Alabama Sodomy Law Struck Down – Finally

The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals has ruled that the state's antisodomy law is unconstitutional - 11 years after the U.S. Supreme Court made that ruling regarding all such laws.

Despite the Supreme Court's 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, striking down all state antisodomy laws, about a dozen states still have these laws on the books and attempt to enforce them. In the Alabama case, Dewayne Williams was charged with first-degree sodomy in 2010, and a Dallas County jury convicted him of the lesser offense of sexual misconduct, which is included in the sodomy statute, reports the Montgomery Advertiser. His sexual partner claimed Williams forced him to have sex, but Williams said the act was consensual.

Williams appealed his conviction, arguing that the law violates the U.S. Constitution, as the Supreme Court found in Lawrence v. Texas, and the Alabama appeals court agreed unanimously. The court noted in its ruling, issued Friday, that the purpose of the antisodomy law was to ban all homosexual sex acts, including those that are consensual. The statute explicitly states that consent is no defense.

Prosecutors in the case still say the sex between Williams and the other man was nonconsensual, and they asked the appeals court to strike the "consent is no defense" language from the law and allow Williams to be tried again for nonconsensual sodomy. The appeals court judges refused, saying this would subject the defendant to "double jeopardy" - being tried twice for the same crime, which is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution.

Trending stories

Here's how to watch Lady Gaga at Coachella & full livestream schedule

From Z to APT: Here's who won the 'Drag Race' S17 Lip Sync Smackdown

Robert Irwin is stripping down & rocking tiny briefs in new underwear campaign

Gerald Garth is keeping people of color happy and healthy through trying times

Elon Musk uses burner accounts on X, doesn’t fact-check: report

France becomes world’s first country to enshrine abortion rights in constitution

Lady Gaga is bringing 'Gothic dreams,' queer joy to Coachella

Broadway's best raise over $1 million for LGBTQ+ and HIV causes

French Polynesia doesn’t need Pride flags to earn its place on every LGBTQ+ bucket list

Trump's orders prompt CDC to erase HIV resources

JoJo Siwa updates pronouns on 'Celebrity Big Brother UK'

Bobby Berk reveals his favorite part about being gay: 'The sex!'

Season 4 of The Switch on resilience & radical self-love returns this spring

In 'Happy Endings with Bruno,' a 'Drag Race' stud offers a massage with a message

'Survivor' star Teeny Chirichillo comes out as trans in candid new essay

Discover the power of Wellness in your life

Out and About with Karan Soni

Broadway bound: The best hotels in NYC’s Theater District for every type of traveler

Beyond Wonderland's accepting & unifying rave culture is needed more than ever

The Charles is Pacific Grove's new LGBTQ+ hotel

How climate disasters hurt mental health in young people

All 6 rogue Mississippi cops got long prison sentences in 'Goon Squad' torture of 2 Black men

Joe Biden has tied the record for most LGBTQ+ judges confirmed in federal courts

15 lesbian coming-of-age movies that will hit you right in the feels

23 brutally funny 'Hands Off' protest signs that prove the resistance is alive & hilarious

• 0
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8

Civil rights advocates praised the appeals court's ruling. "Aiming to ban consensual sex is flat-out wrong," Susan Watson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, told the Advertiser. "A person's sexual orientation shouldn't matter. Consensual sex is consensual sex."

In a prepared statement, Equality Alabama chairman Ben Cooper said, "Each and every person, no matter their sexual orientation or gender identity, is entitled to equal protection under the law. The Alabama court's unanimous decision overturning the statute is a step in the right direction and makes us optimistic for future and ongoing equal rights through the continued elimination of unconstitutional provisions in our state's constitution that violate privacy and equal protections."