Romer v. Evans

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Timothy M. Tymkovich (on behalf of the Petitioners)
Jean E. Dubofsky (on behalf of the Respondents)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
94-1039
Petitioner: 
Romer
Respondent: 
Evans
Opinion: 
517 U.S. 620 (1996)
Categories: 
sexuality, fourteenth amendment, equal protection, discrimination

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Romer v. Evans , 517 U.S. 620 (1996)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039)
Facts of the Case: 

Colorado voters adopted Amendment 2 to their State Constitution precluding any judicial, legislative, or executive action designed to protect persons from discrimination based on their "homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships." Following a legal challenge by homosexual and other aggrieved parties, the state trial court entered a permanent injunction enjoining Amendment 2's enforcement. The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed on appeal.

Question: 

Does Amendment 2 of Colorado's State Constitution, forbidding the extension of official protections to those who suffer discrimination due to their sexual orientation, violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause?

Conclusion: 

Yes. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that Amendment 2 of the Colorado State Constitution violated the equal protection clause. Amendment 2 singled out homosexual and bisexual persons, imposing on them a broad disability by denying them the right to seek and receive specific legal protection from discrimination. In his opinion for the Court, Justice Anthony Kennedy noted that oftentimes a law will be sustained under the equal protection clause, even if it seems to disadvantage a specific group, so long as it can be shown to "advance a legitimate government interest." Amendment 2, by depriving persons of equal protection under the law due to their sexual orientation failed to advance such a legitimate interest. Justice Kennedy concluded: "If the constitutional conception of 'equal protection of the laws' means anything, it must at the very least mean that a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest."

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for Evans, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Equal Protection

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the minority, joined Scalia's dissent
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Wrote a dissent
Scalia
Wrote the majority opinion
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the minority, joined Scalia's dissent
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer

Full Opinion by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy