Romer v. Evans and Colorado's Amendment 2.

What the case considered

Romer v. Evans concerned Amendment 2, a 1992 change to the Colorado Constitution. The measure would have prevented state and local governments from adopting or enforcing protections directed at discrimination based on homosexual, lesbian or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships.

Before the amendment, several Colorado municipalities and public institutions had adopted broader anti-discrimination policies. These policies covered areas such as employment, housing, education and public accommodations, and applied to people regardless of their sexual orientation.

Background and legal challenge

In the early 1990s, Colorado voters were presented with competing descriptions of local protections. Supporters of Amendment 2 characterized those rules as preferential treatment. Opponents argued that the rules applied equally to heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual people by addressing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Municipal governments, civil-liberties advocates and affected residents challenged the amendment. A trial court issued an injunction preventing it from taking effect, and the Colorado Supreme Court upheld that action. The dispute then reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's reasoning

The majority concluded that Amendment 2 was unusually broad. Rather than changing one specific policy, it barred every level of state government from protecting the named group through ordinary law or policy. The Court viewed that classification as lacking a legitimate relationship to a proper governmental purpose.

The decision did not require the Court to resolve every question about sexual orientation, public morality or religious teaching. Its focus was narrower: whether the state could single out a group and make it a stranger to the protections available through the political process.

Three justices dissented. Their view was that the amendment could reasonably be understood as preventing preferential treatment rather than imposing unequal treatment. The disagreement illustrates how equal-protection analysis can turn on the scope and practical effect of a law.

Why the decision matters

Romer v. Evans became an important reference point in later debates about equal protection, public accommodations and the relationship between religious convictions and civil law. It also influenced how courts and lawmakers assessed measures that classify people because of sexual orientation.

The case is best understood in its historical setting. It addressed a particular Colorado constitutional amendment and did not settle every later question involving marriage, family policy, religious institutions or expressive freedom.

Continue the topic

Read the next essay in this series for further discussion of the case and its consequences. You can also compare this history with the site's broader material on marriage equality, human rights, religious freedom and religion and law.

Sources and archival context

The original essay drew on the Supreme Court's opinion and dissent, legal commentary and contemporary reporting. Links in older source material may no longer be active; readers seeking authoritative legal text should consult official court records or established legal repositories.