From '48 to '68: The Decline of Universal Rights, and the Cultural Ascent of the Latex Left
| Autor | Piero A. Tozzi |
| Páginas | 1-15 |
Página 1
IUS
Doctrina
ISSN2222-9655 Volumen II
From げ48 to げ68: The Decline of Universal Rights, and the Cultural Ascent
of the Latex Left
Piero A. Tozzi
In the 1996 case Romer V. Evans, the United States Supreme Court struck down a
Colorado state constitutional amendment that had prohibited municipalities and local governments
within the state from enacting ordinances grant- ing special treatment to “homosexual persons.”
1
The Court deemed the initiative to have been driven by “animus” toward an identifiable minority
class, i.e., those characterized as having or engaging in “homosexual, lesbian, bisexual orientation,
conduct, practices or relationships,” and thus ran afoul of the Equal Protection Clause found in the
Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Accepting such a declaration at face value,
2
has such a doctrine been equally applied toward
all minority groups who are the target of discernable “animus” visited upon them by legislators or
fellow citizens? Or have favored “minorities” emerged? If so, why is that?
ACCEPTABLE ANIMUS?
The U.S. historian Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., once remarked that anti-Catholicism was “the
deepest held bias in the history of the American people.”
3
How did such an ingrained bias manifest
itself, and are there residual effects of such biasor “animus” in the laws and constitutions of the
various states? If so, would not such enactments be subject to challenge under the holding in
The author would like to particularly thank Gudr un Kugler for posing the questio ns that provoked this
article. The author is indebted to the friends and coll eagues whose insights over the cour se of many
discussion s over the years have germinated in this essay, in particular Dennis Saffran, Eamon Moynihan,
and Gerald Russello.
1
517 U.S. 620 (1996).
2
Justice Antonin Scalia dissented vigorously, noting that any such “animus” amounted to “moral
disapproval of homosexual conduct,” akin t o disapproval the law give s to polygamy, cruelty to animals, and
indeed, under Supreme Court jurispruden ce existing at t he time of the decis ion, acts of sodomy. 517 U.S. at
644 (Scalia, J., disse nting).
3
Quoted in Philip Jenkins: The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice 23 (Oxford 2003).
Not to be outdone, John Hingham described anti-Catholicism as “the most luxuriant, tenacious tradition of
paranoiac agitation in American history.” Id.
Revista de Investigación Jurídica
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba