Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

The Interstate Commerce Of Abortion: A Constitutional Argument For The Federal Invalidation Of Restrictive State Abortion Laws, Kaiya Amelia Lyons

Kaiya Amelia Lyons

No abstract provided.

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 …

The New Battleground For Same-Sex Couples Is Equal Rights For Their Kids, Tanya Washington

Tanya Monique Washington

No abstract provided.

Substantive Due Process For Noncitizens: Lessons From Obergefell, Anthony O'Rourke

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The state of Texas denies birth certificates to children born in the United States—and thus citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment—if their parents are undocumented immigrants with identification provided by their home countries’ consulates. What does this have to do with same-sex marriage? In a previous article, I demonstrated that the Supreme Court’s substantive due process analysis in United States v. Windsor is particularly relevant to the state’s regulation of undocumented immigrants. This Essay builds on my earlier analysis by examining United States v. Obergefell’s applications outside the context of same-sex marriage. Obergefell’s due process holding, I argue, can …

Equal Protection; State Alimony Statutes; Sex Discrimination; Orr V. Orr, David A. Detec, Jane L. Thomas-Moore

Akron Law Review

In Orr v. Orr the United States Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Alabama alimony statutes which provided that husbands, but not wives, may be required to pay alimony upon divorce. The Court's principal reason for so holding was the statutes' violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment on the basis of sex discrimination.

The High Price Of Poverty: A Study Of How The Majority Of Current Court System Procedures For Collecting Court Costs And Fees, As Well As Fines, Have Failed To Adhere To Established Precedent And The Constitutional Guarantees They Advocate., Trevor J. Calligan

Trevor J Calligan

No abstract provided.

State V. Nemeth: Equal Protection For The Battered Child, Joseph A. Shoaff

Akron Law Review

This Note analyzes the Court's decision in Nemeth. Part II presents a background of the battered child syndrome followed by a discussion of the admissibility of battered woman and battered child syndrome testimony in Ohio. In addition, it contains a brief overview of Ohio's ambiguous self-defense standard. Part III presents the facts, procedural history, and holding of Nemeth. Part IV analyzes the Court's holding.

This Note establishes why the Ohio Supreme Court should recognize the psychological equivalency of the battered woman and battered child syndromes and affirm the Nemeth holding on equal protection grounds. In doing so, the Court will …

Intestacy Concerns For Same-Sex Couples: How Variations In State Law And Policy Affect Testamentary Wishes, Megan Moser

Seattle University Law Review

As the number of same-sex couples increases in the United States, concerns regarding the evolution of federal and state law, with respect to rights for same-sex couples, also continue to rise. As marriage is not always available to same-sex couples, they often face very different legal issues than couples in a traditional marriage. Because marriage is typically not a legal cause of action, the question of a marriage’s validity often arises incidentally to another legal question, such as the disposition of a decedent’s estate.

Because I Said So: An Examination Of Parental Naming Rights, Ashley N. Moscarello

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Naming a child is often one of the most exciting parts of having a baby. Some parents, of course, choose to be more creative and unique, which leads to some very interesting names like Toilet Queen, Acne Fountain, Crimson Tide Redd, Messiah, Candy Stohr, and Violence. Although some of these names are quite absurd, should the government be able to tell parents that they have crossed the line?

When parents agree about the name they want to give their child, should the state or courts be able to intervene in that decision if the state has problems with the name? …

Better Safe? Why Obergefell Matters Before Court Rules, Tanya Washington

Tanya Monique Washington

No abstract provided.

From Reynolds To Lawrence To Brown V. Buhman: Antipolygamy Statutes Sliding On The Slippery Slope Of Same-Sex Marriage, Stephen L. Baskind

Stephen L Baskind

In 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas (striking Texas’ sodomy law), Justice Scalia predicted in his dissent the end of all morals legislation. If Justice Scalia is correct most, if not all, morals-based legislation may fall. For example, in recent years state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage have fallen to constitutional challenges. Ten years after Lawrence in 2013, a Utah Federal District Court in Brown v. Buhman, though feeling constrained by the 1878 Reynolds case (which rejected a First Amendment challenge to an antipolygamy law), nevertheless at the request of a polygamous family concluded that the cohabitation prong of Utah’s anti-bigamy …

More Than A Piece Of Paper: Same-Sex Parents And Their Adopted Children Are Entitled To Equal Protection In The Realm Of Birth Certificates, Shohreh Davoodi

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In Adar v. Smith, the Fifth Circuit held that Louisiana’s policy of refusing to issue accurate birth certificates to the children of out-of-state, same-sex adoptive parents does not deny those families equal protection of the law. This comment demonstrates that Louisiana’s policy does in fact violate the Equal Protection Clause. There are two ways Louisiana’s policy infringes on the rights of these families. First, the policy burdens fundamental rights stemming from the family autonomy of both parents and children. Second, the policy discriminates against out-of-state same-sex parents, treating them like second-class citizens. These concerns are strong enough that the …

Abolish Anonymous Reporting To Child Abuse Hotlines, Dale Margolin Cecka

Catholic University Law Review

All states allow the public to anonymously report suspicions of child abuse or neglect to a toll free central phone number. An extensive examination of the policy and practices behind anonymous reporting hotlines indicates that they are widely unregulated and susceptible to abuse. The possible repercussions of an anonymous phone call create costs to the family and society which do not outweigh the potential benefit of allowing anonymous public reports. Under the guise of protecting children, the law has developed in such a way that it infringes on the fundamental rights of parents and children. At the same time, anonymous …

Brief For Foreign And Comparative Law Experts Harold Hongju Koh Et Al. As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Harold Hongju Koh, Thomas Buergenthal, Sarah H. Cleveland, Laurence R. Helfer, Ryan Goodman, Sujit Choudhry

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.