Sex Appealed: Was the U.S. Supreme Court Fooled?
When Deputy Joseph Richard Quinn and three other veteran Harris County, Texas, sheriff's deputies with guns drawn, burst into an apartment the night of September 17, 1998, searching for a black male with a gun, their shocking discovery in the back bedroom triggered a chain of events resulting in a 2003 U. S. Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas-that state laws criminalizing consensual, adult sodomy are unconstitutional. The landmark Lawrence ruling is the trigger event kicking away roadblocks to gay marriage. Lawrence remains in headlines today, in a larger cultural war, over adoption, employee benefits, the military's Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell policy, and related issues of judicial activism. In the Houston courthouse where Judge Law presided, rumors circulated that participants invited arrest in a prearranged setup to test the constitutionality of Texas' sodomy statute. The defendants and their attorneys consistently deny that the arrests were manufactured for the purpose of litigation. The Supreme Court based its historic decision on right to privacy. But if rumors of invited arrest are true, there was no right to privacy, and America's highest court may never have heard the case, or may have decided it differently. Was the U. S. Supreme Court fooled big time by a choreographed case? Judge Law, a former journalist, decided to investigate. Lawrence passed through her court shortly before she took office. Join Judge Law as she dusts off her journalist skills to unravel the case, interviewing everyone. Was Lawrence prearranged? Absolutely yes, said one Texas appeals-court justice who ruled on Lawrence. Even the non-attorney justice of the peace in the lower court where the case began has lingering concerns about inconsistencies in the arrest events. Based on her investigation, Judge Law believes the case was a setup. You be the judge.