|
|
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986)
Bowers v. Hardwick No. 85-140 Argued March 31, 1986 Decided June 30, 1986 478 U.S. 186
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
After being charged with violating the Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy by committing that act with another adult male in the bedroom of his home, respondent Hardwick (respondent) brought suit in Federal District Court, challenging the constitutionality of the statute insofar as it criminalized consensual sodomy. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that the Georgia statute violated respondent’s fundamental rights.
Held: The Georgia statute is constitutional. Pp. 190-196.
(a) The Constitution does not confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy. None of the fundamental rights announced in this Court’s prior cases involving family relationships, marriage, or procreation bear any resemblance to the right asserted in this case. And any claim that those cases stand for the proposition that any kind of private sexual conduct between consenting adults is constitutionally insulated from state proscription is unsupportable. Pp. 190-191.
(b) Against a background in which many States have criminalized sodomy and still do, to claim that a right to engage in such conduct is "deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" is, at best, facetious. Pp. 191-194.
(c) There should be great resistance to expand the reach of the Due Process Clauses to cover new fundamental rights. Otherwise, the Judiciary necessarily would take upon itself further authority to govern the country without constitutional authority. The claimed right in this case falls far short of overcoming this resistance. Pp. 194-195.
(d) The fact that homosexual conduct occurs in the privacy of the home does not affect the result. Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 557, distinguished. Pp. 195-196.
(e) Sodomy laws should not be invalidated on the asserted basis that majority belief that sodomy is immoral is an inadequate rationale to support the laws. P. 196.
760 F.2d 1202, reversed.
WHITE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and POWELL, REHNQUIST, and O’CONNOR, JJ., joined. BURGER, C.J., post, p. 196, and POWELL, J., post, p. 197, filed concurring opinions. BLACKMUN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BRENNAN, MARSHALL, and STEVENS, JJ., joined, post, p. 199. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BRENNAN and MARSHALL, JJ., joined, post, p. 214.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986) in 478 U.S. 186 478 U.S. 187. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5QMNJZDPZERDTX9.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), in 478 U.S. 186, page 478 U.S. 187. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5QMNJZDPZERDTX9.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986). cited in 1986, 478 U.S. 186, pp.478 U.S. 187. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=5QMNJZDPZERDTX9.
|