Links

• U.S. Supreme Court To Review Sodomy Case
  Uplinger's attorney filed a motion to dismiss, but Bob was convicted of soliciting in Buffalo city court, and was Fined $100. The law had been more stringently enforced in Buffalo than elsewhere. The Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, rendered its decision in favor of Uplinger. But the state decision was appealed by the then, Erie County District Attorney, Richard Arcara, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. - Gay Community News | Bob Nelson
• Path to Supreme Court Clear for Uplinger Case
  The Buffalo District Attorney, Richard Arcara, failed in his attempt to remove a brief filed by the New York State Attorney General in the case of a gay man charged with soliciting for sodomy. The decision, rendered in Erie County Supreme Court, dismissed Arcara’s suit against the Attorney General and cleared the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal brought by Arcara in the case, People v. Uplinger. - Gay Community News | Bob Nelson
• U.S. Supreme Court Reviews Gay Case
  The Justices themselves seemed confused about Uplinger from the start. The first source of confusion was the highly unusual amicus brief filed by New York state Attorney General Robert Abrams — a brief that put him at odds with D.A. Arcara. Abrams, who was supportive of gay rights, argued in his brief that the law as applied “punishes persons simply for their words and for their decision to engage in consensual sexual activity protected by the right to privacy." - Gay Community News | Urvashi Vaid
• Good neighbours...no thanks to the police, the liquor authorities or the mayor
  Uplinger was walking home from a bar. He stopped to chat with a good-looking stranger who, when asked, denied he was an undercover cop. After walking about two blocks together, Uplinger discreetly asked the man home. The stranger then arrested him. The New York State Court of Appeals ruled in Uplinger's favour, but that decision is being appealed to the Supreme Court. The case is being viewed as a precedent-setting battle which might establish gay rights as a constitutional issue. - The Body Politic | Ken Chaplin
• New York v. Uplinger, 467 U.S. 246, (1984) (No. 82-1724)
  On May 30, 1984, the Supreme Court decided to dismiss the case, allowing the New York Court of Appeals’ earlier decision to stand, and effectively eliminating the last law that allowed for the arrest of LGBTQ+ adults for consensual sex in New York. - Supreme Court of the United States
• The Arrest and Trials of Bob Uplinger
  By declining to rule on the merits of New York v. Uplinger, the Supreme Court avoided ruling on potentially significant questions pertaining to the right to public speech. In so doing, they effectively secured important rights for LGBTQ+ individuals in New York, but left the situation for people in other states far more ambiguous. In fact, only two years later, the Supreme Court ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick [6] that there was no constitutional protection for consensual acts of sodomy between adults, thereby allowing states to continue to pass and enforce laws against sex between LGBTQ+ adults. - HeinOnline | Martin Goffeney