Citation network
Bowers Vs. Hardwick
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 30, 1986
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 186 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Bowers v. HardwickSearch
-
U.S. 186 (1986) Bowers v. HardwickSearch
-
d) The fact that homosexual conduct occurs in the privacy of the home does not affect the result. Stanley v. GeorgiaSearch
-
The District Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, relying on Doe v. Commonwealth'sSearch
-
summary affirmance in that case did not require affirmance of the District Court. Relying on our decisions in Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
and Roe v. WadeSearch
-
and, for all intents and purposes, have decided this case. The reach of this line of cases was sketched in Carey v. PopulationSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Services International, 431 U. S. 678 , 431 U. S. 685 (1977). Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510 (1925), and Meyer v. NebraskaSearch
-
Skinner v. OklahomaSearch
-
supra, and Eisenstadt v. BairdSearch
-
Fourteenth Amendment to confer a fundamental individual right to decide whether or not to beget or bear a child. Carey v. PopulationSearch
-
the Court has sought to identify the nature of the rights qualifying for heightened judicial protection. In Palko v. ConnecticutSearch
-
A different description of fundamental liberties appeared in Moore v. EastSearch
-
Id. at 431 U. S. 503 (POWELL, J.). See also Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
the result should be different where the homosexual conduct occurs in the privacy of the home. He relies on Stanley v. GeorgiaSearch
-
See Baker v. WadeSearch
-
Dronenburg v. ZechSearch
-
to give plenary consideration to the merits of this case rather than rely on our earlier action in Doe. See Usery v. TurnerSearch
-
Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSearch
-
U. S. 651 , 415 U. S. 671 (1974). Cf. Hicks v. MirandaSearch
-
decision involving prosecution for private homosexual sodomy under this statute for several decades. See Thompson v. AldredgeSearch
-
as the Court purports to declare, ante at 478 U. S. 191 , than Stanley v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. 557 (1969), was about a fundamental right to watch obscene movies, or Katz v. UnitedSearch
-
Olmstead v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 113 , 410 U. S. 117 (1973), quoting Lochner v. NewSearch
-
Herring v. StateSearch
-
complaint expressly invoked the Ninth Amendment, see App. 6, and he relied heavily before this Court on Griswold v. ConnecticutSearch
-
to determine if the allegations provide for relief on any possible theory. Page 478 U. S. 202 Bramlet v. WilsonSearch
-
Parr v. GreatSearch
-
Due v. TallahasseeSearch
-
Conley v. GibsonSearch
-
Thornburgh v. AmericanSearch
-
a privacy interest with reference to certain decisions that are properly for the individual to make. E.g., Roe v. WadeSearch
-
Pierce v. SocietySearch
-
without regard for the particular activities in which the individuals who occupy them are engaged. E.g., United States v. KaroSearch
-
Payton v. NewSearch
-
Rios v. UnitedSearch
-
While it is true that these cases may be characterized by their connection to protection of the family, see Roberts v. UnitedSearch
-
S. 619 (1984), the Court's conclusion that they extend no further than this boundary ignores the warning in Moore v. EastSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Bowers v. HardwickSearch
-
Doe v. Commonwealth'sSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial