Digital Commons Network^™

The Respectable Dignity Of Obergefell V. Hodges, Yuvraj Joshi

Yuvraj Joshi

In declaring state laws that restrict same-sex marriage unconstitutional, Justice Kennedy invoked “dignity” nine times—to no one’s surprise. References in Obergefell to “dignity” are in important respects the culmination of Justice Kennedy’s elevation of the concept, dating back to the Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In Casey, “dignity” expressed respect for a woman’s freedom to make choices about her pregnancy. Casey laid the foundation for Lawrence v. Texas, which similarly respected the freedom of choice of homosexual persons. Yet, starting in United States v. Windsor and continuing in Obergefell, the narrative began to change. Dignity veered …

Locked In: Interactions With The Criminal Justice And Child Welfare Systems For Lgbtq Youth, Ymsm, And Ywsw Who Engage In Survival Sex, Brendan M. Conner Esq.

Brendan M. Conner

Famigration (Fam Imm): The Next Frontier In Immigration Law, Kari E. Hong

Kari E. Hong

The recently published article, Immigration’s Family Values by Professor Kerry Abrams and R. Kent Piacenti, and the forthcoming Removing Citizens: Parenthood, Citizenship, and Immigration Courts by Kari Hong examine how, when, and why immigration law uses a different definition of family than the one used in state courts. Despite their differences, in conversation, these two pieces highlight how the Department of Homeland Security likely is either following misguided policies or pursuing improper objectives when creating a federal family law. Crimmigration (Crim Imm) scholarship successfully identified the ways in which the (purported) civil proceedings of immigration law needed the extra constitutional …

A Troubled Marriage: Domestic Violence And The Legal System, Leigh Goodmark

Leigh S. Goodmark

The development of a legal regime to combat domestic violence in the United States has been lauded as one of the feminist movement’s greatest triumphs. But, Leigh Goodmark argues, the resulting system is deeply flawed in ways that prevent it from assisting many women subjected to abuse. The current legal response to domestic violence is excessively focused on physical violence; this narrow definition of abuse fails to provide protection from behaviors that are profoundly damaging, including psychological, economic, and reproductive abuse. The system uses mandatory policies that deny women subjected to abuse autonomy and agency, substituting the state’s priorities for …

Back To The Drawing Board: Barriers To Joint Decision-Making In Custody Cases Involving Intimate Partner Violence, Dana Harrington Conner

Dana Harrington Conner

For survivors of intimate partner violence, custody is, without question, one of the most important issues addressed by our legal system. For battered women, the court’s decision regarding their children is critical. As a result, legal scholars have examined, in depth, the value of sole custody awards in favor of battered women, as well as the dangers of joint custody. To that end, this Article considers, beyond the obvious risks of physical harm, why joint legal custody is not a viable alternative to sole legal custody in cases involving intimate partner violence. In addition, by de-constructing the fundamental aspects of …

The Short, Puzzling(?) Life Of The Civil Union, John G. Culhane

John G. Culhane

In the battle for marriage equality, equal protection has proven to be a more successful strategy than fundamental rights. This outcome is perhaps surprising, given that civil unions arguably afford at least "formal" equality to same-sex couples. Yet the supreme courts of Connecticut and California have emphasized the denial of equality that the difference in names connotes - civil unions or domestic partnerships v. marriage - and therefore have moved dramatically towards real equality. These two courts were the first to declare that sexual orientation is a suspect (California) or quasi-suspect (Connecticut) classification, thereby radically changing the debate and the …

The Irrational Woman: Informed Consent And Abortion Decision-Making, Maya Manian

Maya Manian

In Gonzales v. Carhart, the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on a type of second-trimester abortion that many physicians believe is safer for their patients. Carhart presented a watershed moment in abortion law, because it marks the Supreme Court’s first use of the anti-abortion movement’s “woman-protective” rationale to uphold a ban on abortion and the first time since Roe v. Wade that the Court denied women a health exception to an abortion restriction. The woman-protective rationale asserts that banning abortion promotes women’s mental health. According to Carhart, the State should make the final decisions about pregnant women’s healthcare, because …

Abuse And Discretion: Evaluating Judicial Discretion In Custody Cases Involving Violence Against Women, Dana Harrington Conner

Dana Harrington Conner

This Article is an exploration of the history and creation of the broad power of the custody trial judge, the unsatisfactory standards applied in custody cases involving violence against women, and our system’s inability to adequately review flawed decisions at the appellate level. The Article deconstructs both the process of judicial decision-making at the trial court level in custody cases involving batterers and the standards applied to these cases at the appellate court stage. In addition, the Article also proposes a multi-level approach to resolving the domestic violence dilemma in a custody case.

History confirms that the custody trial judge …