fbpx
Wikipedia

Sodomy laws in the United States

The United States has inherited sodomy laws which constitutionally outlawed a variety of sexual acts that are deemed illegal, illicit, unlawful or unnatural from the colonial laws in the 17th century.[1] While they often targeted sexual acts between persons of the same sex, many sodomy-related statutes employed definitions broad enough to outlaw certain sexual acts between persons of different sexes, in some cases even including acts between married persons.

Decriminalization of sodomy laws in the United States
  1962
  1971
  1972
  1973
  1974
  1975
  1976
  1977
  1978
  1979
  1980
  1983
  1985
  1992
  1993
  1996
  1997
  1998
  1999
  2001
  2003
Current status of state statutes regarding sodomy and bestiality. All sodomy statues have been invalidated (ruled unconstitutional) by state courts or Lawrence v. Texas, but 12 have not been repealed by their state legislatures.
  No statute banning sodomy
  Statute bans bestiality
  Statute bans same-sex sodomy
  Statute bans sodomy

Through the 20th century, the gradual decriminalization of American sexuality led to the elimination of anti-sodomy laws in most U.S. states. During this time, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of its sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick in 1986. However, in 2003, the Supreme Court changed opinion and reversed the decision with Lawrence v. Texas, invalidating all sodomy laws in the remaining 14 states: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Virginia.

History edit

Up to Lawrence v. Texas edit

Colin Talley argues that the sodomy statutes in colonial America in the 17th century were largely unenforced. The reason he argues is that male-male eroticism did not threaten the social structure or challenge the gendered division of labor or the patriarchal ownership of wealth.[2] There were gay men on General Washington's staff and among the leaders of the new republic,[3] even though in Virginia there was a maximum penalty of death for sodomy. In 1779, Thomas Jefferson tried to reduce the maximum punishment to castration.[4] It was rejected by the Virginia legislature.[5] Justice Anthony Kennedy authoring the majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas stated that American laws targeting same-sex couples did not develop until the last third of the 20th century and also wrote that:[6]

Early American sodomy laws were not directed at homosexuals as such but instead sought to prohibit nonprocreative sexual activity more generally, whether between men and women or men and men. Moreover, early sodomy laws seem not to have been enforced against consenting adults acting in private. Instead, sodomy prosecutions often involved predatory acts against those who could not or did not consent: relations between men and minor girls or boys, between adults involving force, between adults implicating disparity in status, or between men and animals.

In 1950, New York enacted a new statute that divided the crime of sodomy into three degrees. First degree sodomy, with a maximum penalty of twenty years imprisonment, is defined as being done by force as in rape, or an act with an animal or a dead body. Second degree sodomy, with a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment, includes acts per os or per anum by a person over twenty-one years old with a person under eighteen years old. Third degree sodomy, which is a misdemeanor with a maximum of six months in prison, is any act per os or per anum not amounting to first or second degree sodomy. With this new law, New York became the first state to reduce the crime of sodomy from a felony to a misdemeanor. A psychopathic offender law was included with this statute, but covered only sexual acts with minors or with the use of force or threats. In 1950, the Attorney General issued an opinion that the governing sodomy law covered both participants in an act of fellatio, the wording of the law being broader for oral sex than for anal. This opinion would be affirmed by a court interpretation more than a decade later.

In 1965, New York enacted a new statute repealing the crime of sodomy. Due to opposition to repealing the crime of sodomy, New York enacted a new statute at the same time that criminalized sodomy and reduced the maximum penalty from six months to three months, along with excluded married couples. It created the category of sexual misconduct, defined as engaging in sexual intercourse with another person without such person's consent and engaging in sexual conduct with an animal or a dead human body, which became a class A misdemeanor. Since the new statute repealing the crime of sodomy would only be effective on 1 September 1967, it never took effect.

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment or hard labor. In that year, the Model Penal Code (MPC) — developed by the American Law Institute to promote uniformity among the states as they modernized their statutes — struck a compromise that removed consensual sodomy from its criminal code while making it a crime to solicit for sodomy. In 1962, Illinois adopted the recommendations of the Model Penal Code and thus became the first state to remove criminal penalties for consensual sodomy from its criminal code,[7] almost a decade before any other state. Over the years, many of the states that did not repeal their sodomy laws had enacted legislation reducing the penalty. At the time of the Lawrence decision in 2003, the penalty for violating a sodomy law varied widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction among those states retaining their sodomy laws. The harshest penalties were in Idaho, where a person convicted of sodomy could earn a life sentence. Michigan followed, with a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment while repeat offenders got life.[8]

By 2002, 36 states had repealed their sodomy laws or their courts had overturned them. By the time of the 2003 Supreme Court decision, the laws in most states were no longer enforced or were enforced very selectively. The continued existence of these rarely enforced laws on the statute books, however, are often cited as justification for discrimination against gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals.

On June 26, 2003, the United States Supreme Court struck down in the Lawrence v. Texas decision the following jurisdictions (14 US states, 1 US territory and the Uniform Code of Military Justice) that statutes criminalized consensual sodomy: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri (rest of the state outside of the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District), North Carolina, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Texas, United States Armed Forces, Utah and Virginia.

On June 26, 2003, at the time of the Lawrence v. Texas decision, the following jurisdictions (20 US states, 1 US territory and the Uniform Code of Military Justice) had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Texas, United States Armed Forces, Utah and Virginia.

Post Lawrence v. Texas edit

In 2005, Puerto Rico repealed its sodomy law, and in 2006, Missouri repealed its law against "homosexual conduct". In 2013, Montana removed "sexual contact or sexual intercourse between two persons of the same sex" from its definition of deviate sexual conduct, Virginia repealed its lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute, and sodomy was legalized in the US armed forces.

In 2005, basing its decision on Lawrence, the Supreme Court of Virginia in Martin v. Ziherl invalidated § 18.2-344, the Virginia statute making fornication between unmarried persons a crime.[9]

On January 31, 2013, the Senate of Virginia passed a bill repealing § 18.2-345, the lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute enacted in 1877. On February 20, 2013, the Virginia House of Delegates passed the bill by a vote of 62 to 25 votes. On March 20, 2013, Governor Bob McDonnell signed the repeal of the lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute from the Code of Virginia.[10]

On March 12, 2013, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down § 18.2-361, the crimes against nature statute. On March 26, 2013, Attorney General of Virginia Ken Cuccinelli filed a petition to have the case reheard en banc, but the Court denied the request on April 10, 2013, with none of its 15 judges supporting the request.[11] On June 25, Cuccinelli filed a petition for certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision, which was rejected on October 7.[12][13]

On February 7, 2014, the Virginia Senate voted 40-0 in favor of revising the crimes against nature statute to remove the ban on same-sex sexual relationships. On March 6, 2014, the Virginia House of Delegates voted 100-0 in favor of the bill. On April 7, the Governor submitted a slightly different version of the bill. It was enacted by the legislature on April 23, 2014. The law took effect upon passage.[14]

On February 26, 2019, the Utah legislature voted to eliminate the crime of sodomy between consenting adults.[15] Governor Gary Herbert signed the bill into law on March 26, 2019.[16][17]

On May 23, 2019, the Alabama House of Representatives passed, with 101 voting yea and 3 absent, Alabama Senate Bill 320, repealing the ban on "deviate sexual intercourse". On May 28, 2019, the Alabama State Senate passed Alabama Senate Bill 320, with 32 yea and 3 absent. The bill took effect on September 1, 2019.[18][19] Alabama is the southernmost continental state to repeal their sodomy law as of 2023.

On March 18, 2020, the Maryland legislature voted to repeal its sodomy law. The bill became law in May 2020 without the signature of Governor Larry Hogan.[20] While the original text of the bill intended to repeal both the state's sodomy law and unnatural or perverted sexual practice law, amendments from the Maryland Senate urged to solely repeal the sodomy law.[21] On March 31, 2023, the Maryland legislature voted to repeal the unnatural and perverted sexual practice law. The bill was sent to Governor Wes Moore for signature. As he did not veto the bill within 30 days of passage, Moore allowed for the bill to become law without his signature, and the repeal took effect on October 1, 2023.[22]

In March 2022, Idaho repealed its sodomy law.[23] The repeal was a result of a lawsuit brought on in September 2020 by a plaintiff known as John Doe. John Doe alleged his constitutional rights were violated when he was forced to register as a sex offender upon moving to Idaho due to a conviction for "oral sex" two decades prior.[24]

On May 17, 2023, the Minnesota legislature passed an Omnibus Judiciary and Public Safety Bill that included provisions repealing the state's sodomy, adultery, fornication, and abortion laws. On May 19, the Governor signed the bill into law. It took effect the following day.[25]

As of October 1, 2023, the following jurisdictions (12 US states) had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy: Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. These statutes penalties are not enforceable due to the binding precedent of Lawrence v. Texas, meaning consensual sodomy cannot be prosecuted.[26]

Sodomy laws by jurisdiction in the United States of America edit

Below is a table of sodomy laws in the jurisdictions in United States of America and penalties as applicable to the binding precedent of Lawrence v. Texas.[27][28]

Jurisdiction Date statute struck down Date statute repealed Covered by statute
Bestiality Opposite-sex intercourse Same-sex intercourse
Anal sex Married intercourse Oral sex Unmarried intercourse Anal sex Oral sex
  Alabama #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2019   Ala. Code 1975 § 13A-6-220 - 221  
  Alaska N/A #1980
(sodomy)

1971
(crime against nature, unnatural carnal copulation by means of the mouth, or otherwise)

  A.S. 11.61.140
  American Samoa #1979 N/A
  Arizona #2001   A.R.S. § 13-1411  
  Arkansas #2001
(Jegley v. Picado)[29]
#2005

1975
(law reinstated in 1977)

  A.C.A. § 5-14-122
  California #N/A #1976   Cal. Penal Code § 286.5
  Colorado #1972   C. R. S. A. § 18-9-202
  Connecticut #1971   C. G. S. A. § 53a-73a
  Delaware #1973   11 Del.C. § 775
  District of Columbia #1993   D.C. Code § 22–1012.01.
  Florida #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas; unnatural and lascivious act)

1971
(Franklin v. State; crimes against nature)[30]

#1974
(crimes against nature)
  West's F. S. A. 828.126   West's F. S. A. 800.02
  Georgia #1998
(Powell v. Georgia)
#N/A   O.C.G.A. § 16-6-6   O.C.G.A. § 16-6-2
  Guam #N/A #1978   9 GCA § 70.40.  
  Hawaii #1973   HRS § 711-1109.8
  Idaho #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2022

1971
(law reinstated in 1972)

  I.C. § 18-6602
  Illinois #N/A #1962   720 I.L.C.S. 5/12-35
  Indiana #1976   I.C. 35-46-3-14
  Iowa #1978   I.C.A. § 717C.1
  Kansas #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#1969
(opposite-sex intercourse)
  K.S.A. 21-5504     K.S.A. 21-5504
  Kentucky #1992
(Kentucky v. Wasson)
#1974
(opposite-sex intercourse)
  KRS § 525.137   KRS § 510.100
  Louisiana #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#N/A   LSA-R.S. 14:89.3   LSA-R.S. 14:89
  Maine #N/A #1976   17 M.R.S.A. § 1031  
  Maryland #1999
(Williams v. Glendening; anal sex)

1998
(Williams v. Glendening; opposite-sex oral sex and same-sex intercourse)


1990
(Schochet v. State; opposite-sex intercourse)[31]

#2023
(unnatural and perverted sexual practice)[32]

2020
(sodomy)[33]

  MD Code, Criminal Law, § 10-606.
  Massachusetts #1974
(Commonwealth v. Balthazar)[34]
#N/A   M.G.L.A. 272 § 77

M.G.L.A. 272 § 34

  M.G.L.A. 272 § 34

M.G.L.A. 272 § 35

  Michigan #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)

1990
(Michigan Organization for
Human Rights v. Kelley
; applied directly to Wayne County; uncertain whether ruling was binding statewide; reversed in 1992 in People v. Brashier)[35][36]

  M.C.L.A. 750.158   M.C.L.A. 750.158

M.C.L.A. 750.338


M.C.L.A. 750.338a


M.C.L.A. 750.338b

    M.C.L.A. 750.158

M.C.L.A. 750.338


M.C.L.A. 750.338a


M.C.L.A. 750.338b

 
  Minnesota #2001
(Doe v. Ventura)
#2023   M.S.A. § 609.294  
  Mississippi #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#N/A   Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-59
  Missouri #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas; rest of the state outside of the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District)

1999
(State of Missouri v. Cogshell; Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District only)

#2006   V.A.M.S. 566.111  
  Montana #1997
(Gryczan v. State)[37]
#2013
(same-sex intercourse)[38][39]

1974
(opposite-sex intercourse)

  MCA 45-8-218
  Nebraska #N/A #1978   Neb. Rev. St. § 28-1010

Neb. Rev. St. 54-904

  Nevada #1993   N. R. S. 201.455
  New Hampshire #1975   N.H. Rev. Stat. § 644:8g
  New Jersey #1978   N. J. S. A. 4:22-17
  New Mexico #1975   NMSA § 30-9A-3
  New York #1980
(New York v. Onofre; excluded the New York National Guard)
#2000   McKinney's Penal Law § 130.20
  North Carolina #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#N/A   N.C.G.S.A. § 14-177
  Northern Mariana Islands #N/A #1983 #N/A
  North Dakota #1973   NDCC, § 12.1-20-12  
  Ohio #1974   R.C. § 959.21
  Oklahoma #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas; same-sex intercourse)

1988
(Newsom v. State; opposite-sex intercourse)

#N/A   21 Okl. St. Ann. § 886
  Oregon #N/A #1972   O. R. S. § 167.333  
  Pennsylvania #1980
(Commonwealth v. Bonadio)[40]
#1995
(unmarried opposite-sex intercourse and same-sex intercourse)

1972
(married opposite-sex intercourse)

  18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3129
  Puerto Rico #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2006
(opposite-sex anal sex and same-sex anal and oral sex)

1974
(opposite-sex oral sex)

  P.R. Laws tit. 33, § 4773
  Rhode Island #N/A #1998   Gen.Laws 1956, § 11-10-1
  South Carolina #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#N/A   Code 1976 § 16-15-120     Code 1976 § 16-15-120  
  South Dakota #N/A #1977   SDCL § 22-22-42  
  Tennessee #1996
(Campbell v. Sundquist)
#1996
(same-sex intercourse)[41]

1989
(opposite-sex intercourse)[42]

  T. C. A. § 39-14-214
  Texas #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)

1970
(Buchanan v. Batchelor; reversed in 1971 by the United States Supreme Court)

#1974
(opposite-sex anal and oral sex[43])
  V. T. C. A., Penal Code § 21.09     V. T. C. A., Penal Code § 21.06
  United States Armed Forces #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2013
(sodomy)
  10 U.S. Code § 934 - Art. 134.  
  United States of America #N/A
  Utah #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2019

1971
(law reinstated in 1972)

  U.C.A. 1953 § 76-9-301.8  
  Vermont #N/A #1977   13 V.S.A. § 352
  Virgin Islands of the United States #1985   14 V.I.C. § 2062
  Virginia #2003
(Lawrence v. Texas)
#2014
(anal and oral sex)[44]

2013
(lewd and lascivious cohabitation)

  Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-361
  Washington #N/A #1976   West's RCWA 16.52.205
  West Virginia #1976 #N/A
  Wisconsin #1983   W.S.A. 944.18  
  Wyoming #1977   W.S.1977 § 6-4-601

Federal law edit

Sodomy laws in the United States were largely a matter of state rather than federal jurisdiction, except for laws governing the District of Columbia and the U.S. Armed Forces.

District of Columbia edit

In 1801, the 6th United States Congress enacted the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801, a law that continued all criminal laws of Maryland and Virginia, with those of Maryland applying to the portion of the District ceded from Maryland and those of Virginia applying to the portion ceded from Virginia. As a result, in the Maryland-ceded portion, sodomy was punishable with up to seven years' imprisonment for free persons and with the death penalty for enslaved persons, whereas in the Virginia-ceded portion it was punishable between one and ten years' imprisonment for free persons and with the death penalty for enslaved persons. Maryland repealed the death penalty for slaves in 1809 and modified the penalty for all persons to match Virginia's terms of imprisonment. In 1847, the Virginia-ceded portion was given back to Virginia, thus only the Maryland law had effect in the district.[45] In 1871, Congress enacted the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, a law that reorganized the district government and granted it home rule. All existing laws were retained unless and until expressly altered by the new city council. Direct rule was reinstated in 1874. The criminal status of sodomy became ambiguous until 1901, when Congress passed legislation recognizing common law crimes, punishable with up to five years' imprisonment or a fine of $1,000.[45]

In 1935, Congress made it a crime in the district to solicit a person "for the purpose of prostitution, or any other immoral or lewd purpose". In 1948, Congress enacted the first law specific to sodomy in the district, which established a penalty of up to ten years in prison or a fine of up to $1,000, regardless of sexuality. Oral sex was included in the law's application. Also included with this law was a psychopathic offender law and a law "to provide for the treatment of sexual psychopaths".[45] The metropolitan police department eventually had several officers whose sole job was to "check on homosexuals". Multiple court cases dealt with the issue in the following years. Many of the published sodomy and solicitation cases during the 1950s and 1960s reveal clear entrapment policies by the local police, some of which were disallowed by reviewing courts. In 1972, settling the case of Schaefers et al. v. Wilson, the D.C. government announced its intention not to prosecute anyone for private, consensual adult sodomy, an action disputed by the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. The action came as part of a stipulation agreement in a court challenge to the sodomy law brought by four gay men.[45]

In 1973, Congress again granted the district home rule through the District of Columbia Home Rule Act. It provided for a new city council that could pass its own laws. However laws regarding certain topics, such as changes to the criminal code, were restricted until 1977. All laws passed by the D.C. government are subject to a mandatory 30-day "congressional review" by Congress. If they are not blocked, then they become law.[46] In 1981, the D.C. government enacted a law that repealed the sodomy law, as well as other consensual acts, and made the sexual assault laws gender neutral. However, the Congress overturned the new law.[47] A successful legislative repeal of the law followed in 1993. This time, Congress did not interfere.[48][45] In 1995, all references to sodomy were completely removed from the criminal code, and in 2004, the D.C. government repealed an outdated law against fornication.[49]

Military edit

Although the U.S. military discharged soldiers for homosexual acts throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth century, U.S. military law did not expressly prohibit homosexuality or homosexual conduct until February 4, 1921.[50]

On March 1, 1917, the Articles of War of 1916 were implemented. This included a revision of the Articles of War of 1806, the new regulations detail statutes governing U.S. military discipline and justice. Under the category Miscellaneous Crimes and Offences, Article 93 states that any person subject to military law who commits "assault with intent to commit sodomy" shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.[51]

On June 4, 1920, Congress modified Article 93 of the Articles of War of 1916. It was changed to make the act of sodomy itself a crime, separate from the offense of assault with intent to commit sodomy.[51] It went into effect on February 4, 1921.[52]

On May 5, 1950, the Uniform Code of Military Justice was passed by Congress and was signed into law by President Harry S. Truman, and became effective on May 31, 1951. Article 125 forbids sodomy among all military personnel, defining it as "any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offence."[51]

As for the U.S. Armed Forces, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has ruled that the Lawrence v. Texas decision applies to Article 125, severely narrowing the previous ban on sodomy. In both United States v. Stirewalt and United States v. Marcum, the court ruled that the "conduct [consensual sodomy] falls within the liberty interest identified by the Supreme Court,"[53] but went on to say that despite the application of Lawrence to the military, Article 125 can still be upheld in cases where there are "factors unique to the military environment" that would place the conduct "outside any protected liberty interest recognized in Lawrence."[54] Examples of such factors include rape, fraternization, public sexual behavior, or any other factors that would adversely affect good order and discipline. Convictions for consensual sodomy have been overturned in military courts under Lawrence in both United States v. Meno[55] and United States v. Bullock.[56]

Repeal edit

On December 26, 2013, President Barack Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which repealed the Article 125 ban on consensual sodomy.[57]

References edit

  1. ^ Eskridge, William N. (2009). Gaylaw: Challenging the Apartheid of the Closet. Harvard University Press. p. 161. ISBN 9780674036581.
  2. ^ Colin L. Talley, "Gender and male same-sex erotic behavior in British North America in the seventeenth century." Journal of the History of Sexuality (1996): 385-408. online
  3. ^ William E Benemann, Male-Male Intimacy in Early America: Beyond Romantic Friendships (2006).
  4. ^ "Amendment VIII: Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments". Press-pubs.uchicago.edu. from the original on 2014-02-04. Retrieved 2014-03-11.
  5. ^ Patricia S. Ticer. "Virginia". Glapn.org. from the original on 2011-10-04. Retrieved 2011-08-31.
  6. ^ Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003).
  7. ^ Canaday, Margot (September 3, 2008). "We Colonials: Sodomy Laws in America". The Nation. from the original on January 26, 2014. Retrieved February 7, 2014.
  8. ^ "Section 750.158 - Crime against nature or sodomy; penalty, Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.158 | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com.
  9. ^ Google Scholar: Martin v.Ziherl, accessed April 9, 2011
  10. ^ "SB 969". Open:States. 20 February 2013. from the original on December 24, 2013. Retrieved April 13, 2013.
  11. ^ "Ken Cuccinelli Loses Petition To Uphold Anti-Sodomy Law". The Huffington Post. 10 April 2013. from the original on 2013-04-13. Retrieved 2013-04-10.
  12. ^ "Ken Cuccinelli Appeals To Defend Virginia's Anti-Sodomy Law At Supreme Court". Huffington Post. June 25, 2013. from the original on July 2, 2013.
  13. ^ "Court won't hear Va. appeal over sodomy law". USA Today. October 7, 2013. from the original on October 25, 2017.
  14. ^ "LIS > Bill Tracking > SB14 > 2014 session". Leg1.state.va.us. from the original on 2014-03-10. Retrieved 2014-04-25.
  15. ^ "Adultery and sodomy among consenting adults closer to being legal in Utah". 26 February 2019.
  16. ^ Bennett, Craig (March 26, 2019). "Governor Signs Bill Making Adultery and Sodomy Legal Between Consenting Adults". News Talk KDXU.
  17. ^ "Adultery and sodomy among consenting adults are no longer illegal in Utah". 26 March 2019.
  18. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-06-30.
  19. ^ AL SB 320
  20. ^ "Maryland Legislation HB0081". mgaleg.maryland.gov.
  21. ^ "Maryland HB81 | 2020 | Regular Session". LegiScan. Retrieved 2020-09-11.
  22. ^ "Bill to repeal Md. sodomy law to take effect without governor's signature". The Washington Blade. May 19, 2023. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
  23. ^ "Idaho S1325 | 2022 | Regular Session".
  24. ^ Boone, Rebecca (September 24, 2020). . Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 23, 2021.
  25. ^ "SF 2909 Status in the Senate for the 93rd Legislature (2023 - 2024)". www.revisor.mn.gov. Retrieved 2023-05-19.
  26. ^ Sulzberger, A.G. (21 Jan 2012), , The New York Times, nytimes.com, archived from the original on January 22, 2012, retrieved 21 Jan 2012
  27. ^ . Archived from the original on 16 December 2013. Retrieved 30 October 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  28. ^ GLAPN - Case Law: "Case law". from the original on 2011-10-01. Retrieved 17 August 2010.
  29. ^ "Jegley v. Picado 80 S.W.3d 332". Apa.org. from the original on 2013-11-04. Retrieved 2014-03-11.
  30. ^ "800.02 Unnatural and lascivious act. A person who commits any unnatural and lascivious act with another person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree". Archive.flsenate.gov. from the original on 2013-12-04. Retrieved 2013-12-02.
  31. ^ Google Scholar: Stephen Adam Schochet v. State of Maryland, October 9, 1990, accessed March 11, 2011
  32. ^ "Legislation - SB0054". mgaleg.maryland.gov.
  33. ^ "Maryland HB81 | 2020 | Regular Session".
  34. ^ Massachusetts Cases: Commonwealth v. Richard L. Balthazar, 366 Mass. 298 2016-03-03 at the Wayback Machine, accessed March 11, 2011
  35. ^ Michigan Organization for Human Rights v. Kelley, No. 88–815820 CZ slip op. (Mich. 3rd Cir. Ct. July 9, 1990).
  36. ^ Gay Times: Michigan 2011-09-28 at the Wayback Machine
  37. ^ . Thetaskforce.org. 1997-07-04. Archived from the original on 2011-08-04. Retrieved 2011-08-31.
  38. ^ "Montana governor signs bill to strike down obsolete sodomy law – LGBTQ Nation". Lgbtqnation.com. 18 April 2013. from the original on 2013-10-25. Retrieved 2013-10-21.
  39. ^ "LAWS Detailed Bill Information Page". Laws.leg.mt.gov. from the original on 2013-10-22. Retrieved 2013-10-21.
  40. ^
  41. ^ Gonzalez, Tony (November 14, 2016). "Nashville Man Cleared Of 1995 'Homosexual Acts' Conviction, But Cases Linger For 41 Others". wpln.org.
  42. ^ "The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States - Tennessee". Glapn.org. from the original on 2013-04-24. Retrieved 2012-08-05.
  43. ^ "The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States - Texas". Glapn.org. from the original on 2011-10-04. Retrieved 2011-08-31.
  44. ^ Weiner, Rachel (6 March 2014). "Virginia lawmakers repeal sodomy ban". The Washington Post. from the original on 7 March 2014. Retrieved 18 May 2014.
  45. ^ a b c d e Painter, George (2005-01-31). "The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States - District of Columbia". Gay and Lesbian Archives of the Pacific Northwest. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
  46. ^ "Chronology of the District of Columbia's Denial of Democracy". D.C. Vote. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
  47. ^ . Congress.gov. United States Congress. Archived from the original on 2021-06-18. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
  48. ^ Sanchez, Rene (1993-04-08). "D.C. Repeals Sodomy Law". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2022-12-11.
  49. ^ . Human Rights Campaign. 2007-03-08. Archived from the original on 2016-11-15. Retrieved 2013-11-02.
  50. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 5, 2016.
  51. ^ a b c "Key Dates in US Policy on Gay Men and Women in the United States Military". usni.org. from the original on 2014-03-23. Retrieved 2014-03-22.
  52. ^ . October 4, 2008. Archived from the original on 2008-10-04.
  53. ^ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces: U.S. v. Stirewalt, September 29, 2004 May 25, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, accessed August 16, 2010
  54. ^ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces: U.S. v. Marcum, August 23, 2004 April 7, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, accessed August 16, 2010
  55. ^ United States v. Webster M. Smith, (United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals 2008).
  56. ^ United States v. Bullock, (United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals 2004).
  57. ^ Johnson, Chris (December 20, 2013). "Defense bill contains gay-related provisions". Washington Blade. from the original on December 22, 2013. Retrieved December 21, 2013.

Further reading edit

  • Ellen Ann Andersen, Out of the Closets and Into the Courts: Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights Litigation (University of Michigan Press, 2006), ISBN 0-472-11397-6, Ch. 4 "Sodomy Reform from Stonewall to Bowers," Ch. 5 "Sodomy Reform from Bowers to Lawrence", accessed June 2, 2022
  • Carlos A. Ball, From the Closet to the Courtroom: Five LGBT Rights Lawsuits that have Changed our Nation (Beacon Press, 2010), accessed June 2, 2022 ISBN 0-8070-0078-7
  • Patricia A. Cain, Rainbow Rights: The Role of Lawyers and Courts in the Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights Movement (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2000), ISBN 0-8133-2618-4, Ch. 4 "Private Rights: 1950-1985", accessed June 2, 2022
  • William N. Eskridge, Dishonorable Passions: Sodomy Laws in America, 1861-2003 (NY: Viking, 2008), ISBN 0-670-01862-7
  • Leslie Moran, The Homosexual(ity) of Law (NY: Routledge, 1996)
  • Martha C. Nussbaum, From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and Constitutional Law (NY: Oxford University Press, 2010), ISBN 0-19-530531-0
  • Jason Pierceson, Courts, Liberalism, and Rights: Gay Law and Politics in the United States and Canada (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2005), accessed June 2, 2022
  • Daniel R. Pinello, Gay Rights and American Law (Cambridge University Press, 2003), accessed August 26, 2010
  • Jerald Sharum "Controlling Conduct: The Emerging Protection of Sodomy in the Military" in Albany Law Review, vol. 69, No. 4, 2006

External links edit

  • Sodomy Laws in the United States
  • The Sensibilities of Our Forefathers: The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States by George Painter

sodomy, laws, united, states, united, states, inherited, sodomy, laws, which, constitutionally, outlawed, variety, sexual, acts, that, deemed, illegal, illicit, unlawful, unnatural, from, colonial, laws, 17th, century, while, they, often, targeted, sexual, act. The United States has inherited sodomy laws which constitutionally outlawed a variety of sexual acts that are deemed illegal illicit unlawful or unnatural from the colonial laws in the 17th century 1 While they often targeted sexual acts between persons of the same sex many sodomy related statutes employed definitions broad enough to outlaw certain sexual acts between persons of different sexes in some cases even including acts between married persons Decriminalization of sodomy laws in the United States 1962 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1983 1985 1992 1993 1996 1997 1998 1999 2001 2003Current status of state statutes regarding sodomy and bestiality All sodomy statues have been invalidated ruled unconstitutional by state courts or Lawrence v Texas but 12 have not been repealed by their state legislatures No statute banning sodomy Statute bans bestiality Statute bans same sex sodomy Statute bans sodomyThrough the 20th century the gradual decriminalization of American sexuality led to the elimination of anti sodomy laws in most U S states During this time the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of its sodomy laws in Bowers v Hardwick in 1986 However in 2003 the Supreme Court changed opinion and reversed the decision with Lawrence v Texas invalidating all sodomy laws in the remaining 14 states Alabama Florida Idaho Kansas Louisiana Michigan Mississippi Missouri North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Texas Utah and Virginia Contents 1 History 1 1 Up to Lawrence v Texas 1 2 Post Lawrence v Texas 2 Sodomy laws by jurisdiction in the United States of America 2 1 Federal law 2 2 District of Columbia 2 3 Military 2 3 1 Repeal 3 References 4 Further reading 5 External linksHistory editUp to Lawrence v Texas edit Colin Talley argues that the sodomy statutes in colonial America in the 17th century were largely unenforced The reason he argues is that male male eroticism did not threaten the social structure or challenge the gendered division of labor or the patriarchal ownership of wealth 2 There were gay men on General Washington s staff and among the leaders of the new republic 3 even though in Virginia there was a maximum penalty of death for sodomy In 1779 Thomas Jefferson tried to reduce the maximum punishment to castration 4 It was rejected by the Virginia legislature 5 Justice Anthony Kennedy authoring the majority opinion in Lawrence v Texas stated that American laws targeting same sex couples did not develop until the last third of the 20th century and also wrote that 6 Early American sodomy laws were not directed at homosexuals as such but instead sought to prohibit nonprocreative sexual activity more generally whether between men and women or men and men Moreover early sodomy laws seem not to have been enforced against consenting adults acting in private Instead sodomy prosecutions often involved predatory acts against those who could not or did not consent relations between men and minor girls or boys between adults involving force between adults implicating disparity in status or between men and animals In 1950 New York enacted a new statute that divided the crime of sodomy into three degrees First degree sodomy with a maximum penalty of twenty years imprisonment is defined as being done by force as in rape or an act with an animal or a dead body Second degree sodomy with a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment includes acts per os or per anum by a person over twenty one years old with a person under eighteen years old Third degree sodomy which is a misdemeanor with a maximum of six months in prison is any act per os or per anum not amounting to first or second degree sodomy With this new law New York became the first state to reduce the crime of sodomy from a felony to a misdemeanor A psychopathic offender law was included with this statute but covered only sexual acts with minors or with the use of force or threats In 1950 the Attorney General issued an opinion that the governing sodomy law covered both participants in an act of fellatio the wording of the law being broader for oral sex than for anal This opinion would be affirmed by a court interpretation more than a decade later In 1965 New York enacted a new statute repealing the crime of sodomy Due to opposition to repealing the crime of sodomy New York enacted a new statute at the same time that criminalized sodomy and reduced the maximum penalty from six months to three months along with excluded married couples It created the category of sexual misconduct defined as engaging in sexual intercourse with another person without such person s consent and engaging in sexual conduct with an animal or a dead human body which became a class A misdemeanor Since the new statute repealing the crime of sodomy would only be effective on 1 September 1967 it never took effect Prior to 1962 sodomy was a felony in every state punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment or hard labor In that year the Model Penal Code MPC developed by the American Law Institute to promote uniformity among the states as they modernized their statutes struck a compromise that removed consensual sodomy from its criminal code while making it a crime to solicit for sodomy In 1962 Illinois adopted the recommendations of the Model Penal Code and thus became the first state to remove criminal penalties for consensual sodomy from its criminal code 7 almost a decade before any other state Over the years many of the states that did not repeal their sodomy laws had enacted legislation reducing the penalty At the time of the Lawrence decision in 2003 the penalty for violating a sodomy law varied widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction among those states retaining their sodomy laws The harshest penalties were in Idaho where a person convicted of sodomy could earn a life sentence Michigan followed with a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment while repeat offenders got life 8 By 2002 36 states had repealed their sodomy laws or their courts had overturned them By the time of the 2003 Supreme Court decision the laws in most states were no longer enforced or were enforced very selectively The continued existence of these rarely enforced laws on the statute books however are often cited as justification for discrimination against gay men lesbians and bisexuals On June 26 2003 the United States Supreme Court struck down in the Lawrence v Texas decision the following jurisdictions 14 US states 1 US territory and the Uniform Code of Military Justice that statutes criminalized consensual sodomy Alabama Florida Idaho Kansas Louisiana Michigan Mississippi Missouri rest of the state outside of the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District North Carolina Oklahoma Puerto Rico South Carolina Texas United States Armed Forces Utah and Virginia On June 26 2003 at the time of the Lawrence v Texas decision the following jurisdictions 20 US states 1 US territory and the Uniform Code of Military Justice had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy Alabama Arkansas Florida Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana North Carolina Oklahoma Puerto Rico South Carolina Texas United States Armed Forces Utah and Virginia Post Lawrence v Texas edit In 2005 Puerto Rico repealed its sodomy law and in 2006 Missouri repealed its law against homosexual conduct In 2013 Montana removed sexual contact or sexual intercourse between two persons of the same sex from its definition of deviate sexual conduct Virginia repealed its lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute and sodomy was legalized in the US armed forces In 2005 basing its decision on Lawrence the Supreme Court of Virginia in Martin v Ziherl invalidated 18 2 344 the Virginia statute making fornication between unmarried persons a crime 9 On January 31 2013 the Senate of Virginia passed a bill repealing 18 2 345 the lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute enacted in 1877 On February 20 2013 the Virginia House of Delegates passed the bill by a vote of 62 to 25 votes On March 20 2013 Governor Bob McDonnell signed the repeal of the lewd and lascivious cohabitation statute from the Code of Virginia 10 On March 12 2013 a three judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down 18 2 361 the crimes against nature statute On March 26 2013 Attorney General of Virginia Ken Cuccinelli filed a petition to have the case reheard en banc but the Court denied the request on April 10 2013 with none of its 15 judges supporting the request 11 On June 25 Cuccinelli filed a petition for certiorari asking the U S Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decision which was rejected on October 7 12 13 On February 7 2014 the Virginia Senate voted 40 0 in favor of revising the crimes against nature statute to remove the ban on same sex sexual relationships On March 6 2014 the Virginia House of Delegates voted 100 0 in favor of the bill On April 7 the Governor submitted a slightly different version of the bill It was enacted by the legislature on April 23 2014 The law took effect upon passage 14 On February 26 2019 the Utah legislature voted to eliminate the crime of sodomy between consenting adults 15 Governor Gary Herbert signed the bill into law on March 26 2019 16 17 On May 23 2019 the Alabama House of Representatives passed with 101 voting yea and 3 absent Alabama Senate Bill 320 repealing the ban on deviate sexual intercourse On May 28 2019 the Alabama State Senate passed Alabama Senate Bill 320 with 32 yea and 3 absent The bill took effect on September 1 2019 18 19 Alabama is the southernmost continental state to repeal their sodomy law as of 2023 On March 18 2020 the Maryland legislature voted to repeal its sodomy law The bill became law in May 2020 without the signature of Governor Larry Hogan 20 While the original text of the bill intended to repeal both the state s sodomy law and unnatural or perverted sexual practice law amendments from the Maryland Senate urged to solely repeal the sodomy law 21 On March 31 2023 the Maryland legislature voted to repeal the unnatural and perverted sexual practice law The bill was sent to Governor Wes Moore for signature As he did not veto the bill within 30 days of passage Moore allowed for the bill to become law without his signature and the repeal took effect on October 1 2023 22 In March 2022 Idaho repealed its sodomy law 23 The repeal was a result of a lawsuit brought on in September 2020 by a plaintiff known as John Doe John Doe alleged his constitutional rights were violated when he was forced to register as a sex offender upon moving to Idaho due to a conviction for oral sex two decades prior 24 On May 17 2023 the Minnesota legislature passed an Omnibus Judiciary and Public Safety Bill that included provisions repealing the state s sodomy adultery fornication and abortion laws On May 19 the Governor signed the bill into law It took effect the following day 25 As of October 1 2023 the following jurisdictions 12 US states had statutes criminalizing consensual sodomy Florida Georgia Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Massachusetts Michigan Mississippi North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina and Texas These statutes penalties are not enforceable due to the binding precedent of Lawrence v Texas meaning consensual sodomy cannot be prosecuted 26 Florida Fld Stat 800 02 Georgia O C G A 16 6 2 Kansas Kan Stat 21 3505 Kentucky KY Rev Stat 510 100 Louisiana R S 14 89 Massachusetts MGL Ch 272 34 MGL Ch 272 35 2023 repeal bill Michigan MCL 750 158 MCL 750 338 MCL 750 338a MCL 750 338b 2023 partial repeal bill Mississippi Miss Code 97 29 59 North Carolina G S 14 177 Oklahoma 21 886 South Carolina S C Code 16 15 60 Texas Tx Penal Code 21 06 Sodomy laws by jurisdiction in the United States of America editBelow is a table of sodomy laws in the jurisdictions in United States of America and penalties as applicable to the binding precedent of Lawrence v Texas 27 28 Jurisdiction Date statute struck down Date statute repealed Covered by statuteBestiality Opposite sex intercourse Same sex intercourseAnal sex Married intercourse Oral sex Unmarried intercourse Anal sex Oral sex nbsp Alabama 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2019 nbsp Ala Code 1975 13A 6 220 221 nbsp nbsp Alaska N A 1980 sodomy 1971 crime against nature unnatural carnal copulation by means of the mouth or otherwise nbsp A S 11 61 140 nbsp American Samoa 1979 N A nbsp Arizona 2001 nbsp A R S 13 1411 nbsp nbsp Arkansas 2001 Jegley v Picado 29 2005 1975 law reinstated in 1977 nbsp A C A 5 14 122 nbsp California N A 1976 nbsp Cal Penal Code 286 5 nbsp Colorado 1972 nbsp C R S A 18 9 202 nbsp Connecticut 1971 nbsp C G S A 53a 73a nbsp Delaware 1973 nbsp 11 Del C 775 nbsp District of Columbia 1993 nbsp D C Code 22 1012 01 nbsp Florida 2003 Lawrence v Texas unnatural and lascivious act 1971 Franklin v State crimes against nature 30 1974 crimes against nature nbsp West s F S A 828 126 nbsp West s F S A 800 02 nbsp Georgia 1998 Powell v Georgia N A nbsp O C G A 16 6 6 nbsp O C G A 16 6 2 nbsp Guam N A 1978 nbsp 9 GCA 70 40 nbsp nbsp Hawaii 1973 nbsp HRS 711 1109 8 nbsp Idaho 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2022 1971 law reinstated in 1972 nbsp I C 18 6602 nbsp Illinois N A 1962 nbsp 720 I L C S 5 12 35 nbsp Indiana 1976 nbsp I C 35 46 3 14 nbsp Iowa 1978 nbsp I C A 717C 1 nbsp Kansas 2003 Lawrence v Texas 1969 opposite sex intercourse nbsp K S A 21 5504 nbsp nbsp K S A 21 5504 nbsp Kentucky 1992 Kentucky v Wasson 1974 opposite sex intercourse nbsp KRS 525 137 nbsp KRS 510 100 nbsp Louisiana 2003 Lawrence v Texas N A nbsp LSA R S 14 89 3 nbsp LSA R S 14 89 nbsp Maine N A 1976 nbsp 17 M R S A 1031 nbsp nbsp Maryland 1999 Williams v Glendening anal sex 1998 Williams v Glendening opposite sex oral sex and same sex intercourse 1990 Schochet v State opposite sex intercourse 31 2023 unnatural and perverted sexual practice 32 2020 sodomy 33 nbsp MD Code Criminal Law 10 606 nbsp Massachusetts 1974 Commonwealth v Balthazar 34 N A nbsp M G L A 272 77 M G L A 272 34 nbsp M G L A 272 34 M G L A 272 35 nbsp Michigan 2003 Lawrence v Texas 1990 Michigan Organization forHuman Rights v Kelley applied directly to Wayne County uncertain whether ruling was binding statewide reversed in 1992 in People v Brashier 35 36 nbsp M C L A 750 158 nbsp M C L A 750 158 M C L A 750 338 M C L A 750 338a M C L A 750 338b nbsp nbsp M C L A 750 158 M C L A 750 338 M C L A 750 338a M C L A 750 338b nbsp nbsp Minnesota 2001 Doe v Ventura 2023 nbsp M S A 609 294 nbsp nbsp Mississippi 2003 Lawrence v Texas N A nbsp Miss Code Ann 97 29 59 nbsp Missouri 2003 Lawrence v Texas rest of the state outside of the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District 1999 State of Missouri v Cogshell Missouri Court of Appeals Western District only 2006 nbsp V A M S 566 111 nbsp nbsp Montana 1997 Gryczan v State 37 2013 same sex intercourse 38 39 1974 opposite sex intercourse nbsp MCA 45 8 218 nbsp Nebraska N A 1978 nbsp Neb Rev St 28 1010 Neb Rev St 54 904 nbsp Nevada 1993 nbsp N R S 201 455 nbsp New Hampshire 1975 nbsp N H Rev Stat 644 8g nbsp New Jersey 1978 nbsp N J S A 4 22 17 nbsp New Mexico 1975 nbsp NMSA 30 9A 3 nbsp New York 1980 New York v Onofre excluded the New York National Guard 2000 nbsp McKinney s Penal Law 130 20 nbsp North Carolina 2003 Lawrence v Texas N A nbsp N C G S A 14 177 nbsp Northern Mariana Islands N A 1983 N A nbsp North Dakota 1973 nbsp NDCC 12 1 20 12 nbsp nbsp Ohio 1974 nbsp R C 959 21 nbsp Oklahoma 2003 Lawrence v Texas same sex intercourse 1988 Newsom v State opposite sex intercourse N A nbsp 21 Okl St Ann 886 nbsp Oregon N A 1972 nbsp O R S 167 333 nbsp nbsp Pennsylvania 1980 Commonwealth v Bonadio 40 1995 unmarried opposite sex intercourse and same sex intercourse 1972 married opposite sex intercourse nbsp 18 Pa C S A 3129 nbsp Puerto Rico 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2006 opposite sex anal sex and same sex anal and oral sex 1974 opposite sex oral sex nbsp P R Laws tit 33 4773 nbsp Rhode Island N A 1998 nbsp Gen Laws 1956 11 10 1 nbsp South Carolina 2003 Lawrence v Texas N A nbsp Code 1976 16 15 120 nbsp nbsp Code 1976 16 15 120 nbsp nbsp South Dakota N A 1977 nbsp SDCL 22 22 42 nbsp nbsp Tennessee 1996 Campbell v Sundquist 1996 same sex intercourse 41 1989 opposite sex intercourse 42 nbsp T C A 39 14 214 nbsp Texas 2003 Lawrence v Texas 1970 Buchanan v Batchelor reversed in 1971 by the United States Supreme Court 1974 opposite sex anal and oral sex 43 nbsp V T C A Penal Code 21 09 nbsp nbsp V T C A Penal Code 21 06 nbsp United States Armed Forces 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2013 sodomy nbsp 10 U S Code 934 Art 134 nbsp nbsp United States of America N A nbsp Utah 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2019 1971 law reinstated in 1972 nbsp U C A 1953 76 9 301 8 nbsp nbsp Vermont N A 1977 nbsp 13 V S A 352 nbsp Virgin Islands of the United States 1985 nbsp 14 V I C 2062 nbsp Virginia 2003 Lawrence v Texas 2014 anal and oral sex 44 2013 lewd and lascivious cohabitation nbsp Va Code Ann 18 2 361 nbsp Washington N A 1976 nbsp West s RCWA 16 52 205 nbsp West Virginia 1976 N A nbsp Wisconsin 1983 nbsp W S A 944 18 nbsp nbsp Wyoming 1977 nbsp W S 1977 6 4 601Federal law edit Sodomy laws in the United States were largely a matter of state rather than federal jurisdiction except for laws governing the District of Columbia and the U S Armed Forces District of Columbia edit In 1801 the 6th United States Congress enacted the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801 a law that continued all criminal laws of Maryland and Virginia with those of Maryland applying to the portion of the District ceded from Maryland and those of Virginia applying to the portion ceded from Virginia As a result in the Maryland ceded portion sodomy was punishable with up to seven years imprisonment for free persons and with the death penalty for enslaved persons whereas in the Virginia ceded portion it was punishable between one and ten years imprisonment for free persons and with the death penalty for enslaved persons Maryland repealed the death penalty for slaves in 1809 and modified the penalty for all persons to match Virginia s terms of imprisonment In 1847 the Virginia ceded portion was given back to Virginia thus only the Maryland law had effect in the district 45 In 1871 Congress enacted the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 a law that reorganized the district government and granted it home rule All existing laws were retained unless and until expressly altered by the new city council Direct rule was reinstated in 1874 The criminal status of sodomy became ambiguous until 1901 when Congress passed legislation recognizing common law crimes punishable with up to five years imprisonment or a fine of 1 000 45 In 1935 Congress made it a crime in the district to solicit a person for the purpose of prostitution or any other immoral or lewd purpose In 1948 Congress enacted the first law specific to sodomy in the district which established a penalty of up to ten years in prison or a fine of up to 1 000 regardless of sexuality Oral sex was included in the law s application Also included with this law was a psychopathic offender law and a law to provide for the treatment of sexual psychopaths 45 The metropolitan police department eventually had several officers whose sole job was to check on homosexuals Multiple court cases dealt with the issue in the following years Many of the published sodomy and solicitation cases during the 1950s and 1960s reveal clear entrapment policies by the local police some of which were disallowed by reviewing courts In 1972 settling the case of Schaefers et al v Wilson the D C government announced its intention not to prosecute anyone for private consensual adult sodomy an action disputed by the U S Attorney for the District of Columbia The action came as part of a stipulation agreement in a court challenge to the sodomy law brought by four gay men 45 In 1973 Congress again granted the district home rule through the District of Columbia Home Rule Act It provided for a new city council that could pass its own laws However laws regarding certain topics such as changes to the criminal code were restricted until 1977 All laws passed by the D C government are subject to a mandatory 30 day congressional review by Congress If they are not blocked then they become law 46 In 1981 the D C government enacted a law that repealed the sodomy law as well as other consensual acts and made the sexual assault laws gender neutral However the Congress overturned the new law 47 A successful legislative repeal of the law followed in 1993 This time Congress did not interfere 48 45 In 1995 all references to sodomy were completely removed from the criminal code and in 2004 the D C government repealed an outdated law against fornication 49 Military edit Main article Section 839 a of title 10 United States Code 925 Article 125 Although the U S military discharged soldiers for homosexual acts throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth century U S military law did not expressly prohibit homosexuality or homosexual conduct until February 4 1921 50 On March 1 1917 the Articles of War of 1916 were implemented This included a revision of the Articles of War of 1806 the new regulations detail statutes governing U S military discipline and justice Under the category Miscellaneous Crimes and Offences Article 93 states that any person subject to military law who commits assault with intent to commit sodomy shall be punished as a court martial may direct 51 On June 4 1920 Congress modified Article 93 of the Articles of War of 1916 It was changed to make the act of sodomy itself a crime separate from the offense of assault with intent to commit sodomy 51 It went into effect on February 4 1921 52 On May 5 1950 the Uniform Code of Military Justice was passed by Congress and was signed into law by President Harry S Truman and became effective on May 31 1951 Article 125 forbids sodomy among all military personnel defining it as any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy Penetration however slight is sufficient to complete the offence 51 As for the U S Armed Forces the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has ruled that the Lawrence v Texas decision applies to Article 125 severely narrowing the previous ban on sodomy In both United States v Stirewalt and United States v Marcum the court ruled that the conduct consensual sodomy falls within the liberty interest identified by the Supreme Court 53 but went on to say that despite the application of Lawrence to the military Article 125 can still be upheld in cases where there are factors unique to the military environment that would place the conduct outside any protected liberty interest recognized in Lawrence 54 Examples of such factors include rape fraternization public sexual behavior or any other factors that would adversely affect good order and discipline Convictions for consensual sodomy have been overturned in military courts under Lawrence in both United States v Meno 55 and United States v Bullock 56 Repeal edit On December 26 2013 President Barack Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 which repealed the Article 125 ban on consensual sodomy 57 References edit Eskridge William N 2009 Gaylaw Challenging the Apartheid of the Closet Harvard University Press p 161 ISBN 9780674036581 Colin L Talley Gender and male same sex erotic behavior in British North America in the seventeenth century Journal of the History of Sexuality 1996 385 408 online William E Benemann Male Male Intimacy in Early America Beyond Romantic Friendships 2006 Amendment VIII Thomas Jefferson A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments Press pubs uchicago edu Archived from the original on 2014 02 04 Retrieved 2014 03 11 Patricia S Ticer Virginia Glapn org Archived from the original on 2011 10 04 Retrieved 2011 08 31 Lawrence v Texas 539 U S 558 2003 Canaday Margot September 3 2008 We Colonials Sodomy Laws in America The Nation Archived from the original on January 26 2014 Retrieved February 7 2014 Section 750 158 Crime against nature or sodomy penalty Mich Comp Laws 750 158 Casetext Search Citator casetext com Google Scholar Martin v Ziherl accessed April 9 2011 SB 969 Open States 20 February 2013 Archived from the original on December 24 2013 Retrieved April 13 2013 Ken Cuccinelli Loses Petition To Uphold Anti Sodomy Law The Huffington Post 10 April 2013 Archived from the original on 2013 04 13 Retrieved 2013 04 10 Ken Cuccinelli Appeals To Defend Virginia s Anti Sodomy Law At Supreme Court Huffington Post June 25 2013 Archived from the original on July 2 2013 Court won t hear Va appeal over sodomy law USA Today October 7 2013 Archived from the original on October 25 2017 LIS gt Bill Tracking gt SB14 gt 2014 session Leg1 state va us Archived from the original on 2014 03 10 Retrieved 2014 04 25 Adultery and sodomy among consenting adults closer to being legal in Utah 26 February 2019 Bennett Craig March 26 2019 Governor Signs Bill Making Adultery and Sodomy Legal Between Consenting Adults News Talk KDXU Adultery and sodomy among consenting adults are no longer illegal in Utah 26 March 2019 Act 2019 465 SB320 PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2020 06 30 AL SB 320 Maryland Legislation HB0081 mgaleg maryland gov Maryland HB81 2020 Regular Session LegiScan Retrieved 2020 09 11 Bill to repeal Md sodomy law to take effect without governor s signature The Washington Blade May 19 2023 Retrieved May 19 2023 Idaho S1325 2022 Regular Session Boone Rebecca September 24 2020 Idaho man sues over state s anti sodomy law Washington Post Archived from the original on February 23 2021 SF 2909 Status in the Senate for the 93rd Legislature 2023 2024 www revisor mn gov Retrieved 2023 05 19 Sulzberger A G 21 Jan 2012 Kansas Law on Sodomy Stays on Books Despite a Cull The New York Times nytimes com archived from the original on January 22 2012 retrieved 21 Jan 2012 United States Sodomy Laws Archived from the original on 16 December 2013 Retrieved 30 October 2023 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint unfit URL link GLAPN Case Law Case law Archived from the original on 2011 10 01 Retrieved 17 August 2010 Jegley v Picado 80 S W 3d 332 Apa org Archived from the original on 2013 11 04 Retrieved 2014 03 11 800 02 Unnatural and lascivious act A person who commits any unnatural and lascivious act with another person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree Archive flsenate gov Archived from the original on 2013 12 04 Retrieved 2013 12 02 Google Scholar Stephen Adam Schochet v State of Maryland October 9 1990 accessed March 11 2011 Legislation SB0054 mgaleg maryland gov Maryland HB81 2020 Regular Session Massachusetts Cases Commonwealth v Richard L Balthazar 366 Mass 298 Archived 2016 03 03 at the Wayback Machine accessed March 11 2011 Michigan Organization for Human Rights v Kelley No 88 815820 CZ slip op Mich 3rd Cir Ct July 9 1990 Gay Times Michigan Archived 2011 09 28 at the Wayback Machine Montana Kills Sodomy Law Thetaskforce org 1997 07 04 Archived from the original on 2011 08 04 Retrieved 2011 08 31 Montana governor signs bill to strike down obsolete sodomy law LGBTQ Nation Lgbtqnation com 18 April 2013 Archived from the original on 2013 10 25 Retrieved 2013 10 21 LAWS Detailed Bill Information Page Laws leg mt gov Archived from the original on 2013 10 22 Retrieved 2013 10 21 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Appellant v Michael BONADIO Patrick Gagliano Shane Wimbel and Dawn Delight a k a Mildred I Kannitz Appellees Gonzalez Tony November 14 2016 Nashville Man Cleared Of 1995 Homosexual Acts Conviction But Cases Linger For 41 Others wpln org The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States Tennessee Glapn org Archived from the original on 2013 04 24 Retrieved 2012 08 05 The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States Texas Glapn org Archived from the original on 2011 10 04 Retrieved 2011 08 31 Weiner Rachel 6 March 2014 Virginia lawmakers repeal sodomy ban The Washington Post Archived from the original on 7 March 2014 Retrieved 18 May 2014 a b c d e Painter George 2005 01 31 The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States District of Columbia Gay and Lesbian Archives of the Pacific Northwest Retrieved 2022 12 11 Chronology of the District of Columbia s Denial of Democracy D C Vote Retrieved 2022 12 11 H Res 208 A resolution disapproving the action of the District of Columbia Council in approving the District of Columbia Sexual Assault Reform Act of 1981 Congress gov United States Congress Archived from the original on 2021 06 18 Retrieved 2022 12 11 Sanchez Rene 1993 04 08 D C Repeals Sodomy Law The Washington Post Retrieved 2022 12 11 D C Sodomy Law Human Rights Campaign 2007 03 08 Archived from the original on 2016 11 15 Retrieved 2013 11 02 United States PDF Archived from the original PDF on February 5 2016 a b c Key Dates in US Policy on Gay Men and Women in the United States Military usni org Archived from the original on 2014 03 23 Retrieved 2014 03 22 HyperWar The Articles of War Approved June 4 1920 October 4 2008 Archived from the original on 2008 10 04 U S Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces U S v Stirewalt September 29 2004 Archived May 25 2010 at the Wayback Machine accessed August 16 2010 U S Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces U S v Marcum August 23 2004 Archived April 7 2010 at the Wayback Machine accessed August 16 2010 United States v Webster M Smith USCG CMG0224 United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals 2008 United States v Bullock Army 20030534 United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals 2004 Johnson Chris December 20 2013 Defense bill contains gay related provisions Washington Blade Archived from the original on December 22 2013 Retrieved December 21 2013 Further reading editEllen Ann Andersen Out of the Closets and Into the Courts Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights Litigation University of Michigan Press 2006 ISBN 0 472 11397 6 Ch 4 Sodomy Reform from Stonewall to Bowers Ch 5 Sodomy Reform from Bowers to Lawrence accessed June 2 2022 Carlos A Ball From the Closet to the Courtroom Five LGBT Rights Lawsuits that have Changed our Nation Beacon Press 2010 accessed June 2 2022 ISBN 0 8070 0078 7 Patricia A Cain Rainbow Rights The Role of Lawyers and Courts in the Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights Movement Boulder CO Westview Press 2000 ISBN 0 8133 2618 4 Ch 4 Private Rights 1950 1985 accessed June 2 2022 William N Eskridge Dishonorable Passions Sodomy Laws in America 1861 2003 NY Viking 2008 ISBN 0 670 01862 7 Leslie Moran The Homosexual ity of Law NY Routledge 1996 Martha C Nussbaum From Disgust to Humanity Sexual Orientation and Constitutional Law NY Oxford University Press 2010 ISBN 0 19 530531 0 Jason Pierceson Courts Liberalism and Rights Gay Law and Politics in the United States and Canada Philadelphia Temple University Press 2005 accessed June 2 2022 Daniel R Pinello Gay Rights and American Law Cambridge University Press 2003 accessed August 26 2010 Jerald Sharum Controlling Conduct The Emerging Protection of Sodomy in the Military in Albany Law Review vol 69 No 4 2006External links editSodomy Laws in the United States The Sensibilities of Our Forefathers The History of Sodomy Laws in the United States by George Painter Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Sodomy laws in the United States amp oldid 1199662300, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.