Bowers v. Hardwick

Facts

In August 1982, Hardwick was charged with violating the Georgia statute criminalizing sodomy. The charge rested on his committing that act with another adult male in the bedroom of his home. The statute said a person commits sodomy when he performs or submits to any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another. It set a prison term of not less than one nor more than 20 years. After a preliminary hearing, the District Attorney decided not to present the matter to the grand jury unless further evidence developed. Hardwick then sued in federal court. He challenged the statute insofar as it criminalized consensual sodomy. He said he was a practicing homosexual, that the statute, as the defendants administered it, placed him in imminent danger of arrest, and that it violated the Federal Constitution for several reasons. John and Mary Doe also sued, but the lower courts dismissed their claim for lack of standing, and they did not challenge that ruling. The Court said the only claim before it was Hardwick's challenge to the statute as applied to consensual homosexual sodomy. It expressed no opinion on the statute as applied to other acts of sodomy.

Issues

1. Does the Federal Constitution confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy, so that it invalidates the laws of the many States that still make such conduct illegal?
2. Is a law against homosexual sodomy invalid under the Due Process Clause, even without a fundamental right, because its only basis is the presumed belief of a majority of the electorate that the conduct is immoral and unacceptable?

Holding

The Federal Constitution confers no fundamental right on homosexuals to engage in sodomy, so the Georgia statute, as applied to consensual homosexual sodomy, was not invalid on that ground. The Court also was unpersuaded that the majority's moral belief about the conduct was an inadequate basis for the law.