ordered
liberty
best
facetious
citations
footnotes
omitted
emphasis
added
bowers
recognized
entirely
irrelevant
whether
laws
long
national
tradition
criminalizing
homosexual
sodomy
directed
homosexual
conduct
distinct
matter
ante
whether
homosexual
sodomy
prohibited
law
targeted
sexual
relations
general
law
prohibiting
homosexual
heterosexual
sodomy
relevant
point
criminalized
suffices
establish
homosexual
sodomy
right
deeply
rooted
nation
history
tradition
today
agrees
homosexual
sodomy
criminalized
thus
dispute
facts
bowers
actually
relied
next
makes
claim
unsupported
citations
aws
prohibiting
sodomy
seem
enforced
consenting
adults
acting
private
ante
key
qualifier
acting
private
since
admits
sodomy
laws
enforced
consenting
adults
although
contends
prosecutions
infrequent
ante
know
acting
private
means
surely
consensual
sodomy
like
heterosexual
intercourse
rarely
performed
stage
means
acting
private
private
premises
doors
closed
windows
covered
entirely
unsurprising
evidence
enforcement
hard
come
imagine
circumstances
enable
search
warrant
obtained
residence
ground
probable
cause
believe
consensual
sodomy
occurring
surely
lack
evidence
sustain
proposition
consensual
sodomy
private
premises
doors
closed
windows
covered
regarded
fundamental
right
even
though
consensual
sodomy
criminalized
prosecutions
consensual
adult
homosexual
sodomy
reported
west
reporting
system
official
state
reporters
years
see
eskridge
gaylaw
challenging
apartheid
closet
hereinafter
gaylaw
also
records
sodomy
prosecutions
executions
colonial
period
katz
almanac
bowers
conclusion
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
deeply
rooted
nation
history
tradition
utterly
unassailable
realizing
fact
instead
says
think
laws
traditions
past
half
century
relevance
references
show
emerging
awareness
liberty
gives
substantial
protection
adult
persons
deciding
conduct
private
lives
matters
pertaining
sex
ante
emphasis
added
apart
fact
emerging
awareness
establish
fundamental
right
statement
factually
false
continue
prosecute
sorts
crimes
adults
matters
pertaining
sex
prostitution
adult
incest
adultery
obscenity
child
pornography
sodomy
laws
enforced
past
half
century
reported
cases
involving
prosecutions
consensual
adult
homosexual
sodomy
gaylaw
relying
evidence
emerging
recognition
upon
american
law
institute
recommendation
criminalize
sexual
relations
conducted
private
ante
ignores
fact
recommendation
point
resistance
considered
adopting
model
penal
code
gaylaw
event
emerging
awareness
definition
deeply
rooted
nation
history
tradition
said
fundamental
right
status
requires
constitutional
entitlements
spring
existence
choose
lessen
eliminate
criminal
sanctions
certain
behavior
much
less
spring
existence
seems
believe
foreign
nations
decriminalize
conduct
bowers
majority
opinion
never
relied
values
share
wider
civilization
ante
rather
rejected
claimed
right
sodomy
ground
right
rooted
nation
history
tradition
thomas
concurring
denial
certiorari
iv
turn
ground
squarely
rests
holding
contention
rational
basis
law
attack
proposition
accord
jurisprudence
indeed
jurisprudence
society
know
requires
little
discussion
texas
statute
undeniably
seeks
belief
citizens
certain
forms
sexual
behavior
immoral
unacceptable
bowers
supra
interest
furthered
criminal
laws
fornication
bigamy
adultery
adult
incest
bestiality
obscenity
bowers
held
legitimate
state
interest
today
reaches
opposite
conclusion
texas
statute
says
furthers
legitimate
state
interest
justify
intrusion
personal
private
life
individual
ante
emphasis
addded
embraces
instead
justice
stevens
declaration
bowers
dissent
fact
governing
majority
state
traditionally
viewed
particular
practice
immoral
sufficient
reason
upholding
law
prohibiting
practice
ante
effectively
decrees
end
morals
legislation
asserts
promotion
majoritarian
sexual
morality
even
legitimate
state
interest
none
laws
survive
review
finally
turn
petitioners
challenge
member
save
justice
ante
opinion
concurring
judgment
embraces
face
applies
equally
persons
men
women
heterosexuals
homosexuals
subject
prohibition
deviate
sexual
intercourse
someone
sex
sure
distinguish
sexes
insofar
concerns
partner
sexual
acts
performed
men
violate
law
men
women
women
denial
equal
protection
since
precisely
distinction
regarding
partner
drawn
state
laws
prohibiting
marriage
someone
sex
permitting
marriage
someone
opposite
sex
objection
made
however
antimiscegenation
laws
invalidated
loving
virginia
similarly
applicable
whites
blacks
alike
distinguished
races
insofar
partner
concerned
loving
however
correctly
applied
heightened
scrutiny
rather
usual
review
virginia
statute
designed
maintain
white
supremacy
racially
discriminatory
purpose
always
sufficient
subject
law
strict
scrutiny
even
facially
neutral
law
makes
mention
race
see
washington
davis
purpose
discriminate
men
women
class
gleaned
texas
law
review
applies
review
readily
satisfied
rational
basis
satisfied
bowers
society
belief
certain
forms
sexual
behavior
immoral
unacceptable
justification
supports
many
laws
regulating
sexual
behavior
make
distinction
based
upon
identity
partner
example
laws
adultery
fornication
adult
incest
laws
refusing
recognize
homosexual
marriage
justice
argues
discrimination
law
must
justified
discrimination
regard
sex
partner
discrimination
regard
sexual
proclivity
principal
actor
true
law
applies
conduct
conduct
targeted
law
conduct
closely
correlated
homosexual
circumstances
texas
sodomy
law
targeted
conduct
instead
directed
toward
gay
persons
class
ante
course
said
law
law
public
nudity
targets
conduct
closely
correlated
nudist
hence
targeted
conduct
directed
toward
nudists
class
may
even
texas
law
deny
equal
protection
homosexuals
class
denial
still
need
justified
anything
rational
basis
cases
show
satisfied
enforcement
traditional
notions
sexual
morality
justice
simply
decrees
application
searching
form
rational
basis
review
texas
statute
ante
cases
cites
recognize
standard
reach
conclusions
finding
required
conventional
analysis
conceivable
legitimate
state
interest
supports
classification
issue
see
romer
evans
department
agriculture
moreno
justice
explain
precisely
searching
form
review
consists
must
least
mean
however
laws
exhibiting
desire
harm
politically
unpopular
group
ante
invalid
even
though
may
conceivable
rational
basis
support
reasoning
leaves
pretty
shaky
grounds
state
laws
limiting
marriage
couples
justice
seeks
preserve
conclusory
statement
preserving
traditional
institution
marriage
legitimate
state
interest
ante
preserving
traditional
institution
marriage
kinder
way
describing
state
moral
disapproval
couples
texas
interest
recast
similarly
euphemistic
terms
preserving
traditional
sexual
mores
society
jurisprudence
justice
seemingly
created
judges
validate
laws
characterizing
preserving
traditions
society
good
invalidate
characterizing
expressing
moral
disapproval
bad
today
opinion
product
product
culture
largely
signed
homosexual
agenda
mean
agenda
promoted
homosexual
activists
directed
eliminating
moral
opprobrium
traditionally
attached
homosexual
conduct
noted
earlier
opinion
fact
american
association
law
schools
reputable
law
school
must
seek
belong
excludes
membership
school
refuses
ban
facilities
law
firm
matter
small
wish
hire
prospective
partner
person
openly
engages
homosexual
conduct
see
romer
supra
one
revealing
statements
today
opinion
grim
warning
criminalization
homosexual
conduct
invitation
subject
homosexual
persons
discrimination
public
private
spheres
ante
clear
taken
sides
culture
war
departing
role
assuring
neutral
observer
democratic
rules
engagement
observed
many
americans
want
persons
openly
engage
homosexual
conduct
partners
business
scoutmasters
children
teachers
children
schools
boarders
home
view
protecting
families
lifestyle
believe
immoral
destructive
views
discrimination
function
judgments
deter
imbued
law
profession
culture
seemingly
unaware
attitudes
culture
obviously
mainstream
calls
discrimination
engage
homosexual
acts
perfectly
legal
proposals
ban
discrimination
title
vii
repeatedly
rejected
congress
see
employment
act
sess
civil
rights
amendments
sess
cases
discrimination
mandated
federal
statute
see
mandating
discharge
armed
forces
service
member
engages
intends
engage
homosexual
acts
cases
discrimination
constitutional
right
see
boy
scouts
america
dale
let
clear
nothing
homosexuals
group
promoting
agenda
normal
democratic
means
social
perceptions
sexual
morality
change
time
every
group
right
persuade
fellow
citizens
view
matters
best
homosexuals
achieved
success
enterprise
attested
fact
texas
one
remaining
criminalize
private
consensual
homosexual
acts
persuading
one
fellow
citizens
one
thing
imposing
one
views
absence
democratic
majority
something
else
require
state
criminalize
homosexual
acts
matter
display
moral
disapprobation
forbid
texas
chosen
well
within
range
traditional
democratic
action
hand
stayed
invention
constitutional
right
impatient
democratic
change
indeed
true
later
generations
see
laws
thought
necessary
proper
fact
serve
oppress
ante
happens
later
generations
repeal
laws
premise
system
judgments
made
people
imposed
governing
caste
knows
best
one
benefits
leaving
regulation
matter
people
rather
courts
people
unlike
judges
need
carry
things
logical
conclusion
people
may
feel
disapprobation
homosexual
conduct
strong
enough
disallow
homosexual
marriage
strong
enough
criminalize
private
homosexual
acts
may
legislate
accordingly
today
pretends
possesses
similar
freedom
action
need
fear
judicial
imposition
homosexual
marriage
recently
occurred
canada
decision
canadian
government
chosen
appeal
see
halpern
toronto
wl
ontario
ct
app
cohen
dozens
canada
follow
gay
couple
lead
washington
post
june
end
opinion
laid
waste
foundations
jurisprudence
says
present
case
involve
whether
government
must
give
formal
recognition
relationship
homosexual
persons
seek
enter
ante
believe
illuminating
bald
unreasoned
disclaimer
progression
thought
displayed
earlier
passage
opinion
notes
constitutional
protections
afforded
personal
decisions
relating
marriage
procreation
contraception
family
relationships
child
rearing
education
declares
ersons
homosexual
relationship
may
seek
autonomy
purposes
heterosexual
persons
ante
emphasis
added
today
opinion
dismantles
structure
constitutional
law
permitted
distinction
made
heterosexual
homosexual
unions
insofar
formal
recognition
marriage
concerned
moral
disapprobation
homosexual
conduct
legitimate
state
interest
purposes
proscribing
conduct
ante
coos
casting
aside
pretense
neutrality
hen
sexuality
finds
overt
expression
intimate
conduct
another
person
conduct
one
element
personal
bond
enduring
ante
justification
possibly
denying
benefits
marriage
homosexual
couples
exercising
liberty
protected
constitution
surely
encouragement
procreation
since
sterile
elderly
allowed
marry
case
involve
issue
homosexual
marriage
one
entertains
belief
principle
logic
nothing
decisions
many
hope
comfortingly
assures
us
matters
appropriate
resolution
three
texas
prohibition
sodomy
neither
infringes
fundamental
right
dispute
unsupported
rational
relation
constitution
considers
legitimate
state
interest
denies
equal
protection
laws
dissent
john
geddes
lawrence
tyron
garner
petitioners
texas
writ
certiorari
appeals
texas
fourteenth
district
june
justice
thomas
dissenting
join
justice
scalia
dissenting
opinion
write
separately
note
law
today
uncommonly
silly
griswold
connecticut
stewart
dissenting
member
texas
legislature
vote
repeal
punishing
someone
expressing
sexual
preference
noncommercial
consensual
conduct
another
adult
appear
worthy
way
expend
valuable
law
enforcement
resources
notwithstanding
recognize
member
empowered
help
petitioners
others
similarly
situated
duty
rather
decide
cases
constitution
laws
like
justice
stewart
find
neither
bill
rights
part
constitution
general
right
privacy
terms
today
liberty
person
spatial
transcendent
dimensions
ante
footnotes
critic
bowers
actually
writes
bowers
correct
nevertheless
right
engage
homosexual
acts
deeply
rooted
america
history
tradition
posner
sex
reason
overrule
bowers
holding
homosexual
sodomy
fundamental
right
worth
noting
societal
reliance
upon
aspect
decision
substantial
well
see
member
armed
forces
shall
separated
armed
forces
member
engaged
homosexual
act
acts
marcum
mcwhorter
relying
bowers
rejecting
claimed
fundamental
right
commit
adultery
mullins
oregon
relying
bowers
rejecting
grandparent
claimed
fundamental
liberty
interes
adoption
grandchildren
doe
wigginton
relying
bowers
rejecting
prisoner
claimed
fundamental
right
hiv
testing
schowengerdt
relying
bowers
upholding
bisexual
discharge
armed
services
charles
baesler
relying
bowers
rejecting
fire
department
captain
claimed
fundamental
interest
promotion
henne
wright
relying
bowers
rejecting
claim
state
law
restricting
surnames
given
children
birth
implicates
fundamental
right
walls
petersburg
relying
bowers
rejecting
challenge
police
department
questionnaire
asked
prospective
employees
homosexual
activity
high
tech
gays
defense
industrial
security
clearance
office
relying
bowers
holding
homosexual
activity
fundamental
right
rejecting
basis
standard
challenge
defense
department
policy
conducting
expanded
investigations
backgrounds
gay
lesbian
applicants
secret
security
clearance
quite
right
history
tradition
starting
point
cases
ending
point
substantive
due
process
inquiry
ante
asserted
fundamental
liberty
interest
must
deeply
rooted
nation
history
tradition
washington
glucksberg
must
also
implicit
concept
ordered
liberty
neither
liberty
justice
exist
sacrificed
ibid
moreover
liberty
interests
unsupported
history
tradition
though
deserving
heightened
scrutiny
still
protected
state
laws
rationally
related
legitimate
state
interest
proceed
discuss
latter
principle
applies
present
case