All these old laws made unenforceable because of a court case need to be removed. All of them. They are at risk of turning into zombie laws. There are multiple old laws, including one from when the state in question was still a territory, now being used to ban abortion. The sodomy law that was the basis for Lawrence v Texas is still on the books and it will be used against people the second Lawrence is overturned.
I think every state, every few years, should pass a bill removing all the laws found unconstitutional. Particularly the laws infringing civil rights.
I drive past there on a regular basis. Right next to each other are that Dunks, an elementary school, and one of the most irritating intersections for 50 miles. Traffic is a nightmare on a good day.
You’re not wrong, but there are a ton of outdated unenforceable laws on the books. Between federal law, the state laws of 50 states, and literally thousands of municipalities with their own codes, it’s not really possible to go repeal all of these. Doing so would consume all the time available to city councils, state legislatures, and maybe even the US Congress.
What we do need to do is, when SCOTUS makes a decision that declares a law unconstitutional, especially when it does so in a way that secures a right for a group of people, is to follow up that decision with appropriate legislation to further protect those rights. After Brown v. Board of Education, we passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and a number of other laws to prevent segregation from being able to return simply by a new SCOTUS overturning Brown (which I wouldn’t put past Alito and Thomas). We should have secured women’s rights by passing the Equal Rights Amendment. We still need to do that. Right now, laws which discriminate on the basis of sex are subject to heightened scrutiny but not to strict scrutiny like laws which discriminate on the basis of race. That needs to change. And that Amendment should be slightly altered to make clear that sexual orientation and gender identity are included.
Passing new laws which supersede defunct ones is more practical than trying to identity and repeal all the defunct ones.
I was discharged more than 30 years ago, but adultery was definitely against the UCMJ at the time. I don’t recall if it was listed in the same section as the regulations against homosexuality (and related “undesirable” behavior,) but I do know it was theoretically an equal offense, so of course all the service members openly committing adultery were getting discharges at the same time I was getting kicked out for being queer.
Oh wait, no they weren’t! How silly of me. For some odd reason these “offenses” weren’t treated equally. I wonder why?
Adultery is apparently still a violation of the UCMJ. Sodomy is not. Obama replaced that section with one specifically banning rape and bestiality. Adultery is covered under a different section, apparently because it reflects on discipline or some bullshit.
As I read your comment I thought, “What pretext would the courts use to find someone with standing to sue in such a case?” Now I know: prosecution for adultery in a gay interracial divorce.
