High Court to Hear Sodomy Law Case

The court agreed Monday to hear a case, Lawrence and Garner v. Texas, which concerns two men arrested for sodomy -- defined as unnatural sexual practices or crimes against nature.

Texas and North Carolina, both historically conservative states, are among a shrinking minority of states that still have sodomy laws on the books, said Susan Sommer, supervising attorney for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a gay rights group.

"We think it's a tremendously positive sign that the court is taking the case," she said. "There has been tremendous progress in the past decades to repeal and strike down these laws."

Sommer said the laws, although only enforced periodically, are used against homosexuals across the nation to intimidate or deny them child custody and employment.

Since the 1960s, sodomy laws have been eliminated because of increasingly liberal public opinion. In 1986, the Supreme Court dealt with a similar case and concluded that the constitutionality of sodomy laws should be left to individual states.

But some experts say that unless the Supreme Court rules against sodomy laws, they are not likely to be successfully challenged in the N.C. General Assembly.

"It's just one of those issues that people don't want to deal with," said UNC political science Professor Thad Beyle. "It's not a comfortable issue."

Sodomy laws likely will remain in place because no one will make a definite effort to change such a controversial issue, Beyle said. "It's a shame, but that's the way politics operate."

N.C. Senate Minority Leader Patrick Ballantine, R-New Hanover, said tradition might factor into the preservation of the laws. "Many times, when a law has been on the books forever, it's hard to get rid of it," he said.

But despite the legal history, Ballantine said he would not be surprised if the Supreme Court struck down the laws because national standards have changed since the advent of sodomy laws.

Some state legislators already are working to change the law. Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, D-Orange, introduced a bill during the 2001 session of the General Assembly that would decriminalize private, not-for-hire sexual behavior between consenting adults.

Kinnaird said she plans to make a similar attempt in the future. But she expressed concern that the Supreme Court case might slow down the passage of her legislation as people wait for the outcome before making a decision.

"I think people are scared to death of that subject," she said.

There is no need for sodomy laws to change because they set moral standards, said John Rustin, director of government relations for the N.C. Family Policy Council. He said the laws set guidelines for states' expectations and are not enforced irrationally. "From that standard, we think it is important that the laws remain on the books."

But Roy Cordato, vice president for research for the John Locke Foundation, a Raleigh-based think tank, said he does not think a nation based around individualistic ideals should have such clearly discriminatory laws.

"I have no idea why (the laws) are in place now," he said. "I have no idea why they were in place before the 21st century."

The State & National Editor can be reached at stntdesk@unc.edu.