Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil rights (3)
- Activists (2)
- Dignity (2)
- Equality (2)
- Immigrants (2)
-
- Incrementalism (2)
- Lawrence v. Texas (2)
- Marriage (2)
- Obergefell v. Hodges (2)
- Same-sex marriage (2)
- U.S. v. Windsor (2)
- 1963 (1)
- 1st amendment (1)
- 2013 (1)
- 4th amendment (1)
- 5th amendment (1)
- Advocacy (1)
- Alabama (1)
- Alleged perpetrators (1)
- American (1)
- American colonization society (1)
- Analysis (1)
- Animus (1)
- Animus jurisprudence (1)
- Anti-discrimination (1)
- Anti-gay (1)
- Antidiscrimination (1)
- Arrests (1)
- Asexual (1)
- Assimilationist (1)
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Queer Sacrifice In Masterpiece Cakeshop, Jeremiah A. Ho
Queer Sacrifice In Masterpiece Cakeshop, Jeremiah A. Ho
Faculty Publications
This Article interprets the Supreme Court’s 2018 decision, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission , as a critical extension of Derrick Bell’s interest convergence thesis into the LGBTQ movement. Chiefly, Masterpiece reveals how the Court has been more willing to accommodate gay individuals who appear more assimilated and respectable—such as those who participated in the marriage equality decisions—than LGBTQ individuals who are less “mainstream” and whose exhibited queerness appear threatening to the heteronormative status quo. When assimilated same-sex couples sought marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, their respectable personas facilitated the alignment between their interests to marry and …
Find Out What It Means To Me: The Politics Of Respect And Dignity In Sexual Orientation Anti-Discrimination, Jeremiah A. Ho
Find Out What It Means To Me: The Politics Of Respect And Dignity In Sexual Orientation Anti-Discrimination, Jeremiah A. Ho
Faculty Publications
This accompanying article considers the state of LGBTQ equality after the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015. Specifically, by examining this upsurge of social visibility for same-sex couples as both acceptance of sexual minorities and cultural assimilation, the article finds that the marriage cases at the Supreme Court — Obergefell and U.S. v. Windsor — shifted the framing of gay rights from the politics of respect that appeared more than a decade ago in Lawrence v. Texas toward a politics of respectability. The article traces this regression in Justice Kennedy’s own definition of dignity from Lawrence, where …
Once We're Done Honeymooning: Obergefell V. Hodges, Incrementalism, And Advances For Sexual Orientation Anti-Discrimination, Jeremiah A. Ho
Once We're Done Honeymooning: Obergefell V. Hodges, Incrementalism, And Advances For Sexual Orientation Anti-Discrimination, Jeremiah A. Ho
Faculty Publications
Undoubtedly, the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision in Obergefell v. Hodges is the watershed civil rights decision of our time. Since U.S. v. Windsor, each recent victory for same-sex couples in the federal courts evidenced that the legal recognition of same-sex marriages in the U.S. was becoming increasingly secure. Meanwhile, momentum was growing for the visibility of sexual minorities nationally. Yet, is marriage equality the last stop in the pro-LGBTQ movement, or should we expect sexual minorities to advance in other legal arenas? Should we expect that the recent strides in marriage equality from Windsor to Obergefell can somehow leverage …
Weather Permitting: Incrementalism, Animus, And The Art Of Forecasting Marriage Equality After U.S. V. Windsor, Jeremiah A. Ho
Weather Permitting: Incrementalism, Animus, And The Art Of Forecasting Marriage Equality After U.S. V. Windsor, Jeremiah A. Ho
Faculty Publications
Within LGBT rights, the law is abandoning essentialist approaches toward sexual orientation by incrementally de-regulating restrictions on identity expression of sexual minorities. Simultaneously, same-sex marriages are become increasingly recognized on both state and federal levels. This Article examines the Supreme Court’s recent decision, U.S. v. Windsor, as the latest example of these parallel journeys. By overturning DOMA, Windsor normatively revises the previous incrementalist theory for forecasting marriage equality’s progress studied by William Eskridge, Kees Waaldijk, and Yuval Merin. Windsor also represents a moment where the law is abandoning antigay essentialism by using animus focused jurisprudence for lifting the discrimination against …
Umd Law Students Travel To Haiti On Fact-Finding Trip, Irene Scharf, Justin Steele
Umd Law Students Travel To Haiti On Fact-Finding Trip, Irene Scharf, Justin Steele
Faculty Publications
During spring break Professor Irene Scharf, director of the Immigration Law Clinic at the UMass School of Law in Dartmouth accompanied a group of UMass law students to the Dominican Republic to engage in fact-finding about the conditions of Haitians in the country. This piece was written by Scharf and Justin Steele, executive articles editor of the UMass Law Review.
Searching For Remedial Paradigms: Human Rights In The Age Of Terrorism, Frances Howell Rudko
Searching For Remedial Paradigms: Human Rights In The Age Of Terrorism, Frances Howell Rudko
Faculty Publications
Nine years after the unprecedented terrorist attacks on September 11, judicial response to various governmental and individual methods of combating terrorism remains deferential and restrained. The courts have heard at least three types of cases brought by advocates for three distinct groups: the alleged perpetrators of terrorism; the victims of terrorist attacks; and third party humanitarian groups. Implicit in the practical question of how to deal effectively with terrorism is the broader consideration which Congress, the President and others must also address: how to respond to the terrorists' extreme human rights violations without violating international humanitarian law.
The Exclusionary Rule In Immigration Proceedings: Where It Was, Where It Is, Where It May Be Going, Irene Scharf
The Exclusionary Rule In Immigration Proceedings: Where It Was, Where It Is, Where It May Be Going, Irene Scharf
Faculty Publications
The case alerted me to the continuing issue concerning the treatment of alleged violations of Fourth Amendment rights in immigration court, with this article the result of research conducted relating thereto. Beyond reviewing the relevant views of the federal courts of appeals; the administrative tribunal that handles appeals of immigration court cases, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA); and even local immigration courts; I consider whether the jurisprudence has remained static since the Supreme Court's watershed opinion on the issue about twenty-five years ago. I also offer suggestions as to how to effectively, fairly, and efficiently resolve the issues raised …
Dr. King, Bull Connor, And Persuasive Narratives, Shaun B. Spencer
Dr. King, Bull Connor, And Persuasive Narratives, Shaun B. Spencer
Faculty Publications
This article describes an in-class exercise that illustrates the use of persuasive narrative techniques in a U.S. Supreme Court decision. The article first describes the background to the Supreme Court’s decision in Walker v. City of Birmingham. Next, the article examines persuasive narrative techniques through the lens of an in-class exercise in which students identify the Justices’ narrative devices and consider how those devices preview the Justices’ legal arguments. Finally, the article describes why the Walker case and the exercise are valuable not only to teach persuasive narratives, but also to raise broader issues of lawyering and social justice.
Pause At The Rubicon, John Marshall And Emancipation: Reparations In The Early National Period?, Frances Howell Rudko
Pause At The Rubicon, John Marshall And Emancipation: Reparations In The Early National Period?, Frances Howell Rudko
Faculty Publications
Marshall thought that the solution to emancipation and the end to slavery were to be nationally funded. He considered slavery a national problem, not a state problem, as most of his fellow Virginians insisted. In this he differed from most southerners who argued that slave matters were state matters and that the nation could involve itself in the institution of slavery only by strictly adhering to the role assigned to it by the Constitution under the three fifths clause and the fugitive slave clause.