Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- American University Washington College of Law (5)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (5)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (5)
- Duke Law (3)
- Mitchell Hamline School of Law (2)
-
- SelectedWorks (2)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (2)
- University of Colorado Law School (2)
- Valparaiso University (2)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School (1)
- New York Law School (1)
- Seattle University School of Law (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Michigan Law School (1)
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (5)
- NULR Online (4)
- Indiana Law Journal (3)
- American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law (2)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (2)
-
- Corey A Ciocchetti (2)
- Law Faculty Publications (2)
- The Modern American (2)
- Akron Law Review (1)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Faculty Working Papers (1)
- Journal of Race, Gender, and Ethnicity (1)
- Legislation and Policy Brief (1)
- Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Publications (1)
- Seattle University Law Review (1)
- Student Scholarship (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- U.S. Supreme Court Briefs (1)
- University of Colorado Law Review (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 37
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
The High Power Of The Lower Courts, Doni Gewirtzman
The High Power Of The Lower Courts, Doni Gewirtzman
Other Publications
No abstract provided.
Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig
Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig
Akron Law Review
The purpose of this Article is to expand the scope of the discussion from one of morality to include a sociological approach, called Diffusion Theory...Section II of this Article explains Diffusion Theory. Section III explores the background of DOMA and the factual background in which DOMA is being challenged by the states and private citizens. Section IV discusses the fundamentals behind the Florida adoption ban and how the change in the message by the challengers has proven effective. The final part, Section V, analyzes whether the approach should center on the inevitability of the change, as reflected in the Justice …
Duty To Defend And The Rule Of Law, Gregory F. Zoeller
Duty To Defend And The Rule Of Law, Gregory F. Zoeller
Indiana Law Journal
This Article challenges Eric Holder’s and William Pryor’s views and explains the proper role of a state attorney general when a party challenges a state statute. In short, an attorney general owes the state and its citizens, as sovereign, a duty to defend its statutes against constitutional attack except when controlling precedent so overwhelmingly shows that the statute is unconstitutional that no good-faith argument can be made in its defense. To exercise discretion more broadly, and selectively to pick and choose which statutes to defend, only erodes the rule of law. (introduction)
Does United States V. Windsor (The Doma Case) Open The Door To Congressional Standing Rights?, Bradford Mank
Does United States V. Windsor (The Doma Case) Open The Door To Congressional Standing Rights?, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In rare cases, a President refuses to defend a statute he believes is unconstitutional. The law is unclear whether Congress or either House of Congress has Article III standing to defend a statute that the President refuses to defend. In United States v. Windsor, the Supreme Court in 2013 addressed the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Obama Administration took the middle position of not defending DOMA, but still enforcing it despite its view that the statute was unconstitutional to assist federal courts in reviewing the constitutionality of the statute. It was unclear whether an appeal was …
Certiorari And The Marriage Equality Cases, Carl Tobias
Certiorari And The Marriage Equality Cases, Carl Tobias
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
Marriage equality has come to much of the nation. Over 2014, many district court rulings invalidated state proscriptions on same- sex marriage, while four appeals courts upheld these decisions. However, the Sixth Circuit reversed district judgments which struck down bans in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Because that appellate opinion created a patchwork of differing legal regimes across the country, this Paper urges the Supreme Court to clarify marriage equality by reviewing that determination this Term.
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by the “Official Proponents” of California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion held that initiative sponsors lack Article III standing to defend their ballot measures even when state officials refuse to defend against constitutional challenges. As a result, Hollingsworth provides state officers with the ability to overrule laws that were intended to bypass the government establishment—in effect, an “executive veto” of popularly-enacted initiatives.
The Article examines this new “executive veto” in depth. It places Hollingsworth in context, discussing the initiative process …
Mini-Domas As Political Process Failures: The Case For Heightened Scrutiny Of State Anti-Gay Marriage Amendments, Steve Sanders
Mini-Domas As Political Process Failures: The Case For Heightened Scrutiny Of State Anti-Gay Marriage Amendments, Steve Sanders
NULR Online
No abstract provided.
Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano
Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano
Seattle University Law Review
Despite being married to a U.S. citizen, non-citizen transgender individuals and non-citizen spouses married to transgender U.S. citizens still face deportation today due to current immigration policies. When forced to return to their home countries, transgender individuals are likely to encounter violence from those who perpetuate hate towards transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Instead of protecting these individuals, the United States continues to send people back to their native countries solely because those individuals do not fall within the narrowly constructed definition of marriage some states use that is legally recognized by federal courts. Transgender individuals receive disparate treatment as …
Is The Full Faith And Credit Clause Still "Irrelevant" To Same-Sex Marriage?: Toward A Reconsideration Of The Conventional Wisdom, Steve Sanders
Is The Full Faith And Credit Clause Still "Irrelevant" To Same-Sex Marriage?: Toward A Reconsideration Of The Conventional Wisdom, Steve Sanders
Indiana Law Journal
Essays on the Implications of Windsor and Perry
Federalism As A Way Station: Windsor As Exemplar Of Doctrine In Motion, Neil S. Siegel
Federalism As A Way Station: Windsor As Exemplar Of Doctrine In Motion, Neil S. Siegel
Faculty Scholarship
This Article asks what the Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. Windsor stands for. It first shows that the opinion leans in the direction of marriage equality but ultimately resists any dispositive “equality” or “federalism” interpretation. The Article next examines why the opinion seems intended to preserve for itself a Delphic obscurity. The Article reads Windsor as an exemplar of what judicial opinions may look like in transition periods, when a Bickelian Court seeks to invite, not end, a national conversation, and to nudge it in a certain direction. In such times, federalism rhetoric—like manipulating the tiers of scrutiny …
Is There A Federal Definitions Power?, Ernest A. Young
Is There A Federal Definitions Power?, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
Although the Supreme Court decided United States v. Windsor on equal protection grounds, that case also raised important and recurring questions about federal power. In particular, defenders of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) argued that Congress may always define the terms used in federal statutes, even if its definition concerns a matter reserved to the States. As the DOMA illustrates, federal definitions concerning reserved matters that depart from state law may impose significant burdens on state governments and private citizens alike. This Article argues that there is no general, freestanding federal definitions power and that sometimes—as with marriage—federal law …
Evolving Values, Animus, And Same-Sex Marriage, Daniel O. Conkle
Evolving Values, Animus, And Same-Sex Marriage, Daniel O. Conkle
Indiana Law Journal
In this Essay, I contend that a Fourteenth Amendment right to same-sex marriage will emerge, and properly so, when the Supreme Court determines that justice so requires and when, in the words of Professor Alexander Bickel, the Court’s recognition of this right will “in a rather immediate foreseeable future . . . gain general assent.” I suggest that we are fast approaching that juncture, and I go on to analyze three possible justifications for such a ruling: first, substantive due process; second, heightened scrutiny equal protection; and third, rational basis equal protection coupled with a finding of illicit “animus.” I …
Exit, Voice, And Loyalty As Federalism Strategies: Lessons From The Same-Sex Marriage Debate, Ernest A. Young
Exit, Voice, And Loyalty As Federalism Strategies: Lessons From The Same-Sex Marriage Debate, Ernest A. Young
University of Colorado Law Review
No abstract provided.
A Visual Guide To United States V. Windsor: Doctrinal Origins Of Justice Kennedy's Majority Opinion, Colin Starger
A Visual Guide To United States V. Windsor: Doctrinal Origins Of Justice Kennedy's Majority Opinion, Colin Starger
NULR Online
No abstract provided.
The Moonscape Of Tax Equality: Windsor And Beyond, Anthony C. Infanti
The Moonscape Of Tax Equality: Windsor And Beyond, Anthony C. Infanti
NULR Online
No abstract provided.
Doma's Ghost And Copyright Reversionary Interests, Brad A. Greenberg
Doma's Ghost And Copyright Reversionary Interests, Brad A. Greenberg
NULR Online
No abstract provided.
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg
U.S. Supreme Court Briefs
In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici constitutional law professors argue that all classifications that carry the indicia of invidiousness should trigger a more searching inquiry than the traditional rational basis test under the Equal Protection Clause would suggest. Classifications that already receive heightened scrutiny, such as race or sex, fit easily into this approach. But the Court’s equal protection jurisprudence has become muddied in a series of cases in which it says rational basis review, but appears to do a more rigorous review. Sexual orientation classifications seemingly were analyzed …
Justice For All: Reimagining The Internal Revenue Service, David J. Herzig
Justice For All: Reimagining The Internal Revenue Service, David J. Herzig
Law Faculty Publications
The ability of the Internal Revenue Service to both collect the tax and enforce the initial determination of tax liability in a neutral and fair manner has been compromised by a February 2011 pronouncement issued by the Department of Justice stating that the President and the Department of Justice believe that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional and that the Department of Justice will no longer defend the statute in courts. The pronouncement results in a disparate treatment of similar taxpayers based solely on the forum of litigation. Through this lens, I examine whether it is …
Teaching U.S. V. Windsor: The Defense Of Marriage Act And Its Constitutional Implications, Corey A. Ciocchetti
Teaching U.S. V. Windsor: The Defense Of Marriage Act And Its Constitutional Implications, Corey A. Ciocchetti
Corey A Ciocchetti
Students are captivated by contemporary, high-profile Supreme Court cases. They recognize the litigants featured on the news, they debate the public policy, sociological and other real world implications of the arguments in school and their peers and parents prod them to discuss their opinions outside of class. I incorporate very recent and noteworthy Supreme Court cases in my legal studies courses with great success. My students are more engaged and prepared than when I assign a textbook chapter (students would rather track the law as it develops in real time). They tend to recall the arguments and legal theories well …
Teaching The U.S. V. Windsor Same Sex Marriage/Equal Protection/Doma Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti
Teaching The U.S. V. Windsor Same Sex Marriage/Equal Protection/Doma Case, Corey A. Ciocchetti
Corey A Ciocchetti
The same sex marriage cases are proving to be the hottest of topics during a very eventful Supreme Court term. The U.S. v. Windsor case is a fitting vehicle to cover the topic. These slides help tell the story and can be used to teach the case as well as important constitutional law issues such as: (1) equal protection, (2) federalism, (3) executive discretion to defend federal laws, (4) incorporation and more.
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Brief Of Amici Curiae Professors Nan D. Hunter, Et Al., Addressing The Merits In Support Of Respondents, Nan D. Hunter, Suzanne B. Goldberg
Faculty Scholarship
In this amicus brief filed in United States v. Windsor, pending before the Supreme Court, amici constitutional law professors argue that all classifications that carry the indicia of invidiousness should trigger a more searching inquiry than the traditional rational basis test under the Equal Protection Clause would suggest. Classifications that already receive heightened scrutiny, such as race or sex, fit easily into this approach. But the Court’s equal protection jurisprudence has become muddied in a series of cases in which it says rational basis review, but appears to do a more rigorous review. Sexual orientation classifications seemingly were analyzed …
Brief Of Federalism Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent Windsor, Ernest A. Young
Brief Of Federalism Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent Windsor, Ernest A. Young
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
In Defense Of The Obama Administration's Non-Defense Of Doma, Daniel J. Crooks Iii
In Defense Of The Obama Administration's Non-Defense Of Doma, Daniel J. Crooks Iii
Legislation and Policy Brief
The Constitution charges the President with the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed . . . .” Moreover, the President takes an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Although “[g]enerally, these duties are compatible . . ., when the Executive faces a law that he believes is unconstitutional, he must decide whether the law should be executed as written and defended if attacked, or whether the duty of faithfulness to the Constitution requires its repudiation.” This decision belongs to the President alone as the head of a co-equal branch of …
Homosexuals, Equal Protection, And The Guarantee Of Fundamental Rights In The New Decade: An Optimist’S Quasi-Suspect View Of Recent Events And Their Impact On Heightened Scrutiny For Sexual Orientation-Based Discrimination, John Nicodemo
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Defense Of Marriage Acts: A Fifty State Survey, Erica A. Holzer
Defense Of Marriage Acts: A Fifty State Survey, Erica A. Holzer
Student Scholarship
This document includes every DoMA statute and constitutional amendment in all 50 states in alphabetical order as of January 31, 2012. The text of these laws is provided, as well as a link to the statute or constitutional amendment on Westlaw.
Wedlocked, Mary P. Byrn, Morgan L. Holcomb
Wedlocked, Mary P. Byrn, Morgan L. Holcomb
Faculty Scholarship
For as long as marriage has existed in the United States, divorce has been its necessary opposite. So strong is the need for divorce that the Supreme Court has suggested it is a fundamental right, and every state in the country allows access to no-fault divorce. For opposite-sex couples, legally ending their marriage is possible as a matter of right. For married same-sex couples, however, state DoMAs (Defense of Marriage Acts) have been a stumbling block – preventing access to divorce in some states. Same-sex couples in numerous states are being told by attorneys and judges that they cannot terminate …
The Obama Administration’S Decision To Defend Constitutional Equality Rather Than The Defense Of Marriage Act, Dawn E. Johnsen
The Obama Administration’S Decision To Defend Constitutional Equality Rather Than The Defense Of Marriage Act, Dawn E. Johnsen
Articles by Maurer Faculty
When President Barack Obama announced his view that the Defense of Marriage Act1 (DOMA) violated the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection,2 he joined a storied line of Presidents who have acted upon their own constitutional determinations in the absence of, and on rare occasion contrary to, those of the U.S. Supreme Court. How best to proceed in the face of a federal statute the President considers unconstitutional can involve complex judgments, as was true of the difficult decision to enforce but not defend DOMA. Ordinarily the Department of Justice should adhere to its tradition of defending statutes against constitutional …
The Constitutional Right To (Keep Your) Same-Sex Marriage, Steve Sanders
The Constitutional Right To (Keep Your) Same-Sex Marriage, Steve Sanders
Articles by Maurer Faculty
Same-sex marriage is legal in six states, and nearly 50,000 same-sex couples have already married. Yet 43 states have adopted statutes or constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage (typically called mini defense of marriage acts, or “mini-DOMAs”), and the vast majority of these measures not only forbid the creation of same-sex marriages, they also purport to void or deny recognition to the perfectly valid same-sex marriages of couples who migrate from states where such marriages are legal. These non-recognition laws effectively transform the marital parties into complete legal strangers to each other, with none of the customary rights or incidents of …
Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig
Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig
Law Faculty Publications
Same-sex couple rights are the topic of much discussion and debate. There are court challenges to the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) as well as proposed marriage statutes. The message and the structure for the recognition of same-sex rights need to be modified. This Article proposes applying, for the first time in the area, modern sociology theory, specifically Diffusion Theory, to change how the message is delivered. Using Diffusion Theory to change the message frame will change judicial decisions. By using the backdrop of the Florida adoption statute, a comparison between the successful challenges to the Florida …
Doma, Romer, And Rationality, Andrew Koppelman
Doma, Romer, And Rationality, Andrew Koppelman
Faculty Working Papers
It has been objected by many that the Defense of Marriage Act lacks a rational basis because it reflects a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group. The increasing success of the argument, which has persuaded three federal judges, reveals the hidden normative premises of rational basis analysis, at least whenever that analysis is used to invalidate a statute. Since 1996, when DOMA was passed by overwhelming margins in both houses of Congress, the country's attitudes toward gay people have evolved rapidly, to the point where this kind of mindless lashing out at gays looks a lot less attractive. …