About Us
ID Bar
Index headline

US Supreme Court's Unequal Protection

LEGALLY: Marriage is a Limited Fundamental, not Absolute Right!

Necessary for Equal Protection from the "Terrible Too's"

US Supreme Court's Fundamentally Wrong &

Unconstitutional Decisions, Corrections & Reverses:

  • Ignored LIFE & LIBERTY Interests: 1857 Slavery, 1895 Segregation,

  • Ignored LIFE & LIBERTY Interests: 1944 Japanese American Internment

  • Ignored LIFE, LIBERTY & PROPERTY Interests: 1973 Abortion,

    Ignored LIFE  & PROPERTY Interests: 2015 Same-Sex Mirage

Considering the right order as in the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights,

specifically in the 5th & 14th Amendments Right Order:

"No person shall be deprived of Life, Liberty or Property without Due Process!"

Property or Liberty interests were misplaced

by the US Supreme Court in front of Life interest

effectively, Liberty Excesses Preferred to Long Life

Costly to Health, Property & Freedom

Missed the Right 14th Equal Protection

Ignored Nature's Biological Laws:

Sodomy=Unsafe, Deadly; Marital Act=Safe!

The CASES: US Supreme Court's Fundamentally Wrong &

Unconstitutional Decisions, Corrections & Reverses:

Slavery Approval: Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) [7,2]

~Holding: Judgment reversed and suit dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

1. Persons of African descent cannot be, nor were ever intended to be, citizens under the U.S. Constitution,

Plaintiff is without standing to file a suit.

2. The Property Clause is only applicable to lands possessed at the time of ratification (1787). As such,

Congress cannot ban slavery in the territories. Missouri Compromise is unconstitutional.

3. Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment prohibits the federal government from freeing slaves brought

into federal territories.

~Answer: 1. SCOTUS did not recognize the equal LIFE or PERSONHOOD of humans of African descent

and their proper right to be US citizens; 2. Put 5th Amendment PROPERTY ahead of 1st & 2nd priority

interests, LIFE & Liberty interests, declaring the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional; & 3. Misconstruing

the 5th Amendment Due Process as virtually only a Property issue, thus ignored both its 1st & 2nd priority

interests, LIFE & Liberty, which might have ended slavery forthwith without and thus preventing the Civil War.

Slavery Superseded: U.S. Constitutional Amendments: XIII, XIV (7/9/1868)

(In particular, SECTION 1 of both XIII & XIV Amendments)

~Constitutional Amendment XIII :

Note: A portion of Article IV, section 2, of the Constitution was superseded by the 13th Amendment.

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall

have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their


Section 2.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

~Constitutional Amendment XIV:

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are

citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce

any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall

any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to

any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers,

counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at

any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives

in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is

denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United

States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation

therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole

number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or

hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an

oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State

legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States,

shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies

thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of

pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But

neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of

insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but

all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Segregation Approval: Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1895) [7,1]

~Holding: The "separate but equal" provision of private services from freeing slaves brought into federal

territories (, but continuing to minimally liberate African Americans from Section 1 of both the XIII & XIV


~Answer: 1. Error not recognizing the equal LIFE or PERSONHOOD of humans of African descent and their

proper right to be US citizens; 2. Continued to put 5th & 14th Amendments' PROPERTY ahead priority

of 1st & 2nd interests, LIFE & Liberty interests, declaring the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional; &

3.Misconstruing the 5th & 14th Amendments Due Process as virtually only a Property issue, again ignoring

both its1st & 2nd priority interests, LIFE & Liberty, and constitutional requirements under the 14th Equal.
Protection Clause.

Segregation Overruled: Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

~Holding: Segregation of students in public schools violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth

Amendment, because separate facilities are inherently unequal. Majority: "Separate is anything but equal!"

Millennia of moral teaching, Life Ordered Liberty~220 Years (1776--1996/2003) Stare Decisis

Precedence 1 Man 1 Woman Marriage Acts Protection: Georgia's Law Banning Oral & Anal Homosexual acts

by homosexuals or heterosexuals SCOTUS 

Sodomy Bans Cont. 220 Years Stare Decisis: Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986)


Sodomy Bans Might Cont.: Romer v. Evans517 U.S. 620 (1996) [6,3]

~Holding: Homosexual or bisexual (LGBT) Deviant Sexual Behavior persons declared a protected IDENTITY

status group under a legal declaration--but not medical health based--interpretation of 14th Amendment

"Equal Protection" under the judiciary fiat Law but not the biological Law of Nature clause

~Answer: SCOTUS, in order to provide 14th Amendment Health as well as Legal Equal Protection to all,

should have remanded, i.e., returned the case back to the Colorado Legislature to rewrite the Colorado law

to make it apply to heterosexuals as well as homosexuals, to rightfully discourage dangerous, life-threatening

homosexual acts whether done by homosexuals or heterosexuals.

~Rational: The Colorado Legislature, to protect general public health interests from the ensuing HIV, HPV,

and other STI or STD financially and medically resource unaffordable and unsustainable epidemic or

pandemic, to satisfy SCOTUS and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, could have amended their

non-discrimination law as follows: anyone, straight, heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual (LGBT) who

performs gay sex acts or relates in LGBT Deviant Sexual Behavior patterns, orientation, conduct, practices

or relationships will not be entitled to have or to claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected

status or claim of discrimination.

Sodomy Bans Struck Down (Bowers v. Hardwick): Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) [6,3]

~Holding: Lawrence explicitly overruled Bowers, holding that it had viewed the liberty interest too narrowly.

The Court held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due

process under the 14th AmendmentLawrence invalidated similar laws throughout the United States that

criminalized sodomy between consenting adults acting in private, whatever the sex of the participants.

~Answer: Holdings of Romer v Evans (1996):& Lawrence v. Texas (2003) too narrowly viewed the 5th &

14th Amendments' life and property interests by exaggerating the liberty interest.

~SCOTUS Re-Invents Segregation, Gender Segregation!

Legally, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively, with respect to gender,

~~Courts Reverted to "separate but equal."

from Plessy v. Ferguson 163 U.S. (1895),

SCOTUS, Please return to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. (1954)

"Separate anything but equal!"

Segregation, Racial or Gender is Unconstitutional!

It denys Gays their limited fundamental if not absolute right to heterosexually reproduce &

contribute to the Real State Interest, the Biological Imperative

the Survival of the Human Species &

Opportunity to attempt to assure the survival of their heterosexual family tree!

Homosexuality license targets gays as a suspect group

condemning them to an early death at 35 to 62,

depending on whether they have the expensive

$400,000 life-time HIV/AIDS treatment

with +30,000 yearly new HIV infected gay males age 13 to 33

(that is mostlyStatutory Rape of the gay boys age 13 to 17)

adding an ever increasing & unsustainable nearly $14 billion health care obligation every year!

$14 billion is
twice the total annual $ 7 Billion Federal Court Budget,

twice the total annual $6,6 Billion US Center for Disease Control Budget, &

nearly half the total 2016 annual $31 Billion US Center for Disease Control Budget!