Romer v. Evans Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The Supreme Court struck down a Colorado constitutional amendment that prohibited any government action designed to protect gay and lesbian individuals from discrimination, holding that it violated the Equal Protection Clause.
Legal Significance: This case established that a law singling out a specific group for disfavored legal status, motivated by animus, fails rational basis review under the Equal Protection Clause, even without applying heightened scrutiny.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
In 1992, Colorado voters approved Amendment 2 to the state constitution. This amendment repealed existing municipal ordinances in cities like Denver, Boulder, and Aspen that banned discrimination based on sexual orientation. More significantly, Amendment 2 prohibited all branches of state and local government from enacting, adopting, or enforcing any statute, regulation, ordinance, or policy that would grant protected status or a claim of discrimination to any person based on their “homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships.” The effect was to nullify existing protections and prevent gay and lesbian individuals from seeking specific legal redress for discrimination in areas such as housing, employment, and public accommodations. A group of individuals and municipalities challenged the amendment, arguing it violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The Colorado Supreme Court enjoined enforcement of the amendment, holding that it infringed on a fundamental right to participate in the political process and was subject to strict scrutiny.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a state constitutional amendment that prohibits all legislative, executive, or judicial action designed to protect a specific class of persons from discrimination violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Yes. The Court held that Amendment 2 violates the Equal Protection Clause. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt moll
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a state constitutional amendment that prohibits all legislative, executive, or judicial action designed to protect a specific class of persons from discrimination violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Conclusion
Romer v. Evans is a landmark Equal Protection decision that established a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore
Legal Rule
A state law that identifies persons by a single trait and imposes Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt moll
Legal Analysis
Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy applied rational basis review, the most Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A state constitutional amendment that prevents any level of government from