The “born free and equal” clauses, deeply embedded within the historical framework of American constitutionalism, play a pivotal role in assessing the validity of numerous landmark Supreme Court rulings. Notably articulated in the Declaration of Independence and numerous state constitutions at the time of the federal Bill of Rights and the ratification of the 14th Amendment, these clauses have been instrumental in shaping interpretations of fundamental rights in the United States.
Among the landmark cases that invoke these principles is Lawrence v. Texas. This 2003 decision invalidated Texas sodomy laws, effectively nullifying statutes across several states that criminalized consensual sexual conduct between adults. The decision, grounded in the right to privacy as established in Griswold v. Connecticut, resonated with the “born free and equal” concept, challenging the notion of whether laws restricting sodomy were consistent with constitutional freedoms.
The legal rationale undergirding the Lawrence decision can be contrasted with the opinions in cases like Washington v. Glucksberg, where the court held that the right to assisted suicide was not rooted in historical tradition. This juxtaposition underscores the evolving interpretations of what rights are considered “deeply rooted in history and tradition.”
Critics, including Justice Antonin Scalia in his dissent, argued that the court erroneously read John Stuart Mill’s harm principle into the Constitution, drawing comparisons to the earlier court reasoning in Lochner v. New York. The notion that sodomy laws could be challenged under the rational basis test only complicates the debate over these statutes’ role in the legal framework governing personal liberties.
For a more detailed exposition on how these clauses interplay with landmark rulings like Lawrence v. Texas, the original SCOTUSblog article provides a comprehensive analysis.
Continued scrutiny of such landmark decisions through the lens of the “born free and equal” clauses may yield further discussion on future implications for privacy rights and personal liberties, including forthcoming analyses of important decisions like Obergefell v. Hodges, which recognized the constitutional right to same-sex marriage.