Replies

That being said, I don't know what arguments were raised in Texas (in particular whether a laches defense was among them), but see no constitutional basis for the Supreme Court to overturn this verdict much as I may beieve that, with proper defense, the people should probably have been acquitted.

I agree. Frankly, I see no reason for federal involvement at all.

Many states have repealed these laws on their own, without help, prodding or mandates handed down from on high.

While I would personally oppose repealing this law, I have no problems with the mechanics behind doing so. I have great respect for the self determination of citizens at the State and local level, as this is the fulfillment of our Tenth Amendment.

But a mandate from SCOTUS would REALLY muck things up. IMO, regardless of where a person falls on the issue of homosexual sodomy, involvement by SCOTUS is a decidedly bad thing.

"Frankly, I see no reason for federal involvement at all."

Article III. Section 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution...

Two citizens residing in the State of Texas, brought a complaint to Texas Courts about a Texas law which they believe violates their rights under the Constitution.

The SCOTUS is the mechanism set in place for citizens to do such a thing, once they have exhausted all venues at the State level.