Opinion ID: 2011334
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: The Factors Applicable to Determining Suspect and Quasi-Suspect Class Status

Text: Unlike Padula, the three other federal circuit court cases that withheld special recognition for homosexuals under the equal protection clause did not rely exclusively on Hardwick; they also applied the factors the Supreme Court has used to ascertain suspect and quasi-suspect classes. I address these factors separately. 1. History of Purposeful Discrimination The first issue is whether homosexuals as a group have suffered a history of purposeful discrimination. See supra note 41. In dissenting from the denial of certiorari in Rowland, 470 U.S. at 1014, 105 S.Ct. at 1377, Justice Brennan remarked that homosexuals have historically been the object of pernicious and sustained hostility, and it is fair to say that discrimination against homosexuals is `likely ... to reflect deep-seated prejudice rather than ... rationality.' See High Tech Gays, 895 F.2d at 573 (homosexuals have suffered a history of discrimination); Ben-Shalom, 881 F.2d at 465 (Homosexuals have suffered a history of discrimination and still do, though possibly now in less degree.); Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati v. Cincinnati, 860 F.Supp. 417, 435 (S.D. Ohio 1994) (gays and lesbians have suffered a history of invidious discrimination based on their sexual orientation). Indeed, [b]eing identified with homosexuality has been the basis of refusals to hire, the ruin of careers, undesirable military discharges, denials of occupational licenses, denials of the right to adopt, to the custody of children and visitation rights, denials of national security clearances and denials of the right to enter the country. Elvia R. Arriola, Sexual Identity and the Constitution: Homosexual Persons as a Discrete and Insular Minority, 10 WOMEN'S RTS.L.REP. 143, 157 (1988) (footnotes omitted). Judge Norris has summarized: Discrimination against homosexuals has been pervasive in both the public and the private sectors. Legislative bodies have excluded homosexuals from certain jobs and schools, and have prevented homosexual[] marriage. In the private sphere, homosexuals continue to face discrimination in jobs, housing and churches. See generally Note, An Argument for the Application of Equal Protection Heightened Scrutiny to Classifications Based on Homosexuality, 57 S.Cal.L.Rev. 797, 824-25 (1984) (documenting the history of discrimination). Moreover, reports of violence against homosexuals have become commonplace in our society. In sum, the discrimination faced by homosexuals is plainly no less pernicious or intense than the discrimination faced by other groups already treated as suspect classes, such as aliens or people of a particular national origin. See, e.g. Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 440, 105 S.Ct. at 3254.... Watkins, 875 F.2d at 724 (en banc) (Norris, J. concurring). I am satisfied on the basis of these judicial observations that no judge could reasonably conclude as a matter of law, for purposes of summary judgment, that homosexuals have not been the objects of purposeful discrimination. 2. Deep-Seated Prejudice Causing Inaccurate Stereotypes That Do Not Reflect Class Members' Abilities Second, we must consider whether gays and lesbians have been targets for so much prejudice that they are often presented as inaccurate stereotypes that do not truly reflect their abilities. [48] See supra note 42. The danger from such stereotyping is not only its unfair assault on feelings but, more significantly, its prejudicial impact on rights and opportunities: inaccurate stereotyping typically withholds recognition of one's capacity to be a productive member of society. See Frontiero, 411 U.S. at 686, 93 S.Ct. at 1770; Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, 860 F.Supp. at 437; see also LAURENCE H. TRIBE, AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 1616 (2d ed. 1988) (in contrast with a characteristic like mental retardation, homosexuality bears no relation at all to the individual's ability to contribute fully to society); Harris M. Miller, II, Note, An Argument for the Application of Equal Protection Heightened Scrutiny to Classifications Based on Homosexuality, 57 S.CAL.L.REV. 797, 814 (1984). A commonly advanced stereotype of gays and lesbians, for example, suggests that they are sexually promiscuous and do not want to settle down in long-term, committed relationships to raise families. See JUDITH A. BAER, EQUALITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION: RECLAIMING THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT 226-28 (1983); ALLEN P. BELL & MARTIN S. WEINBERG, HOMOSEXUALITIES: A STUDY OF DIVERSITY AMONG MEN AND WOMAN 81 (1978); ALBERT D. KLASSEN, ET AL., SEX AND MORALITY IN THE U.S. 171-73, 179-83 (1989) (many believe that homosexuals are dangerous, wanting to seduce children and colleagues). And yet there is powerful evidence to the contrary: Approximately three million gay men and lesbians in the United States are parents, and between eight and ten million children are raised in gay or lesbian households. Sexual Orientation and the Law, 102 HARV.L.REV., at 1629 (citing ABA Annual Meeting Provides Forum for Family Law Experts, 13 Fam.L.Rep. (BNA) 1512, 1513 (Aug. 25, 1987)). This promiscuity stereotype obviously contributes to undermining serious consideration of legitimating same-sex marriages. Viewing the record in the light most favorable to appellants, as we must, I cannot say as a matter of law that gays and lesbians are not the victims of inaccurate stereotyping. 3. Immutability There is a third question: whether homosexuals can be defined, as a class, by an immutable trait that is beyond a class member's control. This inquiry is important because a characterization that is not within [a person's] control, such as race, gender, and illegitimacy, and that bears no relation to the individual's ability to participate in and contribute to society, Lucas, 427 U.S. at 505, 96 S.Ct. at 2762, should not readily serve to justify discrimination by the state. See Frontiero, 411 U.S. at 686-87, 93 S.Ct. at 1770-71. The degree to which an individual controls, or cannot avoid, the acquisition of the defining trait, and the relative ease or difficulty with which a trait can be changed, are relevant to whether a classification is suspect or quasi-suspect because this inquiry is one way of asking whether someone, rather than being victimized, has voluntarily joined a persecuted group and thereby invited the discrimination. See Plyler, 457 U.S. at 216-17 n. 14, 102 S.Ct. 2394 n. 14 (legislation imposing special disabilities upon groups disfavored by virtue of circumstances beyond their control suggests the kind of `class or caste' treatment that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to abolish (emphasis added)). Although the Supreme Court has focused on immutability in a number of cases, see supra note 44, it has never held that only classes with immutable traits can be deemed suspect. Watkins, 875 F.2d at 725 (Norris, J., concurring); see also Miller, supra, at 813. Indeed, on occasion the Court has referred more broadly, to whether members of the class exhibit obvious, immutable, or distinguishing characteristics that define them as a discrete group, Lyng v. Castillo, 477 U.S. 635, 638, 106 S.Ct. 2727, 2729, 91 L.Ed.2d 527 (1986). On the other hand, I am aware of no Supreme Court decision in which a suspect class has not had an immutable characteristic: race, alienage, national origin. See supra notes 35, 36, and 37. Furthermore, the classes specifically deemed quasi-suspect have reflected immutability as well: gender, illegitimacy. See supra notes 38 and 39. In light of this case law and the long-standing public policy reflected in the marriage statute, I would be hard pressed to say that same-sex couples belonged to a suspect or quasi-suspect class for equal protection purposes if sexual orientation were not virtually immutable. If homosexuality has a genetic origin, like race or gender, any courtaware of the history of purposeful discrimination against homosexualswould have to be sympathetic to arguments that any statute forbidding same-sex marriage should be subject to strict, or at least intermediate, scrutiny, with the result that the District must show a compelling, or at least a substantial, governmental interest in forbidding homosexuals to marry one another. Presumably, the same would hold true if sexual orientation were substantially determined by parental hormonal influences. If sexual orientation, however, were entirely a learned, and thus psychological, phenomenonand were subject to change through a program of predictably successful, and safe, therapythen the statute limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, reflecting traditional values, arguably would be reviewable under the rational basis test, unless the other factors relevant to determining suspect or quasi-suspect classes, when taken together, would compel more rigorous scrutiny. Cf. Plyler, 457 U.S. at 219 n. 19 & 220, 102 S.Ct. at 2396 n. 19 & 2396 (adult illegal aliens not a suspect class; undocumented status is not an absolutely immutable characteristic since it is the product of conscious, indeed unlawful, action). There is no scientific consensus about the origin of sexual orientation, although much has been learned quite recently. There is substantial literature to the effect that sexual orientation is formed at an early age, has a genetic or hormonal basis, and is highly resistant to change once established. [49] One study buttresses its finding that homosexuality is a deep-seated, probably biologically based, virtually unchangeable condition by comparing it with bisexuality, which was found to result, to some extent, from learning and social experiences. [50] Still other, mostly older studies suggest that homosexual orientation is probably a result of hormonal predispositions interacting with social and environmental factors. [51] Finally, in contrast with most of the recent scientific opinion, some studies suggest that, whatever its source, homosexual orientation is probably culturally determined [52] and, perhaps, can be changed through religious conversion or, with varying degrees of success, through sustained personal commitment and intensive shock aversion therapy or other unusual treatments. [53] Several courts, citing research before the most recent genetic studies, see supra note 49, have taken a middle position, concluding that the source of sexual orientation is still inadequately understood and is thought to be a combination of genetic and environmental influences. Opinion of the Justices, 129 N.H. 290, 530 A.2d 21, 25 (1987); see Baker v. Wade, 553 F.Supp. 1121, 1129 (N.D.Tex.1982) (same). Whatever the answers are to questions about the origins of sexual orientation and about the kinds of efforts required to prevent or change homosexual orientation (if possible at all), there is substantial authority to the effect that any effort to change homosexual orientation, once in place, requires traumatic, perhaps even emotionally self-destructive, work toward that end. A 1981 study published by the Alfred C. Kinsey Institute for Sex Research concluded by saying: Homosexuals, in particular, cannot be dismissed as persons who simply refuse to conform. There is no reason to think it would be any easier for homosexual men or women to reverse their sexual orientation than it would be for heterosexual readers to become predominantly or exclusively homosexual. ALAN P. BELL, ET AL., SEXUAL PREFERENCE: ITS DEVELOPMENT IN MEN AND WOMEN 222 (1981). Plainly, the very idea of equal protection of the laws stands squarely in the way of any argument that a gay or lesbian is obliged to make what could be an emotionally destructive effort to change sexual orientation rather than receiving constitutional protection of his or her sexual persona as is. See Watkins, 875 F.2d at 725-26 (Norris, J., concurring). [54] It is interesting to note that a federal district court recently has had a full-blown evidentiary hearing on the nature and causes of homosexuality. As a result, the court declared homosexuals and bisexuals a quasi-suspect class and concluded, on the basis of substantial expert testimony, that homo-, hetero-, and bisexual orientation is a characteristic beyond the control of the individual. Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, 860 F.Supp. at 437. More specifically, said the court, sexual orientation is set in at a very early age-3 to 5 yearsand is not only involuntary, but is unamenable to change. Id. at 426. At the very least, therefore, I cannot say as a matter of law that homosexuality is not immutable, as that concept is to be understood in equal protection analysis. See supra notes 49, 50, and 53. [55] 4. Political Powerlessness Finally, there is the question drawn directly from Carolene Products: whether gays and lesbians are a politically powerless minority. See supra note 45. This issue, like immutability, focuses on the power of the putative suspect or quasi-suspect class to avoid discrimination without help of the court. See Rodriguez, 411 U.S. at 28, 93 S.Ct. at 1294 (whether class is relegated to such a position of political powerlessness as to command extraordinary protection from the majoritarian political process). Political power, however, is measured not only by the extent to which a minority group, for example, is represented in legislative bodies, see Frontiero, 411 U.S. at 686 n. 17, 93 S.Ct. at 1770 n. 17, but also, more subtly, by the extent to which deep-seated prejudice prevents the group's full participation in the political process, see Plyler, 457 U.S. at 216-17 n. 14, 102 S.Ct. at 2394 n. 14. One writer indicated almost fifteen years ago that the gay rights movement is gaining strength in certain parts of the country, and its increasing momentum will likely mobilize the homosexual vote. Homosexuals' Right to Marry, 128 U.PA.L.REV. at 204. This writer also noted that in areas with large gay populations, avowed homosexuals are beginning to run for public office, and some have even been victorious in city elections. Id. The conclusion, nonetheless, is that homosexuals are still relatively powerless as a political group. Id.; see generally Kevin A. Zambrowicz, Comment, To Love And Honor All The Days Of Your Life: A Constitutional Right to Same-Sex Marriage, 43 CATH. U.L.REV. 907, 938-39 (1994). Measuring the political power of gays and lesbians is further complicated because the stigma of homosexuality has caused many to conceal their difference and thus to hide part of their identities from the rest of society. BAER, EQUALITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION at 226. Prejudice has prevented some homosexuals from coming out of the closet and joining gay rights organizations that can increase their political power. One commentator summarized: Prejudice effectively silences homosexuals, and renders them unable to counter and remedy invidious government discrimination caused by that prejudice. Public officials sympathetic to the plight of homosexuals, or themselves homosexual, are also silenced by fear of damage to their political futures. John C. Hayes, The Tradition of Prejudice Versus the Principle of Equality: Homosexuals and Heightened Equal Protection Scrutiny after Bowers v. Hardwick, 31 B.C.L.REV. 375, 461 (1990) (footnote omitted). Professor Bruce A. Ackerman has addressed the relative political powerlessness of homosexuals when compared with Carolene Products' most protected discrete and insular minority: [C]ompare the problem faced by black political organizers with the one confronting organizers of the homosexual community. As a member of an anonymous group, each homosexual can seek to minimize the personal harm due to prejudice by keeping his or her sexual preference a tightly held secret. Although this is hardly a fully satisfactory response, secrecy does enable homosexuals to exit from prejudice in a way that blacks cannot. This means that a homosexual group must confront an organizational problem that does not arise for its black counterpart: somehow the group must induce each anonymous homosexual to reveal his or her sexual preference to the larger public and to bear the private costs this public declaration may involve. Although some, perhaps many, homosexuals may be willing to pay this price, the fact that each must individually choose to pay it means that this anonymous group is less likely to be politically efficacious than is an otherwise comparable but discrete minority. For, by definition, discrete groups do not have to convince their constituents to come out of the closet before they can engage in effective political activity. Ackerman, supra, 98 HARV.L.REV. at 730-31. The political power of gays and lesbians is the one relevant factor the trial court did briefly examine: Of perhaps equal significance to this Court in reaching a similar finding of no suspect class or quasi-suspect class is the reality that homosexuals today are not so lacking in political power as to warrant enhanced constitutional protection. Witness, for instance, the recent passage by the City Council and signing by the Mayor of the Domestic Partnership Bill. Gays and lesbians are, in the 1990's, a political force that any elective officeholder may ignore only at his or her peril. Since the trial court issued its opinion, however, the United States House of Representatives effectively vetoed the domestic partnership legislation, codified in D.C.Code §§ 36-1401 to -1408 (1993 Repl.), by preventing the District from spending any money to implement it. See D.C. Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions Act, Pub.L. No. 102-382, 106 Stat. 1422, 1422 (1992); Kent Jenkins, Jr., House Votes Referendum on D.C. Death Penalty; Lawmakers Gut City's Domestic Partners Law, WASHINGTON POST, Sept. 25, 1992, at Al. District Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton was quoted as saying in response: The scare word here was homosexual marriages. Several members [of Congress] told me they saw 30-second commercials coming saying they supported homosexual marriages. The closer we get to an election, the worse the fortunes of any controversial legislation. Id. There can be no question that the political power of gays and lesbians has grown over the years in this community and elsewhere. Locally, as noted earlier in this opinion, the gay community in 1975 had the support of Council member Dixon, who sponsored a bill for same-sex marriage legislation that, while eventually withdrawn, received a serious and fair hearing. And, as the trial court noted, the Council adopted and the Mayor signed domestic partnership legislation, [56] although Congress effectively killed it. [57] Two federal courts, moreover, in denying special scrutiny for homosexuals, noted their increasing political power. See Ben-Shalom, 881 F.2d at 466 (In these times homosexuals are proving that they are not without growing political power.); High Tech Gays, 895 F.2d at 574 ([L]egislatures have addressed and continue to address the discrimination suffered by homosexuals on account of their sexual orientation through the passage of anti-discrimination legislation.). For perspective, however, as Professor Ackerman has pointed out, homosexuals because of their tendency, overall, toward anonymity and diffusion, rather than discreetness and insularitytend to have considerably less political power than African-Americans, a protected racial minority. See Ackerman, supra, 98 HARV.L.REV. at 730-31. Furthermore, for purposes of evaluating constitutional norms, the focus on political power, or powerlessness, has to be national, not local, lest constitutional rights vary from city to city. Two recent decisions in other jurisdictions attest to the fact that a voter majority will enact state constitutional and city charter amendments in efforts to preclude adoption of legislation to protect gays and lesbians against discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation. See Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, supra (city charter amendment); Evans v. Romer, 882 P.2d 1335 (Colo.1994) (en banc) ( Evans II ) (state constitutional amendment); Evans v. Romer, 854 P.2d 1270 (Colo.1993) (en banc) ( Evans I ) (same). Accordingly, in light of such developments, including congressional action negating domestic partnership legislation to benefit same-sex couples (and others) in this jurisdiction, see supra note 57, I cannot say the political power of gays and lesbians locally or nationally is strong enough for me to conclude that the trial court was correct as a matter of law in ruling that gays and lesbians, as a class, have the kind of political power that conclusively cuts against their characterization as a suspect or quasi-suspect class. See Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, 860 F.Supp. at 437-39.