Equality Foundation of Greater Cincinnati, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati

Background

This dispute concerns a Cincinnati charter amendment that tells city departments and agencies not to grant special protection to homosexuals. The lower-court judgment in the case was set aside, and the Supreme Court agreed to have the case reconsidered in light of its decision in Romer v. Evans.

Reasoning

The key question is whether Romer — which involved a state constitutional amendment barring special protection for homosexuals — controls how the Cincinnati amendment should be judged. The Court vacated the lower-court judgment and remanded the case for further consideration under Romer, sending the issue back to lower courts to apply Romer’s reasoning to these facts. Justice Scalia, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Thomas, wrote that remanding on Romer grounds is mistaken because Romer addressed a state-wide bar on protections, not a local decision to withhold protections.

Real world impact

The remand means lower courts must rethink the Cincinnati amendment with Romer in mind, so the final outcome remains uncertain. If courts apply Romer to this local action, it could limit what cities may lawfully do about anti-discrimination protections for homosexuals. The decision is procedural here — the Supreme Court did not decide the final merits and sent the case back for more analysis.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Scalia dissented from the remand. He argued Romer did not resolve whether a local electorate can decide not to grant special protections and would have denied review or held full argument to decide that distinct issue.