Buggery laws are criminal statutes, descended from a 1533 English act, that punish anal intercourse between people and sexual contact between a person and an animal. In the United States, every state and territorial version of these laws became constitutionally unenforceable in 2003 after the Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas, though roughly a dozen states still have the old text sitting in their codes. Outside the U.S., more than 60 countries continue to criminalize the same conduct, and at least 12 authorize the death penalty for it.
Where the Laws Come From
Before 1533, sexual offenses of this kind were handled by church courts and usually met with spiritual penance. Henry VIII changed that by signing the Buggery Act, which moved jurisdiction to the secular courts and made the offense punishable by death and forfeiture of all property. The statute’s preamble called it “the detestable and abominable vice of buggery committed with mankind or beast.”
That single statute became a template. As the British Empire expanded, colonial administrators carried it into territories across Africa, the Caribbean, South Asia, and the Pacific, and many of the “unnatural offenses” laws still enforced in former colonies are direct descendants, sometimes with near-identical wording. England itself did not fully decriminalize consensual same-sex conduct until 1967.
What the Statutes Criminalize
Historical buggery statutes cover two categories of conduct: anal intercourse between people, regardless of the sex of the participants, and any sexual contact between a human and an animal. The terms “sodomy,” “buggery,” and “crime against nature” are used interchangeably across jurisdictions to describe both. Most versions require proof of penetration, however slight, to sustain a conviction.
Because the statutes focus on the physical act rather than consent, relationship, or circumstances, they historically reached married couples, assault victims prosecuted alongside their attackers, and adults in private consensual relationships. The breadth was not accidental; it gave prosecutors wide discretion.
Status in the United States
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) held that laws criminalizing private, consensual sexual conduct between adults violate the liberty protections of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.1Legal Information Institute. Lawrence v. Texas The ruling invalidated sodomy and buggery statutes in every state and territory. Private, consensual intimacy between adults is now beyond the reach of criminal prosecution anywhere in the United States.
Around a dozen states, including Texas, Louisiana, Michigan, and Mississippi, have never formally removed these provisions from their codes. They are sometimes called zombie laws. Any prosecution attempted under one of them would be dismissed on the authority of Lawrence, but their continued presence causes real confusion for people running background checks or doing legal research who assume the conduct is still criminal.
Bestiality Followed a Different Path
Lawrence protected consensual conduct between adults. It did not touch the bestiality half of the old buggery statutes. As of 2026, 49 states criminalize sexual contact with animals, with West Virginia the only exception. Felony penalties run from about one to 20 years depending on the jurisdiction, the conduct, and prior record.
Federal law adds a separate layer. The Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture (PACT) Act of 2019, codified at 18 U.S.C. ยง 48, makes “animal crushing” a federal crime when it occurs on federal property or in interstate commerce, and the definition reaches conduct that would constitute sexual abuse if committed against a person. Conviction carries up to seven years in federal prison, a fine, or both.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 48 – Animal Crushing
Military Law
The armed forces long maintained a stricter rule than any civilian code. Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice prohibited sodomy without regard to consent, location, or the sex of the participants, so that even private conduct between spouses could in theory be charged. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 began narrowing the offense to non-consensual and forcible acts.3Congress.gov. Public Law 112-239 – National Defense Authorization Act Later revisions went further, and Article 125 now addresses kidnapping rather than sodomy.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 10 USC 925 – Art 125 Kidnapping Non-consensual acts once charged under the old sodomy article are now handled under the UCMJ’s sexual assault provisions, and consensual intimate conduct between service members is no longer a military offense.
Where the Laws Are Still Enforced
The U.S. State Department reports that more than 60 countries treat consensual same-sex relations as a crime.5U.S. Department of State – Bureau of Consular Affairs. Gay and Lesbian Travelers Nearly half are former British colonies operating under statutes modeled on the 1533 act or its 19th-century successors.
Penalties vary sharply. Among Commonwealth countries alone, maximum sentences range from about 10 years to life imprisonment. Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, The Gambia, Uganda, Zambia, and Guyana carry life terms. Kenya, Malawi, South Sudan, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, and several Pacific nations cap the offense at around 14 years, sometimes with additional corporal punishment or fines. Jamaica (with hard labor), Grenada, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Tonga anchor the lower end at around 10 years.6Human Dignity Trust. Map of Jurisdictions That Criminalise LGBT People Several jurisdictions add flogging: Sudan prescribes 100 lashes with imprisonment, Iran imposes 100 lashes for certain offenses, and Malaysia and Tonga authorize judicial whipping.
Countries That Authorize the Death Penalty
At least 12 countries impose or authorize execution for consensual same-sex conduct: Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Nigeria (in northern states applying religious law), Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Uganda, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Enforcement varies. Some maintain formal or informal moratoriums; Iran has carried out documented executions. In several of these jurisdictions the death penalty derives from religious codes applied alongside or in place of secular statutes.
How Enforcement Actually Works
In many of these countries, enforcement reaches well beyond formal courtroom prosecution. Police monitor dating apps and websites, sometimes running fake profiles to entrap users. Authorities raid bars, clubs, and private residences. In some places mere suspicion is enough to trigger arrest and extended detention without charge. The laws are also used as tools for extortion, political targeting, and harassment. Courts in some jurisdictions order invasive medical examinations as evidence, a practice international human rights bodies have condemned as cruel and medically baseless.
Travel Risk for U.S. Citizens
Americans abroad are subject to local law, and the State Department warns that people who engage in consensual same-sex relations in countries where it is criminalized “may face severe punishment.”5U.S. Department of State – Bureau of Consular Affairs. Gay and Lesbian Travelers The Department flags three specific risks:
- Entrapment through fake profiles on dating apps and social media targeting foreign nationals.
- Surveillance and raids on meeting places, including commercial businesses.
- Extortion by criminals who threaten exposure or arrest based on real or perceived sexual orientation.
Travelers are advised to check the travel advisory and local laws for any destination before departure, to exercise caution about disclosing sexual orientation, and to be especially careful outside areas known to be welcoming. Anyone arrested should immediately ask police to notify the nearest U.S. embassy. Consular officers can provide assistance and will protect the traveler’s privacy.
Asylum for People Fleeing Enforcement
People escaping countries that actively enforce buggery laws may qualify for asylum in the United States. Federal law defines a refugee as someone with a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.7Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 8 USC 1101 – Definitions U.S. courts and immigration authorities have consistently recognized sexual orientation as the basis for a particular social group claim, and persecution based on perceived orientation is enough; the applicant does not have to actually be gay.8USCIS. Nexus – Particular Social Group – RAIO
The applicant must show that sexual orientation is the basis for group membership and that they have suffered or reasonably fear persecution because of it. Living under a criminalizing law is relevant context, but the mere existence of the law is often not enough on its own; a personal risk of harm generally needs to be shown. Applicants who cannot meet the asylum standard may still qualify for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture, which prevent deportation without granting a path to permanent residency.
Clearing an Old U.S. Conviction
People convicted under state sodomy or buggery statutes before Lawrence still carry those records. The decision made the laws unenforceable going forward but did not automatically vacate past convictions. Someone convicted in 1995 has to take affirmative steps to have the record expunged or vacated.
The available mechanism depends on the state. Some jurisdictions have specific legislation allowing expungement for offenses that have since been decriminalized, generally requiring proof that the original sentence was completed and any fines paid. Some grant expungement at no cost; filing fees elsewhere generally run from nothing up to around $240. Where no specific statute exists, relief may come through general expungement procedures, post-conviction motions, or a pardon petition. Until the record is formally cleared, the old conviction can continue to appear on background checks, affect employment, and create immigration complications, even though the underlying conduct is now constitutionally protected.