Cuccinelli’s Sodomy Appeal Denied
The 4th Circuit Court has denied the Virginia Attorney General’s office an appeal to a March decision that struck down state sodomy laws. The VA AG’s office, headed by conservative activist Ken Cuccinelli, had filed an appeal en banc to the 4th districts ruling, which would have brought the case before a full 15 judge panel. The District court clerk said the appeal was indeed denied and that “No judge requested a poll,” effectively killing the AG’s appeal.
Greg Nevins, a lawyer with Lambda Legal, said denying an en banc hearing like this is not uncommon. “Trying to get a rehearing en banc is about as much a long shot as trying to get a hearing at the Supreme court, so this was kind of a hail mary pass in of itself.”
Taking this case to the Supreme court would be Cuccinelli’s next step, but Nevins said it’s hard to imagine SCOTUS even accepting it. “To say “hey, the Sodomy law we struck down 10 years ago should be allowed to have some vitality,” I just can’t imagine the Supreme Court being interested in that. I don’t think it would be likely to be successful.
The case in question involved William MacDonald engaging in sex acts with 2 girls aged 16 and 17. Virginia, despite the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence V. Texas decision which allows sex acts in private spaces between consenting adults, had continued to charge individuals with sodomy in cases involving sex with minors, or sex in public. MacDonald challenged his sodomy charge, and the 4th Circuit ruled in his favor, striking down Virginia’s sodomy laws in a 2-1 decision. Cuccinelli filed the for an en banc hearing at the end of March, and many were unsure what this meant for the future of sodomy laws in the commonwealth.
In an opinion written by Judge Robert King, one of the district judges that heard the MacDonald case, he suggests Virginia’s General assembly should be the ones removing the Sodomy law, or re-defining it. “The anti-sodomy provision does not mention the word “minor,”" wrote King, “nor does it remotely suggest that the regulation of sexual relations between adults and children had anything to do with its enactment.”
Nevins agreed with this opinion, saying, beyond the unconstitutionally of sodomy laws, VA’s law is not specific enough to be enforced without conflicting with constitutional precedent. “It’s not a ruling that VA can’t have a sodomy law, but they can’t rely on the old sodomy law which doesn’t require any of those things that might make it a legitimate law, it just says “anyone who has oral or anal sex is a felony.” That dog wont hunt… they need to give up the fight and pass a legitimate law if that’s what they want.”
Attorney General Cuccinelli’s office denied comment through out this story. The office still could attempt to bring the case before the Supreme court.
Though a lower court in India had struck down a long time ban on gay sex in 2009, the country’s highest court reversed the decision earlier this week, making “carnal acts against the order of nature” punishable by jail time. India’s LGBTQ population, considered to be over 17% of the world’s total LGBTQ population, has [...]December 12, 2013
- Cuccinelli Falls 17 Points in Election, Receives Funds from Anti-Gay Groups, October 23, 2013
- OpEd: Rank Republican Dishonesty – Obenshain’s War on Women, October 22, 2013
- Lawyer Fighting VA’s Same-sex Marriage Ban Donated to Cuccinelli Campaign, October 17, 2013
- Prev Hammar: Santorum: GOP “Suicidal” to Embrace Gay Marriage
- Next 2013 Campaign Coverage: 2 Candidates Vie for Democratic Attorney General Seat
- Back to top