Law Commons^™

Obama's Conversion On Same-Sex Marriage: The Social Foundations Of Individual Rights, Robert L. Tsai

Faculty Scholarship

This essay explores how presidents who wish to seize a leadership role over the development of rights must tend to the social foundations of those rights. Broad cultural changes alone do not guarantee success, nor do they dictate the substance of constitutional ideas. Rather, presidential aides must actively re-characterize the social conditions in which rights are made, disseminated, and enforced. An administration must articulate a strategically plausible theory of a particular right, ensure there is cultural and institutional support for that right, and work to minimize blowback. Executive branch officials must seek to transform and popularize legal concepts while working …

After Obergefell: The Next Generation Of Lgbt Rights Litigation, Nancy Levit

Faculty Works

Leading to Obergefell v. Hodges, the road to marriage equality was uneven. Several state courts in the 1970s rejected same-sex marriage, based on circular reasoning that avoided the critical constitutional question. The federal government entered the debate and enacted the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. DOMA restricted the definition of marriage to one man and one woman; and, no state was required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state. State legislatures that had not previously acted enacted mini-DOMAs and others passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. Within two decades the Supreme Court reversed its position on the …

Federalism, Marriage, And Heather Gerken's Mad Genius, Kristin Collins

Faculty Scholarship

In her characteristically astute and engaging essay, Professor Heather Gerken offers a sensitive and sympathetic reading of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor.¹ Her core claim is that Windsor—and the transformation of political and legal support for same-sex marriage in the United States—demonstrate how “federalism and rights work together to promote change” and, in particular, how federalism furthers the equality and liberty values of the Fourteenth Amendment.² This is a natural line of argument for Gerken to develop with respect to Windsor, as she has produced an incredible body of scholarship dedicated to what …

A Friendly Amendment, Larry Yackle

Faculty Scholarship

Heather Gerken comes to praise Justice Kennedy’s opinion for the Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor. 1 I come to praise Gerken’s valiant effort to recast the Windsor opinion along more convincing lines.2 Gerken does not propose a wholesale substitute for Justice Kennedy’s analysis. She suggests a shift in emphasis that lends Kennedy’s explanation for condemning DOMA a surprising jurisprudential significance. Where some us have seen yet another lamentable paean to the sovereignty of the states, Gerken detects the faint hint of the “nationalist” school of federalism that she and others have nurtured in recent years.3 Gerken does not …

Same-Sex Couple Deemed “Spouses” For Purposes Of The Bankruptcy Code, Michael Rich

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The Bankruptcy Code states that a legally married couple may file a joint bankruptcy petition pursuant to section 302(a). However, this right to joint filing is narrowly limited to an “individual that may be a debtor under such chapter and such individual’s spouse.” Generally, courts have rejected joint filings under section 302(a) filed by debtors who are not legally married. For example, a parent and child cannot file a joint bankruptcy petition under section 302(a). Further, a couple that is living together without being legally married may not file a joint petition. The Bankruptcy Code is silent as to …

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 …

Federal Visions Of Private Family Support, Laura A. Rosenbury

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article offers a new perspective on the relationship between family and federalism by analyzing why the government — whether state or federal — recognizes family at all. The Article examines the current balance between state and federal authority over family by reviewing the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Astrue v. Capato, upholding the Social Security Administration’s deference to states’ intestacy laws when distributing benefits to posthumously conceived children, and United States v. Windsor, in which the Court struck down a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Although each decision affirmed the states’ primary role in defining family …

Weather Permitting: Incrementalism, Animus, And The Art Of Forecasting Marriage Equality After U.S. V. Windsor, Jeremiah A. Ho

All Faculty Scholarship

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 the …

"Not Without Political Power": Gays And Lesbians, Equal Protection, Darren Lenard Hutchinson

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court purportedly utilizes the suspect class doctrine in order to balance institutional concerns with the protection of important constitutional rights. The Court, however, inconsistently applies this doctrine, and it has not precisely defined its contours. The political powerlessness factor is especially undertheorized and contradictorily applied. Nevertheless, this factor has become salient in recent equal protection cases brought by gay and lesbian plaintiffs. A growing body of and federal and state-court precedent addresses the flaws of the Court's suspect class doctrine. This Article discusses the inadequacies of the suspect class doctrine and highlights problems within the emerging scholarship and …

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 …

The Geography Of Marriage, William P. Lapiana

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Mobile Activism: What Your Profile Picture Says About You, Laura J. Koenig

SURGE

I know you’ve all been seeing this image all of your Facebook news feeds. All of the sudden a few weeks ago it became everyone’s profile picture. People were sharing it, along with other images, explaining why Prop. 8 and the Defense Of Marriage Act should be repealed, and were generally expressing their support of marriage equality. [excerpt]

The Current State And Trajectory Of U.S. Conflict Of Laws, Marketa Trimble

Boyd Briefs / Road Scholars

Professor Marketa Trimble presented these materials to the Czech Society for International Law on March 28, 2013.

A Visual Guide To United States V. Windsor: Doctrinal Origins Of Justice Kennedy’S Majority Opinion, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

After finding the Court had jurisdiction, Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor reached the merits and concluded that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was in violation of the Fifth Amendment. In his dissent, Justice Scalia attacked the majority’s doctrinal reasoning on the merits as “nonspecific handwaving” that invalidated DOMA “maybe on equal-protection grounds, maybe on substantive due process grounds, and perhaps with some amorphous federalism component playing a role.”

This Visual Guide is a “doctrinal map” that responds to Scalia’s accusation by charting the doctrinal origins of Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion. Specifically, the map shows how …

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 …

Why Equal Protection Trumps Federalism In The Same-Sex Marriage Cases, Erin Ryan

Scholarly Publications

Federalism is once again at the forefront of the Supreme Court’s most contentious cases this Term. The cases attracting most attention are the two same-sex marriage cases that were argued in March. Facing intense public sentiment on both sides of the issue and the difficult questions they raise about the boundary between state and federal authority, some justices openly questioned whether to just defer to the political process. And while this is often a wise prudential approach in review of contested federalism-sensitive policymaking, it’s exactly the wrong course of action when the matter under review is an individual right. This …

Passive-Aggressive Executive Power, Corinna Barrett Lain

Law Faculty Publications

My contribution to the 2013 Constitutional Law Schmooze poses a question about the downside of executive power, at least in the enforcement context. If executive power to enforce the law presupposes the duty to use it, what happens when the executive branch would rather not? Perhaps reframing the question will help. What do the death penalty, driving violations, drugs, deportation, and the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) have in common, besides the letter “d”? The answer is passive-aggressive executive power, and in the brief discussion that follows, I use these five factual contexts to illustrate five variations of what I …

The 'Federal Law Of Marriage': Deference, Deviation, And Doma, W. Burlette Carter

GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works

The article discusses the history of federal inroads into marriage by examining federal interventions during the nineteenth and early twentieth century, argues that, in some cases but not all, marriages' federal benefits are indeed intended to support natural procreation, argues that DOMA's underlying statutes are key to ascertaining the purposes of federal marriage benefits and burdens, distinguishes sexual orientation discrimination from race discrimination and offers a proposal for dealing with equal protection challenges to denials of marriage rights to same sex couples. The proposal, which depends upon dual standards of review, recognizes the historical denial of family rights to same …

The Virtue Of Obscurity, Colin Starger

All Faculty Scholarship

The critics have panned Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in United States v. Windsor. Supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage have together bemoaned what may be called Kennedy’s “doctrinal obscurity” in Windsor. Doctrinal obscurity describes the opinion’s failure to justify striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) using any discernable accepted test for substantive due process or equal protection. Specifically, Kennedy does not ask whether DOMA burdens a right “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition,” nor does he identify sexual orientation as a suspect or semi-suspect classification, nor does he subject DOMA to explicit rational …

Will Supreme Court Rule On Doma?, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

Windsor Products: Equal Protection From Animus, Dale Carpenter

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court's opinion in United States v. Windsor has puzzled commentators, who have tended to overlook or dismiss its ultimate conclusion that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional because it arose from animus. What we have in Justice Kennedy’s opinion is Windsor Products — an outpouring of decades of constitutional development whose fountainhead is Carolene Products and whose tributaries are the gay-rights and federalism streams. This paper presents the constitutional anti-animus principle, including what constitutes animus, why it offends the Constitution, and how the Supreme Court determines it is present. The paper also discusses why the Court was …

Prop 8, Doma Defenders Rely On Federalism, Arthur S. Leonard

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

Same-Sex Marriage Litigation Update - September 17, 2012, Wilson Huhn

Akron Law Faculty Publications

Same-sex marriage cases are reaching the federal circuit courts and may be heard by the Supreme Court in the near future. This presentation summarizes the status of same-sex marriage litigation.

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 …

Same-Sex Married Debtors May File A Joint Petition For Bankruptcy, Jennifer Arcarola

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Legally married couples may file a petition for bankruptcy jointly under section 302(a) of the Bankruptcy Code (“the Code”). The choice to file jointly is limited to only include married spouses, excluding partners and people in civil unions. Across virtually all jurisdictions, courts have explicitly rejected joint filings under section 302(a) filed by unmarried debtors. For example, an adult child cannot file for bankruptcy jointly with a parent, nor can a cohabiting unmarried couple file together. While the Bankruptcy Code does not purport to define who may qualify as a married couple, the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) does, …

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 …

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 …

Private Parties, Legislators, And The Government's Mantle: On Intervention And Article Iii Standing, Suzanne B. Goldberg

Faculty Scholarship

This essay takes up questions regarding whether initiative proponents and legislators can defend a law in federal court when the government declines to defend. Looking first at intervention under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I argue that neither has the cognizable interest needed to enter an ongoing lawsuit as a party. Yet even if they are allowed to intervene, these would-be defenders of state or federal law cannot take on the government’s mantle to satisfy Article III because the government’s standing derives from the risk to its enforcement powers, which is an interest that cannot be delegated to others. …

Planning For Same-Sex Couples In 2011, Patricia A. Cain

Faculty Publications

This article is the published version of a CLE outline prepared for ALI-ABA in January 2011 and then updated in March 2011. It includes citations to relevant authority regarding a number of tax issues that same-sex couples encounter both under the income tax and under the estate and gift tax system. The outline also includes a list of states that recognize the status of same-sex couples as married, registered domestic partners, civil unions, or similar forms of recognition, and identifies those states in which legislative action recognizing same-sex couples is possible and those in which it is not, due to …

"Till Death (Or Doma) Does Us Part": How Doma Imposes An Unconstitutional Classifying And Coercive Condition On Federal Funding In The Wake Of Massachusetts V. United States Department Of Health And Human Services, Erin Bender

Law Student Publications

Part II of this Note provides a short legislative history of DOMA and an overview of Spending Clause jurisprudence. Part III provides an overview of Judge Tauro‘s opinion in Massachusetts. Finally, Part IV of this Note analyzes Section Three of DOMA under the proposed classifying/coercive condition approach to the Spending Clause and concludes that Section Three of DOMA would be unconstitutional as either type of condition.