Lawso Discussion Summary 5

Lawso Discussion Summary 5 - Connor On the Contrary Justice...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Noah Greenberg Jason Hopkins Lawso 1 Thursdays 2:00 November 5, 2008 This weeks readings deal with the Supreme Court and the way in which they can judge certain cases. The first reading of the Lawrence V. Texas decision delved into the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions in the court. First, Justice Kennedy explained his reasoning behind outlawing the prohibition of homosexual sodomy with the Due Process Clause, saying that nowhere in the constitution was Sodomy outlawed, and therefore was a people’s right in the private sphere. Justice O’ Connor on the other hand justified her concurring vote with the Equal Protection Clause, explaining that the issue was not a question of weather or not sodomy was legal, but weather sodomy was legal in a homosexual context. Outlawing such intimate acts for a certain group of people would be in violation of the 14 th Amendment, and therefore was unconstitutional in the eyes of Justice O’
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Connor. On the Contrary, Justice Scalia’s interpretation of the laws decided that the prohibition of Sodomy was a state right under the 10 th amendment, and therefore he could not vote against the Bowers decision. The piece on Judicial Activism by Thomas Sowell had many connections to the Supreme Court write up. Sowell’s discussion of how justices can act “actively” or “passively” was clearly exercised by the Supreme Court in Lawrence . While Scalia passively examined the case, Justice Kennedy practiced “judicial activism” in deciding the case. Question: Sowell discussed how many people believe that an issue with Judicial Activism is that Justices will lean on their own morals and values when deciding a case. In a case like this, couldn’t people on either side of the case be at risk of using their own ethics?...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 11/02/2010 for the course LAWSO 151 taught by Professor Hajjar during the Winter '08 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 2

Lawso Discussion Summary 5 - Connor On the Contrary Justice...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online