Law Commons^™

Family Law's Exclusions, Clare Huntington

Faculty Scholarship

As Fordham Law School commemorates the hundredth anniversary of women in its ranks, the school is also acknowledging the ways it has excluded women. For this special Issue celebrating scholarship by the women of Fordham, I see a similar theme echoing in my work. From my first article, published soon after I graduated from law school, through my most recent work, I have identified and explored the exclusions riddling family law.

Nonmarital Families And The Legal System's Institutional Failures, Clare Huntington

Faculty Scholarship

As along-time critic of family law, I find it odd to be singing the system's praises. And yet I am. Sort of. In this issue of the Family Law Quarterly, which addresses cohabitation and nonmarital families, I want to focus on what happens when relationships end. For all its shortcomings, family law provides an institution to help divorcing couples restructure their families following the end of relationships. For nonmarital families, not so much. Unmarried parents theoretically can go to court when they separate, but most do not. Thus., as a practical matter, the legal system leaves unmarried parents without an …

Postmarital Family Law: A Legal Structure For Nonmarital Families, Clare Huntington

Faculty Scholarship

Family law is based on marriage, but family life increasingly is not. The American family is undergoing a seismic shift, with marriage rates steadily declining and more than four in ten children now born to unmarried parents. Children of unmarried parents fall far behind children of married parents on a variety of metrics, contributing to stark inequality among children. Poverty and related factors explain much of this differential, but new sociological evidence highlights family structure — particularly friction and dislocation between unmarried parents after their relationship ends — as a crucial part of the problem. As the trend toward nonmarital …

Obergefell'S Conservatism: Reifying Familial Fronts, Clare Huntington

Faculty Scholarship

I am delighted with the result in Obergefell v. Hodges, but I am unhappy with the Court’s reasoning. In lieu of a straightforward, and far more defensible, decision based purely on the Equal Protection Clause, Justice Kennedy’s reliance on the Due Process Clause is deeply problematic.

A substantive due process analysis required the Court to define marriage and explain its social importance. This meant the Court had to choose between competing images — social fronts — of marriage. If it had used an equal protection analysis, the Court would not have had to decide whether marriage is traditional or …