Lawrence v. Texas (2003)

In the Lawrence v. Texas case in 2003, police enter the home of John Lawrence in response to a weapons disturbance. Upon entering the house, the police found Lawrence and another man, Garner, engaged in a sexual act. The two men were in violation of a Texas law forbidding sexual conduct between two people of the same sex. Lawrence and Garner were taken to jail to spend the night, and when released each had to pay a fine. The men challenged the Texas statute, saying that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protected their privacy. The Supreme Court was challenged to look back on the Bowers v. Hardwick case where it ruled that one’s sexual conduct privacy was not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Justice Kennedy delivered the Opinion of the Court, explaining that the “the petitioners were adults at the time of the alleged offense. Their conduct was private and consensual” (Lawrence v. Texas 2003, Kennedy, J. opinion of the court). The question then becomes whether the men are free to “engage in the private conduct in the exercise of their liberty under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution” (Lawrence v. Texas 2003, Kennedy, J. opinion of the court). This case didn’t just focus on the private rights of an individual because the law makers are ultimately complaining that sodomy is unnecessary because it is nonprocreative act. Two heterosexual people, however, even those who are married, can also engage in sexual acts with no intention of procreation. In his Opinion Kennedy notes that it is not fair for the government to dictate every aspect of the private sphere, making it no longer private, but public.
As argued in the Griswold Opinion of the Court, the Bill of Rights protects a person’s privacy in his/her own home. The police entered Lawrence’s private space and caught him with Garner. Not only is the act of sexual conduct private, but so is one’s sexual orientation. Justice Kennedy points out several times that there is a long history of laws against homosexual behavior, and never before, have the laws been enforced if the acts were consensual. In the end Kennedy notes that deciding the case based on the private/public realms becomes too difficult. He steps around the Griswold v. Connecticut case by basing his opinion in the right to liberty stated in the Constitution. He then argues the case on the basis of individual liberty. Do the men in this case have a right to the liberty and freedom to take part in a harmless act within the privacy of one’s own home? The Court states that it is unfair to create laws about a behavior just because the subject makes some people uncomfortable. They decide in favor of the men because the case involved two adults who gave full consent “their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government” (Lawrence v. Texas 2003, Kennedy, J. opinion of the court).

(Written by Siobhan... not Ben)