Question 1: In Bowers, the Court ruled that the Constitution gives no protection to the practice of homosexual sodomy. In the Lawrence case, Justice Kennedy asserts that the real constitutional issue posed by Texas's antisodomy law has nothing to do with specific sexual practices. What does he think the real constitutional issue is? Cite specific language from the decision to support your answer.

Question 2:

a. Justice Kennedy concedes that many people (maybe even a majority) have a deeply ingrained moral aversion to homosexuality. According to Kennedy, why is it improper to base the Court's decision on such moral objections? Cite specific language from the decision to support your answer.

b. According to Kennedy, what should be the basis for the Court's decision? Cite specific language from the decision to support your answer.

Question 3:

a. On what grounds does Scalia criticize the Court's majority for maintaining that the state of Texas has no legitimate interest in prohibiting homosexual sodomy?

b. What, according to Scalia, is the legitimate state interest that justifies prohibiting homosexual sodomy?

Question 4: Scalia accuses the Court's majority of pursuing a political agenda. What is the basis for that claim?

Question 5: Scalia believes that the majority opinion opens the door to the constitutional expansion of gay rights. What specific "right" does he fear that the Court may in the future confer on homosexuals?

Question 6: Do you agree with the Court's decision in Lawrence that private sexual relations among con-senting adults-whether heterosexual or homosexual-should not be a concern of the govern-ment? Or do you agree with Justice Scalia that the government has a legitimate interest in the regulation of morals, so long as there is no specific constitutional prohibition against such regulation? Explain and support your answer.