Retired-6
03-21-2003, 01:42 PM
Disclaimer: The following U.S. Supreme Court Caselaws are provided ONLY for educational and informational purposes and are NOT intended to be "legal advice" or "legal opinions" of PTO, its members or those associated with PTO in any way and should NOT be interpeted as such. If you have a legal problem, you are enouraged to seek the advice of a licensed attorney in your area.
1) Bowers v. Hardwick, June 30, 1986 (Georgia Sodomy Law)
This decision ruled the Georgia sodomy law constitutional.
2) Romer v. Evans, May 20, 1996 (Colorado Gay Rights,
Amendment 2)
This decision ruled that Amendment 2 violates the Equal
Protection Clause.
3) Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v.
Southworth, March 22, 2000 (Student Fees)
This decision ruled that public universities can use mandatory student fees to support campus groups even though some students may disagree with some groups' views. The case in question involved self-identified Christian conservative students at the University of Wisconsin, who objected to 18 of 125 campus groups supported by a small amount of their required student activity fees; among the groups they objected to was the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Campus Center.
4) United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., May
22, 2000 (Adult Programming)
This decision ruled that a federal law that restricts adult programming to the overnight hours if cable providers cannot fully scramble the signal is unconstitutional. The justices said that Congress went too far in trying to protect children from adult-oriented programs by implementing Section 505 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
5) Apprendi v. New Jersey, June 26, 2000 (New Jersey Hate
Crimes Law)
This decision struck down a New Jersey hate-crime law, which includes sexual orientation as a protected category, ruling it unconstitutionally allows judges to unilaterally increase a defendant's criminal sentence based on a finding of bias. The court said due process provisions of the Constitution require that juries, not judges, make a determination that a hate crime was committed before an extended prison term can be imposed. However the principle of enhanced sentencing for bias motivation was untouched.
6) Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, June 28, 2000
(New Jersey Homosexual Boy Scouts Leader Ban)
This decision ruled that the Boy Scouts of America can exclude homosexuals from serving in leadership roles. This decision overturned a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling that held the Boy Scouts as subject to state anti-bias laws, which prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. The majority opinion concluded that forcing the Scouts to accept a homosexual leader placed an unconstitutional burden on the
organization's "expressive purpose."
7) Seling v. Young, January 17, 2001
(Lifetime Lockup for Sexually Violent Preditors)
This decision ruled that Keeping sexually violent predators confined after their prison terms expire does not automatically violate their constitutional rights, and that a state's failure to provide treatment required by law does not turn a sex-predator's lawful confinement into unlawful punishment. The court held that such prisoners cannot win their release by merely challenging the conditions of their confinement. Andre Brigham Young, who was convicted of rape challenged his confinement under the law, saying he should get a chance to show that he was being subjected to unconstitutional double punishment. In 1990, shortly before
Young was to complete a prison term for his conviction, state officials began proceedings that resulted in him being confined indefinitely as a sexually violent predator. In many states an 18 year old male who has consenting sex with a 17 year old male can be considered a sexually violent preditor by an anti-gay judge. This decision provides an opportunity to put homosexuals who have consenting sex in prison for
life. The death penelty for consenting sex is not far behind.
8) Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, March 21, 2001
(Discrimination Claims)
This decision ruled that employers can force workers to take job-related disputes to arbitration rather than to court. The case involved a gay former employee of the Richmond, Virginia based Circuit City Stores. Agreements to arbitrate workplace disputes are enforceable even if the employer required the worker to sign the agreement in order to be hired, the court said. The majority said the employee cannot sue over alleged harassment at work. Arbitration has increasingly been used to resolve a wide variety of disputes, including employment discrimination claims. Supporters of arbitration say it is less complicated and less expensive than a lawsuit. But employees’ advocates say the process can be tilted toward employers and that workers forfeit certain rights.
9) Ashcroft v. Free Speach Coalition, April 16, 2002 (Free
Speach)
This decision struck down a controversial U.S. child pornography law. The majority said the First Amendment protects sexual images that only appear to depict sex with minors. They said the Child Pornography Prevention Act violated free speech rights because it was too vague and far-reaching. In its ruling, the majority agreed with pornographers and other artists, who argued that the ban on simulated child sex could make it a crime to show sex scenes like those in movies like "Traffic" or "American Beauty." The law was Congress' answer to then-emerging computer technology that allowed the computer alteration of images of real children, or the creation from scratch of simulated children posed in sexual acts. It was an expansion of existing bans on the usual sort of child pornography. Congress justified the wider ban on grounds that while no real children were harmed in creating the material, real children could be harmed by feeding the prurient appetites of pedophiles or child molesters.
10) City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., May 13,
2002 (Free Speach)
This decision ruled that evidence of neighborhood crime and blight may have been strong enough to justify banning more than one sex-related business from operating under the same roof in Los Angeles. Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas and O`Connor found the city had done enough to bolster its argument that what it called "sex superstores" have negative side effects on the surrounding neighborhood and should be banned. Kennedy would not go that far. Kennedy found that while the city may have had sufficient evidence for its ban, a lower court should not have ruled without more review. Because of the ambivalence of Justice Kennedy, the court lacked a five-member majority fully endorsing the ban. Nonetheless, the court reversed the ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and sent the case back for further study or a full trial. The ruling means that the city can continue to defend the ban against challenges from adult businesses that contend the law is an unconstitutional limit on free speech. The Supreme Court has previously said that cities may fight the crime, filth and economic decline associated with traditional red light districts though zoning regulations, such as forcing sex-related businesses to relocate far away from one another. Los Angeles did just that in 1978, with a local law requiring adult establishments to be at least 1,000 feet away from other such businesses and 500 feet away from any school, religious institution or public park. The law was based on a 1977 study that said concentrating adult businesses in a particular area led to increased crime, lower property values and other negative effects. The city then discovered what its lawyers call a loophole. One X-rated movie theater could add products and services to become a "sex superstore," the city said. So the city took what it called the logical next step, and in 1983 banned multiple adult businesses from operating on the same site. The ban was ignored in some cases, including by two adult bookstores that added video viewing booths in the early 1990s. After city inspectors discovered the violations, the stores sued, claiming the ban was a violation of the constitutional guarantee of free speech and unjustifiably treated sexual content more harshly than more mainstream fare. A federal judge ruled for the two businesses in 1998, and the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court agreed. The city then appealed to the Supreme Court.
11) McKune v. Lile, June 10, 2002 (Sex Offender Punishment)
This decision ruled that sex offenders can be denied prison privileges for refusing to participate in a treatment program that requires them to accept responsibility for their crimes. This decision overturned a U.S. appeals court ruling which said an inmate facing the loss of privileges was being punished for remaining silent, in violation of the constitutional right against self-incrimination. In upholding the Sexual Abuse Treatment Program in Kansas, the court said a state can condition an inmate's privileges on participation in the program. Under the program, inmates must accept responsibility for crimes for which they have been sentenced and complete a sexual history form detailing all prior sexual activities. The information can be used against them in future criminal proceedings. Failure to participate in the Kansas program can result in curtailment or loss of visitation rights, work and recreation opportunities, access to a personal television and other privileges.
12) Otte v. Doe, March 5, 2003 (Sex Offender Information)
This decision ruled that states can post sex offenders' photos and other personal information on the Internet. In a key first test of "Megan's law" provisions that are on the books in every state, the majority said sex-offender registries are not an unconstitutional extra punishment for offenders who already have served their sentences.
1 1
1) Bowers v. Hardwick, June 30, 1986 (Georgia Sodomy Law)
This decision ruled the Georgia sodomy law constitutional.
2) Romer v. Evans, May 20, 1996 (Colorado Gay Rights,
Amendment 2)
This decision ruled that Amendment 2 violates the Equal
Protection Clause.
3) Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System v.
Southworth, March 22, 2000 (Student Fees)
This decision ruled that public universities can use mandatory student fees to support campus groups even though some students may disagree with some groups' views. The case in question involved self-identified Christian conservative students at the University of Wisconsin, who objected to 18 of 125 campus groups supported by a small amount of their required student activity fees; among the groups they objected to was the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Campus Center.
4) United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., May
22, 2000 (Adult Programming)
This decision ruled that a federal law that restricts adult programming to the overnight hours if cable providers cannot fully scramble the signal is unconstitutional. The justices said that Congress went too far in trying to protect children from adult-oriented programs by implementing Section 505 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
5) Apprendi v. New Jersey, June 26, 2000 (New Jersey Hate
Crimes Law)
This decision struck down a New Jersey hate-crime law, which includes sexual orientation as a protected category, ruling it unconstitutionally allows judges to unilaterally increase a defendant's criminal sentence based on a finding of bias. The court said due process provisions of the Constitution require that juries, not judges, make a determination that a hate crime was committed before an extended prison term can be imposed. However the principle of enhanced sentencing for bias motivation was untouched.
6) Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, June 28, 2000
(New Jersey Homosexual Boy Scouts Leader Ban)
This decision ruled that the Boy Scouts of America can exclude homosexuals from serving in leadership roles. This decision overturned a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling that held the Boy Scouts as subject to state anti-bias laws, which prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation. The majority opinion concluded that forcing the Scouts to accept a homosexual leader placed an unconstitutional burden on the
organization's "expressive purpose."
7) Seling v. Young, January 17, 2001
(Lifetime Lockup for Sexually Violent Preditors)
This decision ruled that Keeping sexually violent predators confined after their prison terms expire does not automatically violate their constitutional rights, and that a state's failure to provide treatment required by law does not turn a sex-predator's lawful confinement into unlawful punishment. The court held that such prisoners cannot win their release by merely challenging the conditions of their confinement. Andre Brigham Young, who was convicted of rape challenged his confinement under the law, saying he should get a chance to show that he was being subjected to unconstitutional double punishment. In 1990, shortly before
Young was to complete a prison term for his conviction, state officials began proceedings that resulted in him being confined indefinitely as a sexually violent predator. In many states an 18 year old male who has consenting sex with a 17 year old male can be considered a sexually violent preditor by an anti-gay judge. This decision provides an opportunity to put homosexuals who have consenting sex in prison for
life. The death penelty for consenting sex is not far behind.
8) Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, March 21, 2001
(Discrimination Claims)
This decision ruled that employers can force workers to take job-related disputes to arbitration rather than to court. The case involved a gay former employee of the Richmond, Virginia based Circuit City Stores. Agreements to arbitrate workplace disputes are enforceable even if the employer required the worker to sign the agreement in order to be hired, the court said. The majority said the employee cannot sue over alleged harassment at work. Arbitration has increasingly been used to resolve a wide variety of disputes, including employment discrimination claims. Supporters of arbitration say it is less complicated and less expensive than a lawsuit. But employees’ advocates say the process can be tilted toward employers and that workers forfeit certain rights.
9) Ashcroft v. Free Speach Coalition, April 16, 2002 (Free
Speach)
This decision struck down a controversial U.S. child pornography law. The majority said the First Amendment protects sexual images that only appear to depict sex with minors. They said the Child Pornography Prevention Act violated free speech rights because it was too vague and far-reaching. In its ruling, the majority agreed with pornographers and other artists, who argued that the ban on simulated child sex could make it a crime to show sex scenes like those in movies like "Traffic" or "American Beauty." The law was Congress' answer to then-emerging computer technology that allowed the computer alteration of images of real children, or the creation from scratch of simulated children posed in sexual acts. It was an expansion of existing bans on the usual sort of child pornography. Congress justified the wider ban on grounds that while no real children were harmed in creating the material, real children could be harmed by feeding the prurient appetites of pedophiles or child molesters.
10) City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., May 13,
2002 (Free Speach)
This decision ruled that evidence of neighborhood crime and blight may have been strong enough to justify banning more than one sex-related business from operating under the same roof in Los Angeles. Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas and O`Connor found the city had done enough to bolster its argument that what it called "sex superstores" have negative side effects on the surrounding neighborhood and should be banned. Kennedy would not go that far. Kennedy found that while the city may have had sufficient evidence for its ban, a lower court should not have ruled without more review. Because of the ambivalence of Justice Kennedy, the court lacked a five-member majority fully endorsing the ban. Nonetheless, the court reversed the ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and sent the case back for further study or a full trial. The ruling means that the city can continue to defend the ban against challenges from adult businesses that contend the law is an unconstitutional limit on free speech. The Supreme Court has previously said that cities may fight the crime, filth and economic decline associated with traditional red light districts though zoning regulations, such as forcing sex-related businesses to relocate far away from one another. Los Angeles did just that in 1978, with a local law requiring adult establishments to be at least 1,000 feet away from other such businesses and 500 feet away from any school, religious institution or public park. The law was based on a 1977 study that said concentrating adult businesses in a particular area led to increased crime, lower property values and other negative effects. The city then discovered what its lawyers call a loophole. One X-rated movie theater could add products and services to become a "sex superstore," the city said. So the city took what it called the logical next step, and in 1983 banned multiple adult businesses from operating on the same site. The ban was ignored in some cases, including by two adult bookstores that added video viewing booths in the early 1990s. After city inspectors discovered the violations, the stores sued, claiming the ban was a violation of the constitutional guarantee of free speech and unjustifiably treated sexual content more harshly than more mainstream fare. A federal judge ruled for the two businesses in 1998, and the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court agreed. The city then appealed to the Supreme Court.
11) McKune v. Lile, June 10, 2002 (Sex Offender Punishment)
This decision ruled that sex offenders can be denied prison privileges for refusing to participate in a treatment program that requires them to accept responsibility for their crimes. This decision overturned a U.S. appeals court ruling which said an inmate facing the loss of privileges was being punished for remaining silent, in violation of the constitutional right against self-incrimination. In upholding the Sexual Abuse Treatment Program in Kansas, the court said a state can condition an inmate's privileges on participation in the program. Under the program, inmates must accept responsibility for crimes for which they have been sentenced and complete a sexual history form detailing all prior sexual activities. The information can be used against them in future criminal proceedings. Failure to participate in the Kansas program can result in curtailment or loss of visitation rights, work and recreation opportunities, access to a personal television and other privileges.
12) Otte v. Doe, March 5, 2003 (Sex Offender Information)
This decision ruled that states can post sex offenders' photos and other personal information on the Internet. In a key first test of "Megan's law" provisions that are on the books in every state, the majority said sex-offender registries are not an unconstitutional extra punishment for offenders who already have served their sentences.
1 1