Law Commons^™

Marriage Equality Comes To The Fourth Circuit, Carl Tobias

Washington and Lee Law Review

Marriage equality has come to America. Throughout 2014, several federal appellate courts and numerous district court judges across the United States invalidated state constitutional or statutory proscriptions on same-sex marriage. Therefore, it was not surprising that Eastern District of Virginia Judge Arenda Wright Allen held that Virginia’s bans were unconstitutional in February. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed her opinion that July. North Carolina, South Carolina, and West Virginia District Judges rejected these jurisdictions’ prohibitions during autumn, and the Supreme Court approved marriage equality the next year. Because marriage equality in the Fourth Circuit presents …

Stretching The First Amendment: Religious Freedom And Its Constitutional Limits Within The Adoption Sector, Tracy Smith

Pepperdine Law Review

The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity.

How To Get Away With Murder: The “Gay Panic” Defense, Omar T. Russo

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The “Legal Stranger” And Parent: A Love Story?, Kellie Mahoney

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Federal Visions Of Private Family Support, Laura A. Rosenbury

Laura A. Rosenbury

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 …

Afterword – Straightness As Property: Back To The Future-Law And Status In The 21st Century, Symposium: Liberalism And Property Rights, Berta E. Hernández-Truyol, Shelbi D. Day

Berta E. Hernández-Truyol

As is evident from the other works in this Symposium, throughout history in both the United States and the greater Western World, status-based exclusion of individuals and groups from property rights has been central to the existence of political and social hierarchies. Specifically, exclusion based on status — whether it be nationality, culture, race, sex or sexuality — has plagued our history and has been integral in the formation and development of both constitutional and property law regimes. Consequently, both regimes are at best uneven in the grant and distribution of rights and benefits. A forward-looking examination of the link …

Doma And Diffusion Theory: Ending Animus Legislation Through A Rational Basis Approach, David J. Herzig

Akron Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to expand the scope of the discussion from one of morality to include a sociological approach, called Diffusion Theory...Section II of this Article explains Diffusion Theory. Section III explores the background of DOMA and the factual background in which DOMA is being challenged by the states and private citizens. Section IV discusses the fundamentals behind the Florida adoption ban and how the change in the message by the challengers has proven effective. The final part, Section V, analyzes whether the approach should center on the inevitability of the change, as reflected in the Justice …

Marriage-Based Immigration For Same-Sex Couples After Doma: Lingering Problems Of Proof And Prejudice, Anna Carron

Northwestern University Law Review

In 2013, the Supreme Court changed the lives of thousands of same-sex couples in America by declaring the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional in United States v. Windsor. This decision allowed same-sex spouses to receive the same marriage-based immigration benefits under federal law that “traditional marriages” had long received. Although this holding is a victory for binational same-sex couples, bias still exists in the practices U.S. Customs and Immigration Services (USCIS) uses to evaluate the legitimacy of marriages. This bias manifests itself in the proof USCIS requires to show a relationship is bona fide, proof that often assumes …

Income Tax Treatment Of Same-Sex Couples: Windsor Vs State Marriage Bans, Samantha Schmid

Marquette Law Review

In 1996 the United States Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which codified the federal definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. But in 2013 the United States Supreme Court struck down this definition of marriage and, for the first time, the federal government began recognizing same-sex marriages. However, many states, including Wisconsin, continued to have state bans on same-sex marriage, and many of these bans have recently been challenged in state and federal courts. The effect of this has been a patchwork of laws that provide same-sex couples different rights based upon the state in …

Baker V. Nelson: Flotsam In The Tidal Wave Of Windsor's Wake, David B. Cruz

Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality

Part I of this Article sketches the virtually unbroken string of pro-marriage decisions in the lower federal and state courts since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in United States v. Windsor to give a sense of the size and magnitude of this “tidal wave” of precedent. Next, Part II briefly explores some of the reasons that might help account for the flood of litigation and overwhelmingly positive outcomes. Part III tentatively suggests one way this flow of decisions in favor of marriage equality might influence the Supreme Court as it returns to the issue. Part II then at some …

Marriage Equality Comes To Virginia, Carl Tobias

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Duty To Defend And The Rule Of Law, Gregory F. Zoeller

Indiana Law Journal

This Article challenges Eric Holder’s and William Pryor’s views and explains the proper role of a state attorney general when a party challenges a state statute. In short, an attorney general owes the state and its citizens, as sovereign, a duty to defend its statutes against constitutional attack except when controlling precedent so overwhelmingly shows that the statute is unconstitutional that no good-faith argument can be made in its defense. To exercise discretion more broadly, and selectively to pick and choose which statutes to defend, only erodes the rule of law. (introduction)

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 …

Full Faith And Credit For Homosexual Marriage And A Resurgent Defense Of Marriage Act, Steven Specht

Steven Specht

When the Court considered Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in United States v. Windsor, it carefully avoided addressing Section 2 which created the ability for states to ignore the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Though bans on same-sex or homosexual marriage are slowly being overturned by the courts, Section 2 creates a work-around for many states to not recognize same-sex marriages from other states on grounds of public policy. Even if the Court is to strike down all state bans on same-sex marriage in an upcoming opinion, no case on Section 2 …

Doma's Ghost And Copyright Reversionary Interests, Brad A. Greenberg

Northwestern University Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

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 …

Fixing Hollingsworth: Standing In Initiative Cases, Karl Manheim, John S. Caragozian, Donald Warner

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

In Hollingsworth v. Perry, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by the “Official Proponents” of California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California. Chief Justice Roberts’ majority opinion held that initiative sponsors lack Article III standing to defend their ballot measures even when state officials refuse to defend against constitutional challenges. As a result, Hollingsworth provides state officers with the ability to overrule laws that were intended to bypass the government establishment—in effect, an “executive veto” of popularly-enacted initiatives.

The Article examines this new “executive veto” in depth. It places Hollingsworth in context, discussing the initiative process …

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 …

Navigating A Post-Windsor World: The Promise And Limits Of Marriage Equality, Nancy J. Knauer

Nancy J. Knauer

When the 2013 landmark decision in U.S. v. Windsor invalidated part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), it was hailed as a landmark civil rights victory, but its implementation has been far from seamless. The federal government has not applied a uniform rule for marriage recognition, applying a state-of-domicile rule for some purposes (Social Security) and a broader state-of-celebration rule for others (e.g., federal tax matters). Moreover, Windsor did not directly address the state-level marriage prohibitions that remain in place in the majority of states. As a result, the United States continues to be a patchwork of marriage laws …

Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano

Seattle University Law Review

Despite being married to a U.S. citizen, non-citizen transgender individuals and non-citizen spouses married to transgender U.S. citizens still face deportation today due to current immigration policies. When forced to return to their home countries, transgender individuals are likely to encounter violence from those who perpetuate hate towards transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Instead of protecting these individuals, the United States continues to send people back to their native countries solely because those individuals do not fall within the narrowly constructed definition of marriage some states use that is legally recognized by federal courts. Transgender individuals receive disparate treatment as …

Immigration After Doma: How Equal Is Marriage Equality?, John Medeiros

Journal of Public Law and Policy

Nearly 36,000 United States citizens are currently living with their foreign-born same-sex partners. Until recently, same-gendered binational spouses have been unable to avail themselves of the immigration advantages shared by their heterosexual counterparts, largely because of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines “marriage” at the federal level as “a legal union between one man and one woman.” This dual treatment changed, however, in the summer of 2013, when the Supreme Court heard the case of United States v. Windsor, which challenged Section 3 of DOMA. In Windsor, the Court held that by restricting …

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

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 …

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 …

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.