AIDS and the Sexuality of Law: Ironic Jurisprudence Book

uring the first decade of the AIDS pandemic, many court cases were brought forward to protect the rights of people with HIV. By looking at the decisions written by the courts regarding these cases, Joe Rollins has determined that many had unfor-tunate side effects. By bringing their own fears and prejudices of homosexuality to bear on their decisions, judges often used the figure of the 'dangerous homosexual' as a threat to heterosexuality and society itself. As a result, these opinions worked more toward policing the borders of sexuality, trying to draw a clear line between straight and gay, rather than protecting public health. Looking at cases related to adult businesses, men with HIV in the prison system, and health-care providers with HIV, AIDS, Law, and Sexuality un-covers the consequences and far-reaching influence of what these judges wrote, and did not write, on American percep-tions of homosexuality.