Law Commons^™

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 …

Conjuring "Equal Dignity": Mapping The Constitutional Dialogue To And From Same-Sex Marriage, Julie Nice

Julie A. Nice

Gerry Bradley Was Quoted In The Ncr Article Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Squall In Seattle On January 14, Gerard Bradley

Gerard V. Bradley

Gerry Bradley was quoted in the National Catholic Register article Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Squall in Seattle by JOAN FRAWLEY DESMOND on January 14. “The Supreme Court’s Hosanna-Tabor decision in 2012 basically means that no law can make a religious institution retain someone the institution does not want if that person has some responsibility for developing or teaching the doctrines of that religion,” said Gerard Bradley, a professor of law at the University of Notre Dame.

Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman

Charles H. Baron

In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution’s Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article explores …

T: Appending Transgender Equal Rights To Gay, Lesbian And Bisexual Equal Rights, Libby Adler

Libby S. Adler

Advocates for transgender constituencies are making crucial choices right now about what kind of reformist tracks to lay for themselves. The appending of “T” to “LGB” suggests the likelihood of following in the steps of the mainstream advocates for the sexuality constituencies, one characterized by a quest for formal equality based on an assumed identity. This paper urges that transgender advocates consider fully the costs of this course before charging headlong in a direction that might at first hold obvious appeal. Such a course has had under-recognized costs for the sexuality-based constituencies and costs for transgender constituencies are already beginning …

Going Courting: How Same-Sex Marriage Opponents Came To Love The Courts, Robert Lipkin

Robert Justin Lipkin

No abstract provided.

Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman

Charles H. Baron

In Baker v. State, the Supreme Court of Vermont ruled that the state constitution’s Common Benefits Clause prohibits the exclusion of same-sex couples from the benefits and protections of marriage. Baker has been praised by constitutional scholars as a prototypical example of the New Judicial Federalism. The authors agree, asserting that the decision sets a standard for constitutional discourse by dint of the manner in which each of the opinions connects and responds to the others, pulls together arguments from other state and federal constitutional authorities, and provides a clear basis for subsequent development of constitutional principle. This Article explores …