Thursday, March 28, 2024

AdvertiseDonateSubmit
NewsSportsArtsOpinionThe QuadPhotoVideoIllustrationsCartoonsGraphicsThe StackPRIMEEnterpriseInteractivesPodcastsBruinwalkClassifieds

Communities respond to Court ruling…

By Daily Bruin Staff

May 21, 1996 9:00 p.m.

Wednesday, May 22, 1996

Reversal of Colorado anti-homosexual law creates legality
debatesBy Patrick Marantal

Daily Bruin Staff

Monday, the Supreme Court struck down a Colorado law which would
deny homosexuals constitutional protection and make them "unequal
to everyone else." While California is far from the epicenter, the
state has felt the aftershocks.

While members of the local gay and lesbian community celebrated
in the streets of West Hollywood Monday, opponents of the ruling
claimed the decision was misguided.

"Homosexuality is a fringe element of society that does not
necessarily have a place in those virtues we as a society seek to
further as exemplary of its citizens," said Jay Wang, chairman of
the Bruin Republicans.

Others emphasized the strong desire to keep such anti-homosexual
measures legal in other states.

"We’ll stop at nothing," said Jim Woodall, head of Concerned
Women for America, a national conservative organization. "We’re
willing to tolerate their behavior … But that does not give them
special protected status under the law."

Unlike some people’s negative reactions to the ruling, members
of the gay and lesbian community marked the ruling as one of the
most significant victories for gay rights to date.

"Many people feel that this is the most important civil rights
decision regarding lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals," said
Charles Outcalt, director of the UCLA Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual
Studies Resource Center. "It is the first time that the Supreme
Court (has ruled) that lesbian and gay people deserve equal
rights."

And other supporters of the ruling recalled times when
legislation was not in their favor. To them, this decision marked a
stepping stone for further strides in equality.

"Elated. Absolutely elated," said Jennifer Pizer, a lawyer for
the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc. "It was a long
time coming."

"Ten years ago, the Hardwick decision upheld the Georgia sodomy
law. The language (of the opinion) was very difficult to read,"
Pizer added. "In this decision, the tone is different. It’s
respectful. And it expressly includes us in all the constitutional
values and protections American citizens enjoy."

Since the Monday ruling, some argued that such decisions should
belong to the state and enacted through the legislature.

"My belief is based on the fact that homosexuality is a conduct
issue and the Constitution guarantees an allowance for the states
and the citizens of the state on lifestyle issues," Wang said.

Also, Wang emphasized that this decision steered away from
previous precedents set by the Supreme Court, such as the Georgia
sodomy case in which the state rendered sodomy illegal.

However, supporters of the Monday ruling contended that the
defeat of the measure was constitutional because it was based on
the equal protection clause, which guarantees an individual equal
participation in the political process.

"The court said that whenever you try to treat a group
differently … you have to have a reason," Pizer said. "Their
argument was that ordinances give special rights, but the courts
said that was implausible."

Despite legal questions surrounding the ruling, the decision
could potentially reverse current legislation throughout the
nation.

For example, a 1993 Cincinnati measure bars laws that would
protect homosexuals from discrimination. Because of the Colorado
decision, the Supreme Court may now send the Cincinnati amendment
back to lower courts and ask judges to reconsider their
decision.

While the ruling did not specifically address homosexual conduct
or call for a closer inspection of laws on sexual orientation,
members of the gay and lesbian community believed that the Court’s
ruling may affect present and future legislation.

"Following this ruling, our legal arguments are stronger," Pizer
said. "But there also has been a very important symbolic victory
when the Supreme Court said it is not OK to treat lesbians, gays
and bisexuals differently because of bias."

While the decision still settles into the nation, some
remembered the rationale behind the high court’s majority and
dissenting opinion.

In Romer v. Evans, the Court ruled a Colorado amendment that
bans laws protecting homosexuals violated the equal protection
clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"(The ruling) identifies persons by a single trait and then
denies them protection across the board," wrote Justice Anthony
Kennedy in the majority opinion."It is not within our
constitutional traditions to enact laws of this sort."

The three justices who dissented, with Justice Antonin Scalia
writing the opinion, contended the court should not "take sides in
this culture war."

Mixed reactions followed news of the ruling. Notably, President
Bill Clinton backed the Court’s decision, after having voiced
opposition towards same-sex marriages earlier this month.

"The President believes the day’s decision was appropriate. The
Colorado law denied a group of citizens the right to participate
effectively in the political process in Colorado," said White House
Press Secretary Mike McCurry.

Members of the homosexual community hope that the Court’s ruling
will influence Clinton’s wavering position on a Republican-backed
bill that would ban same-sex marriages.

But McCurry maintained that the Clinton administration has not
yet taken a stance on the bill and is still "analyzing the
situation."

Compiled with Daily Bruin wire reports.

… the court’s decision could potentially reverse current
legislation throughout the nation.

Share this story:FacebookTwitterRedditEmail
COMMENTS
Featured Classifieds
More classifieds »
Related Posts