In the case of Romer v. Evans Supreme Court in 1996, voters in the state of Colorado approved a second amendment to their state Constitution by referendum, to prevent homosexuals from becoming a protected minority. Before the referendum, many large cities in Colorado passed laws prohibiting discrimination based on their sexuality, including whether they were gay or not. Colorado citizens who disapprove of homosexuality then created a petition to put the Second Amendment to a vote, and won with a majority of 53% of the vote. Richard Evans, with the support of many others, took the amendment to court, arguing that it was unconstitutional and should be removed from the constitution, before winning in the Colorado Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of the United States. by Justice Kennedy, as the Colorado Amendment was found to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Kennedy argued that the amendment targets a specific group in which it would ensure that only homosexuals cannot benefit from the protective rights enjoyed by anyone else. This idea makes gay people unequal to others because they don't get the same protection that anyone else could get if they needed it. Additionally, the amendment places a burden on the gay community by not allowing them to seek protection from discrimination through legislation. Furthermore, Kennedy states: "In an ordinary case, a law will be upheld if it can be said to further a legitimate interest of the government..." (632) By this he means that a law will be considered valid as long as it she has a.... .... middle of paper ...... argument because it shows the problems with the amendment and her argument is consistent with the constitution. Additionally, Kennedy raises more valid points, while Scalia primarily relies on the reasoning that Kennedy's argument lacks sufficient legal citation evidence. Furthermore, Kennedy believes that the amendment is unconstitutional because it violates the Equal Protection Clause because it denies homosexuals special rights that any other minority has access to, and it targets a class that it affects instead of creating a general law that affects everyone. . Thus, Kennedy's argument should prevail because he relies on the Constitution as the primary evidence to demonstrate that the amendment is invalid and should not be allowed, and Kennedy believes that the amendment violates gay rights, which is clearly the case when referring to them as individuals. a specific class.