| Romer v. Evans | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 10, 1995 Decided May 20, 1996 | |
| Full case name | Roy Romer, Governor of Colorado, et al. v. Richard G. Evans, et al. |
| Citations | 517 U.S. 620 (more) 116 S. Ct. 1620; 134 L. Ed. 2d 855; 1996 U.S. LEXIS 3245; 64 U.S.L.W. 4353; 70 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1180; 68 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶ 44,013; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 3509; 96 Daily Journal DAR 5730; 9 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 607 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Preliminary injunction granted to plaintiffs, 1993 WL 19678 (Colo. Dist.Ct. 1993); affirmed, 854 P.2d 1270 (Colo. 1993); certiorari denied, 510 U.S. 959 (1993); injunction made permanent, 1993 WL 518586 (Colo. Dist.Ct. 1993); affirmed, 882 P.2d 1335 (Colo. 1994); cert. granted, 513 U.S. 1146 (1995). |
| Subsequent | None |
| Holding | |
| An amendment to the Colorado Constitution that prevents protected status under the law for homosexuals or bisexuals violates the Equal Protection Clause because it is not rationally related to a legitimate state interest. Supreme Court of Colorado affirmed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer |
| Dissent | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Thomas |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV; Colo. Const. art. II, § 30b | |
Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case dealing with sexual orientation and state laws.[1] It was the first Supreme Court case to address gay rights since Bowers v. Hardwick (1986),[2] when the Court had held that laws criminalizing sodomy were constitutional.[3]
The Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that a state constitutional amendment in Colorado preventing protected status based upon homosexuality or bisexuality did not satisfy the Equal Protection Clause.[1] The majority opinion in Romer stated that the amendment lacked "a rational relationship to legitimate state interests", and the dissent stated that the majority "evidently agrees that 'rational basis'—the normal test for compliance with the Equal Protection Clause—is the governing standard".[1][4] The state constitutional amendment failed rational basis review.[5][6][7][8]
The decision in Romer set the stage for Lawrence v. Texas (2003),[9] where the Court overruled its decision in Bowers;[3] for the Supreme Court ruling striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor (2013); and for the Court's ruling striking down state bans on same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). Justice Anthony Kennedy authored all four opinions, and was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in every one.
- ^ a b c Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
- ^ Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986).
- ^ a b Linder, Doug. "Gay Rights and the Constitution". University of Missouri-Kansas City. Retrieved August 27, 2011.
- ^ Wald, Kenneth & Calhoun-Brown, Allison (2014). Religion and Politics in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 347. ISBN 9781442225558 – via Google Books..
- ^ Hames, Joanne & Ekern, Yvonne (2012). Constitutional Law: Principles and Practice. Cengage Learning. p. 215. ISBN 978-1111648541 – via Google Books.
- ^ Smith, Miriam (2008). Political Institutions and Lesbian and Gay Rights in the United States and Canada. Routledge. p. 88. ISBN 9781135859206 – via Google Books.
- ^ Schultz, David (2009). Encyclopedia of the United States Constitution. Infobase Publishing. p. 629. ISBN 9781438126777 – via Google Books.
- ^ Bolick, Clint (2007). David's Hammer: The Case for an Activist Judiciary. Cato Institute. p. 80. ISBN 9781933995021 – via Google Books.
- ^ Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search