What Do You Think?

“Search and seizure is a legal procedure used in many civil law and common law legal systems whereby police or other authorities and their agents, who suspect that a crime has been committed, do a search of a person’s property and confiscate any relevant evidence to the crime. Most countries have provisions in their constitutions that provide the public with the right to be free from “unreasonable” search and seizure. This right is generally based on the premise that everyone is entitled to a reasonable right to privacy. In practice, this constitutional right is regularly respected only in democracies.Though interpretation may vary, this right usually requires law enforcement to obtain a search warrant before engaging in any form of search and seizure.”

The police in Harris county responded to a report that was, when received, considered to be true, that there was an armed man displaying aggressive behavior. The police responded with the force that is required for such a call, which allowed them to aggressively enter the home of Geddes Lawrence. They found no gunman, but were shocked no less to find him with one Tyron Garner, another male, performing sexual acts.

There is no doubt that Texas has a law that condemns the above-mentioned activities. However, the Bill of Rights, or the first ten amendments do clearly supercede state law.
If there is a conflict between a state law and federal statute, administrative regulation, or treaty provision, the federal law will supercede the state law by the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause. If a state law conflicts with the Constitution, it may be facially invalid, or invalid as to one person or class of persons. If it is facially invalid, it is effectively “Null and void””.

With this knowledge, I can argue that what the district attorney argued cannot hold up, as the men did have a reasonable right to privacy, a right that was violated by the Harris County police when they, acting morally, entered his home. Upon discovering what it was the two men were doing, they should have apologized and left the premises as the reason for why they were dispatched was false. They entered his house in search of a gunman; they didn’t have a warrant to raid the house in search of practicing homosexuals. Also, when Texas states that they have the right to set the moral standards of its people, they are referring to a law that is in conflict with a federal statute. According to the Constitution’s Supremacy clause, that law would have to be null and void.

Misters Lawrence and Garner, though in violation of a Texas law, were arrested unjustly, and were right to challenge the case as they did. If Texas had wanted to charge them with a violation of that particular law, which occurred behind closed, and mind you, locked doors, they would have needed to have a search warrant to raid their house in order to catch them in the act. As they were happened upon while the police were in search of something else, they should have been turned loose and simply advised that they better not be caught next time. Not to mention that the police should have also replaced the door that they undoubtedly kicked in.