Limon v. Kansas III
Awesome. “Kansas cannot punish illegal underage sex more severely if it involves homosexual conduct, the state’s highest court ruled unanimously Friday in a case watched by national groups on both sides of the gay rights debate.”
This is particularly poignant. The day after it decided Lawrence v. Texas in June 2003 – when we were all giddy and high on our newfound nationwide freedom – the U.S. Supreme Court, in what seemed to be an afterthought, sent a case back to Kansas in which a teenage boy had received a 17-year jail sentence for underage gay sex with another minor. If it had been heterosexual sex, the guy likely would have gotten probation or, at most, just over a year in jail. The U.S. Supreme Court sent the case back “for further reconsideration in light of Lawrence v. Texas.” In other words: Hint hint. Unfortunately, the Kansas court either didn’t get the hint or blatantly chose to ignore it, because in February 2004, that court upheld the 17-year jail sentence.
Well, finally, justice has been done, because the Kansas Supreme Court has reversed the lower court. Here’s the ruling and here’s a summary.
Took long enough. Justice sometimes does happen, given enough time.
[tags: links]
5 comments
Definitely good news, I am glad that the court finally got in right. I can’t believe that the Kansas A.G. kept the fight up. I know they went to the Kansas Supreme Court after the Kansas Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the state but why would the A.G. defend a law like this? It is absolutely beyond me.
Anyway…hopefully the kid will now be able to live a good life. There are definitely still some challenges ahead for him.
I can only speak for California’s A.G., Bill Lockyer, who believes it’s every’s state’s A.G.’s job to defend every one of a state’s laws to the best of his or her ability. He’s defending California’s anti-marriage-equality law with gusto, even though privately he seems to disagree with it.
No, I wouldn’t want that job, either.
In further good news, Kline’s office has decided not to try to take it back to the U.S. Supreme Court again, so this case it totally, finally over. Kline also issued a statement backpedalling like mad about defending the law. Seems he’s a little embarassed about being so thoroughly spanked with a unanimous decision.
The A.G. in Arizona has to defend the one man- one woman marriage law and he used the procreation argument, which I thought was an attempt for the law to be declared unconstitutional (the A.G. is a Democrat). Unfortunately, the nutty AZ Supreme Court sided with that equally nutty argument. I’m waiting for the case to go to the Supremes- if procreation is the sole reason for marriage then there are a whole bunch of heterosexual marriages that are invalid as well.
Good God, homer: I have been married for 20 1/2 years with no offspring – so is my marriage invalid?
And like steve I hope that the kid will now be able to live a good life.