Romer v. Evans
Week 11 — Equal Protection — Rational Basis
Facts
- Colorado amended its state constitution to prohibit any state or local governmental body from enacting protections for persons based on sexual orientation.
- The amendment was primarily targeted at homosexuals.
Issue
Whether Colorado's constitutional amendment prohibiting protections based on sexual orientation served a legitimate government purpose under rational basis review.
Holding
No. The amendment failed even rational basis review and violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Reasoning
- The government must remain open on impartial terms to all those who seek its assistance.
- Harming a politically vulnerable group (gays) is not a legitimate government purpose.
- Because the amendment was rooted in animus toward homosexuals rather than any legitimate interest, it could not satisfy even the deferential rational basis standard.
Notes
- Romer is one of the cases that triggers what is colloquially called rational basis "with bite."
- A bare congressional or State desire to harm or discriminate against a politically unpopular group is not a legitimate government interest.
- Romer is one of several sexual-orientation cases where the Court dodged the level-of-scrutiny question (along with Lawrence, Windsor, and Obergefell).