Romer v. Evans
Majority (6-3) Opinion by Justice Kennedy
20 May 1996
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States,
Washington, D.C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors,
in order that
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 94-1039
ROY ROMER, GOVERNOR OF COLORADO, et al., PETITIONERS v. RICHARD
G. EVANS et al. on writ of certiorari to the supreme court
of Colorado
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court.
One century ago, the first Justice Harlan admonished
this Court that the Constitution "neither knows nor
tolerates classes among citizens." Plessy v. Ferguson, 163
U. S. 537, 559 (1896) (dissenting opinion). Unheeded
then, those words now are understood to state a commitment to the
law's neutrality where the rights of persons are at stake. The Equal
Protection Clause enforces this
principle and today requires us to hold invalid a provision of
Colorado's Constitution.
I
The enactment challenged in this case is an amendment to the
Constitution of the State of Colorado,
adopted in a 1992 statewide referendum. The parties
and the state courts refer to it as "Amendment 2," its
designation when submitted to the voters. The impetus
for the amendment and the contentious campaign that
preceded its adoption came in large part from ordinances
that had been passed in various Colorado municipalities.
For example, the cities of Aspen and Boulder and the
City and County of Denver each had enacted ordinances
which banned discrimination in many transactions and
activities, including housing, employment, education,
public accommodations, and health and welfare services.
Denver Rev. Municipal Code, Art. IV 28-91 to 28-116
(1991); Aspen Municipal Code 13-98 (1977); Boulder
Rev. Code 12-1-1 to 12-1-11 (1987). What gave rise
to the statewide controversy was the protection the
ordinances afforded to persons discriminated against by
reason of their sexual orientation. See Boulder Rev.
Code 12-1-1 (defining "sexual orientation" as "the
choice of sexual partners, i.e., bisexual, homosexual or
heterosexual"); Denver Rev. Municipal Code, Art. IV
28-92 (defining "sexual orientation" as "[t]he status of
an individual as to his or her heterosexuality, homosexuality or
bisexuality"). Amendment 2 repeals these
ordinances to the extent they prohibit discrimination on
the basis of "homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation,
conduct, practices or relationships." Colo. Const., Art. II,
30b.
Yet Amen