Also known as: sexual orientations
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A person's predisposition or inclination toward a particular type of sexual activity or behavior, including heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality. This characteristic functions as a protected attribute in rules that prohibit judges and lawyers from manifesting bias, prejudice, or harassment and in constitutional analysis that invalidates laws reflecting animus toward the group.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
During a damages hearing, defense counsel made repeated jokes about plaintiff Santiago Sanchez's sexual orientation while questioning emotional distress. The trial judge overruled objections and allowed the line of questioning to continue without any warning to counsel. The conduct violated the judge's duty to prevent harassment based on sexual orientation in judicial proceedings.
Attorney Samuel Soto repeatedly referred to opposing counsel's sexual orientation in settlement negotiations and discovery disputes. The lawyer knew the comments demeaned the other attorney on the basis of that characteristic. The conduct subjected the lawyer to professional discipline under rules governing harassment in the practice of law.
In a housing discrimination trial, plaintiff's counsel made repeated comments about defendant Simon Stern's sexual orientation while examining witnesses. The presiding judge directed counsel to stop and warned that further remarks would result in sanctions. The judge fulfilled the obligation to prevent lawyers from manifesting bias based on sexual orientation against parties.
Judge Skylar Sullivan maintained active membership in a private club that excluded individuals based on sexual orientation. The judge continued to attend events and use club facilities after learning of the exclusionary policy. The membership violated the prohibition on judges belonging to organizations that practice invidious discrimination on that basis.
State police arrested Simone Sanders and a same-sex partner for private consensual conduct under a statute that criminalized the acts only when performed by persons of the same sex. The couple challenged the law as violating liberty interests protected by due process. The statute failed because it imposed criminal liability solely on the basis of sexual orientation without any legitimate governmental interest.
Samantha Stone and her same-sex partner sought a marriage license from a state clerk who refused on the ground that the state constitution limited marriage to opposite-sex couples. The couple sued, claiming denial of equal protection and due process. The refusal was invalidated because the state could not exclude couples from the fundamental right to marry on the basis of sexual orientation.
Yes. Such an amendment singles out one class defined by sexual orientation and disables that class alone from seeking ordinary legal protections that remain available to other groups. Even under rational basis review, the measure fails because its breadth reflects impermissible animus rather than any legitimate governmental purpose.
A judge may allow reference only when the factor is relevant to an issue in the proceeding and the reference remains legitimate rather than demeaning. Repeated joking comments or innuendo that harass a party exceed this allowance and require judicial intervention under the conduct rules.
…treats the same conduct differently based solely on the participants. Those harmed by this law are people who have a same-sex sexual orientation and thus are more likely to engage in behavior prohibited by § 21.06. The Texas statute makes homosexuals unequal in the eyes of the law by making particular conduct—and only that…
…involves an unconstitutional intrusion into his privacy and his right of intimate association does not depend in any way on his sexual orientation. Second, I disagree with the Court's refusal to consider whether § 16-6-2 runs afoul of the Eighth or Ninth Amendments or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Ante ,…
…cities in Colorado, including Aspen, Boulder, and Denver, which prohibited discrimination against persons based upon their sexual orientation in areas such as housing, employment, education, public accommodations, health and welfare services, and other transactions and activities. Id. , at C-3 to C-4. Amendment 2, which was…
…and enjoys the benefits of parenthood, should be responsible for the support of those children—regardless of her gender or sexual orientation
…are created each year. When users sign up, they must create a profile by answering a series of questions about their sex,
Yes when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know the statements amount to harassment or discrimination on that basis in conduct related to the practice of law. Legitimate advocacy tied to record evidence may be permitted, but repeated derogatory references that appeal to bias cross the line.
The Court has applied rational basis review but with searching examination when the law reflects animus toward the group or imposes broad political disabilities. Laws that single out the class and bar access to protections fail even this deferential standard when they lack a rational relationship to any legitimate interest.