Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 22, 1995 TAG: 9502230012
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A4 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: KNIGHT-RIDDER/TRIBUNE
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
The justices will hear a case from Colorado, where voters amended their state constitution in 1992 to bar all state and local government units from giving homosexual men, lesbians or bisexuals any special protection against discrimination.
State courts ruled the amendment was unconstitutional and prevented it from taking effect, so ordinances or policies prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation remain intact in Denver, Boulder, Aspen, Telluride and Crested Butte and at several state universities.
Now, the Supreme Court will hear Colorado Gov. Roy Romer's appeal to restore the voters' decision, known as Amendment 2. The case is expected to be argued next fall and decided in early 1996.
The legal question is whether Amendment 2 is barred by the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of ``equal protection of the laws.''
Last year the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Amendment 2 violated the U.S. Constitution because it barred homosexuals from ``having an effective voice in governmental affairs ... to seek legislation that would protect them from discrimination based on sexual orientation.''
Romer and the Colorado attorney general, Gale Norton, protested to the U.S. Supreme Court that the ruling creates boundless new rights for minorities, clouds any state or federal attempts to override the social policies of ``lesser governments'' and ``strikes at the heart of voter sovereignty.''
They were joined by Colorado for Family Values, which started the drive for Amendment 2, and by four states - Nebraska, Alabama, Idaho and Virginia - represented by Robert Bork, a former federal judge whose nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected.
by CNB