Posted on 01/10/2005 8:23:28 AM PST by DBeers
Supreme Court Lets Stand Florida's Gay Homosexual Adoption Ban
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear a constitutional challenge to a 1977 Florida law that bans gays and lesbians from adopting children, the only such state law in the nation.
Without comment, the high court declined to consider whether the law, which was adopted at the height of entertainer Anita Bryant's anti-homosexual campaign, unfairly singled out gays and lesbians in violation of their constitutional rights.
The law states, "No person eligible to adopt under this statute may adopt if that person is a homosexual." No other state categorically excludes gays or lesbians from adopting.
The law's sponsor, Florida Sen. Curtis Peterson, said at the time the purpose of the legislation was to send a message to gays and lesbians that "we're really tired of you. We wish you'd go back into the closet."
The Supreme Court issued its last gay rights ruling in 2003, when it struck down a Texas sodomy law and declared that constitutional due process and privacy rights applied to gays in that case.
The Florida law was challenged in 1999 by four gay men, Steven Lofton, Douglas Houghton, Wayne LaRue Smith and Daniel Skahen, who have been raising foster children, but cannot adopt them because of the law.
The lawsuit claimed the law violated the right to equal protection of lesbians and gays who seek to adopt and of the children raised by gays and lesbians who cannot be adopted by those caring for them.
A federal judge in Miami and a U.S. appeals court upheld the law. The Atlanta-based appeals court said the issue of gay adoptions should be decided by the Florida legislature, not by the courts.
Attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union appealed to the Supreme Court. They said whether a state can categorically exclude gays from consideration as adoptive parents represented an important question of federal law.
They said the appeals court disregarded Supreme Court rulings in 2003 and in 1996 that held that disapproval of gay people is not a constitutionally acceptable basis for government action.
They also said the law denied many Florida children permanent families. "This law sacrifices the interests of children," they said. "It is no exaggeration to say that lives may be at stake here; childhoods certainly are."
Attorneys for the Florida Department of Children and Families said the appeal should be denied and that Supreme Court review would be "inappropriate."
They described the law as related to rational state goals. "Florida's interest in placing children with married mothers and fathers has been recognized as legitimate by Florida state courts."
Justice is a sweet thing when served on the unjust!
homosexual agenda pre ping
Hmmmm....sounds like a healthy setback for the liberals.
Tears in the world of the rump wranglers and crack snackers.
Some children were just protected.
time for a little Anita Bryant revival, I think.
Such a great politically incorrect line.
I just hate the ACLU. I'm glad they lost this one.
Basically, they left the issue open so that they can revisit it later, if they feel they can get away with it.
GOOD NEWS PING!
There's nothing more beautiful than the reaffirmation of an American!
Good news for Florida!
Good for Florida, at least one state in the nation has some guts, morals and good sense.
Be on the look-out for more lunacy from Massachusetts. State Sen. Jarrett Barrios who married his boyfriend last year is the most high profile candidate to replace Attorney General Reilly when not if, he should run against Gov. Romney. Barrios is above all, a Gay Activist. He is just the type to follow in the footsteps of the Gay DOJ zealots that went after the Evangelicals in Philly. Barrios won't say it ,but he could use his office to strip the Catholic Church and others who do not recognize Gay Marriage of their Tax-Exempt Status.
Given SCOTUS Texas ruling, this makes absolutely no sense. I'm glad they upheld Florida, but I think the justices read the tea leaves in the last election and are going to lie low for a bit and let the storm die down.
Then they'll be back to their old tricks.
We need a constitutional amendment AND, in the meantime, a congressional restriction on court purview.
What did the individual justices rule/say?
Dang -- this is the ONLY sane state in the union, on this issue?
Dang!
Dan
"We're really tired of you. We wish you'd go back into the closet."
Probably the sentiment of many of us whose tolerance reached its limit a long time ago. I'm so happy that the USSC (for once) decided to leave a state issue with the state.
Now Florida needs to keep people otherwise ineligible for adopting children from being their foster parents as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.