Respondent's Brief
Table Of Contents
Questions presented
Statement
Summary of argument
Argument
- Substantive Due Process Under The Fourteenth Amendment
- The appellate record is inadequate to support the recognition of the limited constitutional right asserted by the petitioners
- The Court has adopted an historical approach to the recognition of liberty interests protected under the Due Process Clause
- This nation has no deep-rooted tradition of protecting a right to engage in sodomy
- No tradition of protection exists at any level of specificity of designation of an asserted liberty interest
- Principles of stare decisis counsel against recognition of a new protected liberty interest
- Equal Protection Under the Fourteenth Amendment
- The Equal Protection Clause—standard of review
- Rational-basis review
- Heightened review is neither sought nor required
- The petitioners have not established their membership in the class for which equal protection relief is sought
- The Texas Legislature did not purposefully discriminate in the passage of section 21.06
- Section 21.06 is rationally related to a legitimate state interest
- Section 21.06 was enacted for the purpose of avoiding litigation and possible invalidation of the predecessor statute
- Section 21.06 furthers the legitimate governmental interest of promotion of morality
- Summary
- The Equal Protection Clause—standard of review
Conclusion
Additional topics
- Respondent's Brief - Questions Presented
- Respondent's Brief - Respondent's Brief
- Other Free Encyclopedias
Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1995 to PresentRespondent's Brief - Respondent's Brief, Table Of Contents, Questions Presented, Statement, Summary Of Argument - In The Supreme Court of the United States