Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Why Justice Kennedy's Opinion In Windsor Short-Changed Same-Sex Couples, Adam Lamparello
Why Justice Kennedy's Opinion In Windsor Short-Changed Same-Sex Couples, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s decision in United States v. Windsor—invalidating the Defense of Marriage Act—made the same mistake as his decision in Lawrence v. Texas: it relied upon abstract notions of ‘liberty’ rather than the text-based guarantee of equality. Same-sex couples deserve more. They are entitled to equal treatment under the United States Constitution. Bans on same-sex marriage cannot be supported by a rational state interest, and instead constitute impermissible discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. By issuing a doctrinally muddled decision that included discussions of federalism, liberty, due process, and equal protection, Justice Kennedy missed an …
The Constitution, The Roberts Court & Business: The Significant Business Impact Of The Supreme Court's 2011-2012 Term, Corey A. Ciocchetti
The Constitution, The Roberts Court & Business: The Significant Business Impact Of The Supreme Court's 2011-2012 Term, Corey A. Ciocchetti
Corey A Ciocchetti
The 2011-2012 Supreme Court term created quite the media buzz. The Affordable Care Act cases and the controversial Arizona immigration law dominated the headlines. But the term also included other fascinating yet less sensationalized cases. The Court heard its fair share of criminal law controversies involving derelict defense attorneys and prosecutors as well as civil procedure disputes involving qualified immunity for witness in grand jury proceedings and private parties assisting the government in litigation. The justices also entertained arguments on a federal law allowing United States citizens born in Jerusalem to have “Israel” stamped as their birthplace on a passport. …
National Federation Of Independent Business V. Sebelius, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds
National Federation Of Independent Business V. Sebelius, Brannon P. Denning, Glenn H. Reynolds
Brannon P. Denning
Using our now-famous "Five Takes" format, Glenn Reynolds and I analyze NFIB v. Sebelius from five different perspectives: (1) Sebelius as Marbury; (2) Sebelius as Bakke; (3) Sebelius and the "legitimating" power of judicial review; (4) Sebelius as a Thayerian decision; and (5) Sebelius as part of some long game of Chief Justice Roberts'.