As Solicitor General, Ted Cruz defended a state ban on the sale of sex toys. On behalf of then state Attorney General Greg Abbot, he wrote 76 page long brief defending the ban to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, calling on a federal court to uphold the law.
The brief insisted that Texas, in order to protect "public morals," had "police-power interests" in "discouraging prurient interests in sexual gratification, combating the commercial sale of sex, and protecting minors." There was a "government" interest, it maintained, in "discouraging…autonomous sex." The brief compared the use of sex toys to "hiring a willing prostitute or engaging in consensual bigamy," and it equated advertising these products with the commercial promotion of prostitution. In perhaps the most noticeable line of the brief, Cruz's office declared, "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship." That is, the pursuit of such happiness had no constitutional standing. And the brief argued there was no "right to promote dildos, vibrators, and other obscene devices." The plaintiffs, it noted, were "free to engage in unfettered noncommercial speech touting the uses of obscene devices," but not speech designed to generate the sale of these items.
The 5th Circuit struck his case down, ruling that Texans have a right to be free of government intrusion. He lost, however, he has revealed himself to be neither impartial - by padding the case with his moral views - or a small government conservative.
On top of that, there was and still is more important things for the government to worry about than what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes, such as illegal immigration and the potential of Islamic Jihadists crossing the border.