Supreme Court Says No to Cuccinelli’s Big Bedroom Government

Bad news for Ken Cuccinelli. Good news for people who would like to keep Big Government out of their bedrooms.

via ThinkProgress

The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday that it would not hear Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II’s (R) appeal of a lower court ruling that held that the state’s sodomy ban is wholly unconstitutional. Cuccinelli had made his defense of the law an issue in his campaign for governor.

Virginia’s archaic Crimes Against Nature law made oral and anal sex a felony — even between consenting adults in the privacy of their bedroom.

I’ll never forget that time a guy ran for governor on a platform of making blowjobs illegal.

This entry was posted in Epic Fail, Sex, Supreme Court and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://welcomebacktopottersville.blogspot.com jurassicpork

    How the fuck would you even enforce something like that? Would it involves drones, ninjas, professional peeping toms, what?

    • Ipecac

      You would only enforce it against gays, because they couldn’t be having penis-vaginal sex. So if they’re having any sex at all, it must be illegal.

    • D_C_Wilson

      CCTV cameras in every room.

  • Brutlyhonest

    One of cuccinelli’s tv ads proudly proclaims that, “He was the first state AG to file a lawsuit against Obamacare!” Of course, they never mention all the wingnut AGs lost. Still, he and his ilk are proud of all the tax money they flushed down the drain to fight the eevil.

    Fortunately, there’s a libertarian candidate that is polling at 8% or so and keeping cuccinelli trailing.

    Also, too: Channel 10 here in Hampton Roads is running two pieces today that are essentially readings of cuccinelli pr4ess releases. The second even plays his new ad in the background while reading the talking points. No attempt at parity, of course. Librul media indeed.

  • Robert Scalzi

    lets hope the voters in VA take the Supremes lead and say no to this American Terrorist

  • Victor_the_Crab

    What was the ruling? I can’t imagine someone like Antonin Scalia – who seems so obsessed about who has teh gay – would agree with this.

    • D_C_Wilson

      There was no ruling. The Supreme Court simply refused to hear the case, which means the lower court ruling stands. It’s not surprising. The court already settled this issue with Lawrence v. Texas and obviously, didn’t feel there was a need to rehear it all over again.