But Scalia will have nothing to do with it. Slate has a nice bit of coverage of the matter of Lawrence v. Texas, currently before the Supreme Court. The facts aren’t really in dispute: in 1998, responding to a false report of a break-in, Houston policemen entered an apartment to discover two men engaged in a sex act — an act that is illegal for homosexuals (but not heterosexuals) to commit in Texas. The men were arrested, and have been fighting the case ever since. Frankly, the fact that Harris County continues to pursue this case staggers me: what are they thinking? What is the State’s interest in what goes on between consenting adults behind closed doors?

Well, as it happens, Scalia thinks there is such an interest, based in part on moral disapproval (!). On the issue of why this law covers only gays, not hetero couples:

“It’s conceded by the state of Texas that married couples can’t be regulated in their private sexual decisions,” says [defense attorney Paul] Smith. To which Scalia rejoins, “They may have conceded it, but I haven’t.”

If this doesn’t scare you, you’re not paying attention. Our own sterling governor, Rick Perry, has deemed the laws “appropriate” in the wake of this case, unconcerned that people like Lawrence must register as sex offenders as a consequence of their conviction. Fortunately, the American Bar Association disagrees.

More coverage at: Salon CNN Houston Chronicle