Archaic Law Alert
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Is this law also on the books in California? If so, Gray Davis might sue Californians for "alienation of affection," too.
Well, Randy, if we interpreted the law correctly, he'd probably sue the rest of the U.S. -- not Californians.
Lawrence was about criminal law, not contract law. If you cheat on your wife, you've still broken the contract, regardless of the legal status of your nookie.
Assuming that this civil tort is invalid on the basis of Lawrence v. Texas - which held that morality and tradition cannot provide the rational basis for law - then states that grant divorce and allocate property on the basis of adultery and abandonment are likewise invalid.