home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!JUTS!news
- From: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
- Newsgroups: misc.legal
- Subject: Re: Supreme Court and Homosexuality
- Message-ID: <56Re02GR2cOo01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
- Date: 24 Nov 92 01:10:11 GMT
- References: <1992Nov19.232937.25927@Princeton.EDU>
- Sender: netnews@ccc.amdahl.com
- Reply-To: tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (Terry Carroll)
- Organization: Amdahl Corporation
- Lines: 15
-
- In article <1992Nov19.232937.25927@Princeton.EDU>,
- sbgreene@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Steven Greene) writes:
- > Actually, it gets even better (worse?) than that. As Tribe's petition
- > for rehearing pointed out, there was nothing in the record before the
- > Supreme Court that indicated the sex of Hardwick's partner. The Court,
- > of course, knew and made that a major point in its decision. But
- > technically, it had no basis in the record on which to make the
- > distinction between homosexual and heterosexual sodomy.
-
- I'd assume that came out at oral argument.
-
- No pun intended, honest.
-
- Terry Carroll - tjc50@juts.ccc.amdahl.com - 408/992-2152
- The opinions presented above are not necessarily those of a sound mind.
-