Wow.

[pat]

They explicitly overturned Bowers. They made the decision turn on privacy, rather than equal protection, grounds. Boys and girls, one of the first thing they tell you in 1L Constitutional Law is how much the Supremes just hate to explicitly overrule prior rulings. And the ruling was 6-3 (I expected 5-4) which means if we lost Sandra Day O'Connor (who might retire), it would still stand. (Rhenquist doesn't matter: even if he does step down, no one he's likely to be replaced with would be farther right.)

I can hardly wait to read the opinion for myself.

Comments

My favorite quote from the decision

[cheshyre]

"Bowers was not correct when it was decided, and it is not correct today. It ought not to remain binding precedent. Bowers v. Hardwick should be and now is overruled."

[anisoptera.livejournal.com]

From Bloomberg
"Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with Kennedy that the Texas law must be thrown out. Of those, all but O'Connor also voted to overturn the Bowers decision on grounds that such sex acts are a fundamental right. O'Connor relied on different grounds, saying the Texas law violated homosexuals' equal-protection rights. "

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aeHU8viQWp4w&refer=us