Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Law
Introduction: Invited Essays On The Implications Of Windsor And Perry
Introduction: Invited Essays On The Implications Of Windsor And Perry
Indiana Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Standing To Appeal And Executive Non-Defense Of Federal Law After The Marriage Cases, Ryan W. Scott
Standing To Appeal And Executive Non-Defense Of Federal Law After The Marriage Cases, Ryan W. Scott
Indiana Law Journal
Essays on the Implications of Windsor and Perry
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
Conferring Dignity: The Metamorphosis Of The Legal Homosexual, Noa Ben-Asher
Conferring Dignity: The Metamorphosis Of The Legal Homosexual, Noa Ben-Asher
Faculty Publications
The legal homosexual has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past three decades, culminating in United States v. Windsor, which struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In 1986, the homosexual was a sexual outlaw beyond the protection of the Constitution. By 2013, the homosexual had become part of a married couple that is “deemed by the State worthy of dignity.” This Article tells the story of this metamorphosis in four phases. In the first, the “Homosexual Sodomite Phase,” the United States Supreme Court famously declared in Bowers v. Hardwick that there was no right …
Leveling Up After Doma, Deborah A. Widiss
Leveling Up After Doma, Deborah A. Widiss
Indiana Law Journal
Essays on the Implication of Windsor and Perry
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
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Same-Sex Marriage, Federalism, And Judicial Supremacy, Robert F. Nagel
Same-Sex Marriage, Federalism, And Judicial Supremacy, Robert F. Nagel
Publications
Justice Kennedy's opinion in United States v. Windsor is characterized by a number of strained and wavering constitutional claims. Prominent among these is the argument that the principle of federalism calls into question the congressional decision to adopt the traditional definition of marriage, which the state of New York rejected. An examination of earlier federalism cases demonstrates that Kennedy's appreciation for federalism is in fact severely limited and suggests and that his lax use of legal authority is directly if perversely related to this limited appreciation.
Federalism cases prior to Windsor show that Justice Kennedy supports state authority only when …
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 …
The Ninth Circuit’S Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian C. Bartrum
The Ninth Circuit’S Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian C. Bartrum
Scholarly Works
When the Ninth Circuit handed down Witt v. Department of the Air Force, President Obama and then-Solicitor General Kagan declined to take an appeal to the Supreme Court. At the time, it seemed that most advocates of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” believed that the administration made that decision because it was afraid the Supreme Court would reverse the Ninth Circuit. If that fear was perhaps well-founded in 2009, it is certainly less so now. In the wake of SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Abbott Laboratories, as well as recent District Court decisions, opponents of federal constitutional protection for gay people …