Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Toward A More Perfect Union: The Road To Marriage Equality For Same-Sex Couples, Jennifer L. Levi Jan 2004

Toward A More Perfect Union: The Road To Marriage Equality For Same-Sex Couples, Jennifer L. Levi

Faculty Scholarship

The Author believes that civil unions have become synonymous with inequality. In this posture, the term inequality should be descriptive rather than subjective. She argues that civil unions relegate gay and lesbian couples to second-class status. However characterized or defined, civil unions are not marriages. Those two statuses are not equivalent; they are not equal. Within that framework, in order for any one person to decide where he or she stands on the issue of whether gay and lesbian couples should be entitled to marriage, civil unions, something else, or nothing, he or she must first understand why marriage matters …


Restructuring The Marital Bedroom: The Role Of The Privacy Doctrine In Advocating The Legalization Of Same-Sex Marriage, Nadine A. Gartner Jan 2004

Restructuring The Marital Bedroom: The Role Of The Privacy Doctrine In Advocating The Legalization Of Same-Sex Marriage, Nadine A. Gartner

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

Part I of this paper examines the reasons underlying queer rights advocates' reluctance to insert privacy arguments into the case for legalizing same-sex marriage. Part II illustrates that, due to such disinclination, advocates transformed notions of privacy into concepts of liberty. Part III argues that, after the Lawrence decision, proponents of same-sex marriage can and should use privacy-based arguments to fortify their claims.


Foreword To Legalizing Gay Marriage, David L. Chambers Jan 2004

Foreword To Legalizing Gay Marriage, David L. Chambers

Other Publications

The significance and timeliness of Michael Mello’s book was brought home to me recently when I participated in a conference on same-sex marriage at Brigham Young University Law School in Provo, Utah. Nearly everyone in the audience opposed permitting two men or two women to marry each other. Many favored an amendment to the United States Constitution to prevent any state from permitting same-sex couples to marry. Most regretted the decision of the United States Supreme Court in June 2004 holding sodomy laws unconstitutional. To them, the institution of marriage was under siege. The welfare of unborn children was at …


Marriage, Cohabitation, And Collective Responsibility For Dependency, Elizabeth S. Scott Jan 2004

Marriage, Cohabitation, And Collective Responsibility For Dependency, Elizabeth S. Scott

Faculty Scholarship

Marriage has fallen on hard times. Although most Americans say that a lasting marriage is an important part of their life plans, the institution no longer enjoys its former exclusive status as the core family form. This is so largely because social norms that regulate family life and women's social roles have changed. A century (or even a couple of generations) ago, marriage was a stable economic and social union that, for the most part, lasted for the joint lives of the spouses. It was the only option for a socially sanctioned intimate relationship and was the setting in which …


"You Are Entering A Gay And Lesbian Free Zone": On The Radical Dissents Of Justice Scalia And Other (Post-) Queers – [Raising Questions About Lawrence, Sex Wars, And The Criminal Law], Bernard Harcourt Jan 2004

"You Are Entering A Gay And Lesbian Free Zone": On The Radical Dissents Of Justice Scalia And Other (Post-) Queers – [Raising Questions About Lawrence, Sex Wars, And The Criminal Law], Bernard Harcourt

Faculty Scholarship

The most renowned substantive criminal law decision of the October 2002 Term, Lawrence v. Texas, will go down in history as a critical turning point in criminal law debates over the proper scope of the penal sanction. For the first time in the history of American criminal law, the United States Supreme Court has declared that a supermajoritarian moral belief does not necessarily provide a rational basis for criminalizing conventionally deviant conduct. The Court's ruling is the coup de grâce to legal moralism administered after a prolonged, brutish, tedious, and debilitating struggle against liberal legalism in its various criminal …