Introduction
In the case, Bowers v. Hardwick, the Constitution and state law were used to prove that criminalizing private sexual conduct was legal. On the other hand, the rule that there is no fundamental right in the Constitution for homosexuals to engage in sodomy was used. This rule seems persuasive as it also criminalized sodomy in heterosexual couples, making each couple equal.
Discussion
In addition, one of the primary sources of the law is custom, and the Court used it to show the validity of banning sodomy. It was stated that the states in the USA banned sodomy as it is unacceptable and unserious, and it violates the Nation’s history and tradition. On the other hand, such intervention violates the right to the person’s private life, which the Constitution provides. Moreover, the Court criminalized consensual sodomy, which violated the person’s right to freedom. These rules of law also seem persuasive and show that some of the rules were controversial. Thus, the rules of law used by both sides of the conflict in the case Bowers v. Hardwick seem persuasive, as they are based on the Federal Constitution but also controversial.
In addition, a similar case, Lawrence v. Texas, developed the law and used the rule of law to invalidate sodomy, which makes them persuasive. Firstly, discrimination was seen in this case, as the banning of sodomy in Texas was used only for homosexual couples. Such division violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which guaranteed equal protection of the law. Secondly, the Federal Constitution provides a person with freedom, and in these cases, consensual sodomy was criminalized, which violated a person’s vital interests in liberty and privacy. In this case, it is possible to state that the law was selective. Furthermore, the use of custom and the statement that sodomy violates history and freedom was outdated and did not meet modern realities. Thirdly, different law rules were used in different states, showing inequality and discrimination. Lastly, the mentioned aspects proved the invalidity of the prohibition of sodomy, which resulted in legalizing it in all states of the USA. Hence, in the case, of Lawrence v. Texas, the rules of law about inequality, violation of private life, and freedom seem persuasive and led to the invalidation of the sodomy law in the USA.
The rules of law, such as violation of the constitutional right and sexual inequality stated in the first cases, were persuasively applied in the case Lawrence v. Texas. Firstly, the defense during these cases was based on the violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. In the case Lawrence v. Texas, this rule was supported by evidence that the law was unequal to semi-sexual couples because sodomy among heterosexual couples was not criminalized. Secondly, in all cases, the defense stated that such intervention violates a person’s right to private life, adding that the sodomy was based on a consensual agreement. In the case Lawrence v. Texas, this fact was used to prove that the violation of constitutional rights was seen. Lastly, in this case, the defense showed that there was no precedent to protect homosexual couples, but they have the same rights as heterosexuals.
Conclusion
Therefore, the case Lawrence v. Texas determined that the violation of the rights of homosexuals was seen as a violation of constitutional rights, and primarily the defense was based on the rules of law from similar cases.