When most people hear the the term “Civil Rights” they more often than not automatically think about Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and Rosa Parks and their roles in the fight for African American rights the 1950s and 60s. What they do not usually think about are the rights of homosexuals in Colorado. Romer v. Evans was a case that was argued in 1995 and then decided on in 1996. The premise of this case was that there was an amendment to the Colorado Constitution that was adopted in 1992 and was referred to as “Amendment 2”. This amendment directly states that: “No Protected Status Based on Homosexual, Lesbian or Bisexual Orientation. Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments, nor any of its agencies, political subdivisions, municipalities or school districts, shall enact, adopt or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance or policy whereby homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships shall constitute or otherwise be the basis of or entitle any person or class of persons to have or claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim of discrimination. This Section of the Constitution shall be in all respects self-executing.”^[1] This states that those who are of homosexual and bisexual orientation should not receive special protection under the law and was passed by a state wide referendum. This was argued that it was considered unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates the Equal Protection Clause and was confirmed by the Supreme court of Colorado. It was then was taken to the Supreme Court by Governor Roy Romer even though he did not agree with Amendment Two he was forced to defend it because he was the Governor of Colorado. 

     This was a very hard time for gay rights in America. AIDS serves as perfect example of this because a large majority of the ignorant population believed that AIDS was caused by homosexual men which was not true at all. Sure it was prevalent in the gay community but that was not the only group that it effected. In the late 1989 my grandmother lost one of her sons Bill to cancer and when this happened she received much sympathy from everyone. then two years later she lost another son John. When John passed it was a completely different story altogether. This was because John was gay and he had contracted HIV which soon developed into AIDS. After Johns death grandmother did not  receive the same sympathy that she had with Bill. She had received so little that it was almost taboo to even brooch the subject. My uncle was a very funny and charismatic person and he was discriminated till the day he died and my grandmother felt this discrimination after his death because of the way he had died. It’s not fair that my grandmother received this cold reception from everyone. It wasn’t right at all we are all people and we are all must be protected under the Equal Protection Clause.    

     When Romer v. Evans was taken to the Supreme Court it was argued on the side of the petitioner by Timothy Tymkovich exactly what the amendment says is that no one under the government of Colorado can give special protection to homosexuals and bisexuals who have been discriminated by any means be it going to a library or applying for a job.^[2]  When this is taken for face value it seems like it is okay because it makes it so homosexuals can not be discriminated but what it really means is that it singles out homosexuals and does not add gender, religion or race into the conversation and these are specially protected for example affirmative action. Everyone must have protection when they are being discriminated no exception. And many people today take this for granted.^[3] For the side of the Respondent was represented by Jean Dubofsky who argues that there are laws that apply to everybody and those laws are called laws of general applicability. She states that Amendment Two would take this general applicability away form those in the gay community.^[4]  

     In the dissenting opinion Justice Scalia states that those who brought the case to the Supreme Court did not ask to overrule Bowers v. Hardwick which was decided ten years earlier. Bowers v. Hardwick stated that according to the Constitution it does not prohibit making it illegal to be a homosexual. For the respondents did not to try to get Bowers v. Hardwick overruled is quite interesting. Perhaps they did not want to ask for what they figured they could not get.  Justice Scalia also states that Amendment Two was very hostile towards homosexuality but he thinks that doesn't matter because it is the majority culture of the time.^[5]

     In the majority opinion which was written by Justice Kennedy stated that the majority could not find a reason for this amendment to be in effect in Colorado. It also states that it directly set apart homosexuals and made them separate and unequal to everyone one else.^[6] The most important part of the Amendment was the part that it outlawed a group of people from claiming violation of the 14th Amendment or any Civil Rights laws.  This was deemed by the Court to be a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.  This case was very confusing at times but after reading it and understanding it better it all makes sense and I fully agree with the courts decision to affirm this case. 

Footnotes

1. ROY ROMER, GOVERNOR OF COLORADO, v. RICHARD G. EVANS http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/romer.html ▲
2. Romer v. Evans - Oral Argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039/argument ▲
3. Romer v. Evans - Opinion Announcement http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039/opinion ▲
4. Romer v. Evans - Opinion Announcement http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039/opinion ▲
5. Romer v. Evans - Oral Argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039/argument ▲
6. Romer v. Evans - Oral Argument http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_1039/argument ▲