Live Chat Support

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Essay on Analysis of Lawrence v. Texas, (539 US 558)

Case Analysis Essay on Lawrence v. Texas (539 U.S. 558)

Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the US Supreme Court.  In a 6-3 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that the ruling in the case of Bower’s should be reconsidered.  Firstly, it is incorrect to state that there is a long standing antipathy against homosexual activities.  Sodomy was prohibited early in our history because it does not promote procreation which should be the ultimate goal of every sexual activity.  Sodomy was prohibited not because these are homosexual activities.  The reason why sodomy was directly prohibited because it often involved those sexual activities between men and minor girls, or between adults but with the use of force or between adults with marked differences in their status or between men and animals.   

Further, the Bowers case cited 25 states prohibiting homosexual activities.  In the past years, however, these 25 states have been reduced to 13 of which 4 enforce their laws only against homosexual conduct.  This proves that there is no longstanding antipathy towards homosexual conduct.  In some of these states which prohibit sodomy whether for same-sex or heterosexual couple, there is a general pattern that these laws are not enforced when it involves two consenting adults who conduct their homosexual activities in private.    

Granting without admitting that the society has considered homosexual activity as immoral it does not follow that this is a sufficient reason for enacting a law prohibiting it.  Individuals should be given sufficient liberty to do and perform any act concerning the intimacies of personal relationship.  It is for these reasons that the Bowers case should be overruled.

The Reliable and Affordable Essay Writing Services

The Texas Law prohibiting sexual intercourse between people of the same sex violates due process which is protected by the US Constitution.  It bears stressing that the petitioners were caught in a moment of sexual intimacy.  They were both adults who willingly gave their consent to such intimacy.  There was no physical force, intimidation or coercion involved.  The right of liberty of every individual under the due process clause gives them the freedom to engage in private conduct without government intrusion and interference.  Further there is no valid reason to be advanced by the government for its intrusion in the affairs of private individual, to wit:   

“The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter. The case does involve two adults who, with full and mutual consent from each other, engaged in sexual practices common to a homosexual lifestyle. The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives.”

It is worthy to take note that Justice Scalia dissented in this case.  In her dissenting opinion she expressed her apprehension about the possible effects of the reversal of the ruling in Bowers case on the other cases previously decided on the basis of the Bowers case.  Further, Justice Scalia argued against the decision on the ground that the overturning of the Bowers case meant the violation of a basic principle known as stare decisis.  This principle simply means adherence to precedents which states that once a case has been decided one way, then another case, involving exactly the same point in issue, should be decided in the same manner. 

I agree with this Supreme Court decision.  The Right to be Let Alone is a time-honored rule which has been recognized by the society since time immemorial.  In essence it is the right to privacy.  This right grants individuals the right to be secured in their persons, houses and effects.   The right to privacy also immunes the houses and places of abode of people from any unwarranted searches in the absence of a valid search warrant.  This right even extends to the offices, business establishments and papers and effects that may be found in these places.  There was even a case when the right was held to be available to a person in the seclusion of a glass-paneled telephone booth. (Katz v US 381 US 347)  This is a landmark Supreme Court decision that has empowered not only our gay brothers and sisters but also affirmed and strengthened our right to privacy.  It is indeed one of the most important civil rights victories in history.  (Chad Graham 1)

This is a free Essay on Analysis of Lawrence v. Texas (539 US 558).  We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom. If you need help we will write well written Essay on Analysis of Lawrence v. Texas,  (539 US 558) at very affordable costs starting at $7.50/page.

No comments:

Post a Comment