Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJones, Andrew
dc.date2021-11-25T13:36:31.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T12:29:54Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T12:29:54Z
dc.date.issued2015-10-02T08:16:12-07:00
dc.identifierylpr/vol3/iss1/14
dc.identifier.contextkey7669781
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/17150
dc.description.abstractIn recent years, some courts have concluded that the constitutional rights of privacy and equal protection unequivocally protect homosexual conduct between consenting adults. Other court opinions, however, have relied on the traditional legal and social condemnation of homosexuality to deny protection to homosexual conduct, especially by members of the military. In Dronenburg v. Zech, for example, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected privacy and equal protection challenges to a Navy regulation prohibiting homosexual conduct, including private consensual activity. Judge Bork, writing the opinion of the panel designated to hear the case, refused to find a right of privacy in private homosexual conduct between consenting adults, and upheld the challenged Navy regulation as bearing a rational relationship to legitimate governmental interests.
dc.titleDronenburg v. Zech: Judicial Restraint or Judicial Prejudice?
dc.source.journaltitleYale Law & Policy Review
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T12:29:54Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylpr/vol3/iss1/14
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1050&context=ylpr&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
17_3YaleL_PolyRev245_1984_1985_.pdf
Size:
1.140Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record