Ongoing police undercover lewd conduct sting operations directed at LGBTQ people reveal entrenched law enforcement bias against sexual minorities. The lewd stings are largely pretextual, based upon non-existent com- plaints and non-provable harm. The resulting arrests and convictions often lead to devastating consequences, including lengthy prison terms, life-long sex offender registration, anti-gay violence, and even suicide. Legal challenges to these operations have proven largely futile, however. Such challenges have relied upon existing doctrines, including entrapment and equal protection, that are too limited, or too difficult to prove, in the context of lewd stings. This article posits that the constitutional criminalization principles articulated in Lawrence v. Texas provide a more effective basis for challenging lewd stings. In Lawrence, the Supreme Court plainly held that majoritarian morality principles do not justify criminal laws. Instead, crimes must be directed at provable harms. Our empirical research on the policies of the Los Angeles Police Department reveals, however, that during lewd stings police target conduct that they believe to be morally offensive rather than objectively harmful. This morality-based exercise of enforcement discretion is unconstitutional under Lawrence, which applies with equal force to both criminalization and enforcement decisions.

中文翻译：

---

Lewd Stings：将劳伦斯诉德克萨斯案扩大到歧视性执法

警方正在进行的针对 LGBTQ 人群的卧底猥亵行为表明执法部门对性少数群体存在根深蒂固的偏见。淫秽的刺痛很大程度上是借口，基于不存在的投诉和无法证明的伤害。由此产生的逮捕和定罪往往会导致毁灭性的后果，包括长期监禁、终身性犯罪者登记、反同性恋暴力，甚至自杀。然而，事实证明，对这些行动提出的法律挑战基本上是徒劳的。这些挑战依赖于现有的教义，包括诱捕和平等保护，这些教义在淫秽刺痛的背景下过于有限或难以证明。本文假定劳伦斯诉德克萨斯案中阐明的宪法刑事定罪原则为挑战猥亵行为提供了更有效的基础。在劳伦斯，最高法院明确地认为，多数道德原则不能为刑法辩护。相反，犯罪必须针对可证明的伤害。然而，我们对洛杉矶警察局政策的实证研究表明，在猥亵期间警察会针对他们认为在道德上具有攻击性而非客观上有害的行为。在劳伦斯看来，这种基于道德的执法自由裁量权是违宪的，它同样适用于刑事定罪和执法决定。在猥亵期间，警察会针对他们认为在道德上具有攻击性而非客观上有害的行为。在劳伦斯看来，这种基于道德的执法自由裁量权是违宪的，它同样适用于刑事定罪和执法决定。在猥亵期间，警察会针对他们认为在道德上具有攻击性而非客观上有害的行为。在劳伦斯看来，这种基于道德的执法自由裁量权是违宪的，它同样适用于刑事定罪和执法决定。