Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Same-sex marriage (3)
- Baker v. State (2)
- Common Benefits Clause (2)
- Constitutional Law (2)
- Constitutional jurisprudence (2)
-
- Constitutional scholarship (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Law and Society (2)
- Law school curriculum (2)
- New Judicial Federalism (2)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (2)
- State constitutional law (2)
- Vermont (2)
- Affirmative action (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Rights (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Constitutional Rights (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Constitutional rhetoric (1)
- Decriminalization (1)
- Dignity (1)
- Equal Protection (1)
- Gay rights (1)
- India (1)
- Justice Kennedy (1)
- Lawrence v. Texas (1)
- Legal Analysis and Writing (1)
- Legal Education (1)
- Legal History (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The Respectable Dignity Of Obergefell V. Hodges, Yuvraj Joshi
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 Constitutional Rhetoric Of White Innocence
The Constitutional Rhetoric Of White Innocence
Cecil J. Hunt II
This article discusses the Supreme Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence in deciding racially inflected claims of constitutional shelter. It argues that the Court’s use of this rhetoric reveals that it has adopted a distinctly white-centered-perspective which reveals only a one-sided view of racial reality and thus distorts its ability to accurately appreciate the true nature of racial reality in contemporary America. This article examines the Court’s habit of consistently choosing a white-centered-perspective in constitutional race cases by looking at the Court’s use of the rhetoric of white innocence first in the context of the Court’s concern with …
Legal Affinities: Explorations In The Legal Form Of Thought, Patrick Brennan
Legal Affinities: Explorations In The Legal Form Of Thought, Patrick Brennan
Patrick McKinley Brennan
This is my Introduction to Legal Affinities: Explorations in the Legal Form of Thought (forthcoming 2012) (co-edited with H. Jefferson Powell and Jack Sammons), a volume of essays dedicated to exploring the work of Joseph Vining. The Introduction introduces Vining’s phenomenology of law and surveys the themes and topics developed by the volume’s eight authors: Joseph Vining, Judge John T. Noonan, Jr., Rev. John McCausland, H. Jefferson Powell, Jack Sammons, Steve Smith, James Boyd White, and Patrick Brennan.
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
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 …
The Reality Of Moral Imperatives In Liberal Religion, Howard Lesnick
The Reality Of Moral Imperatives In Liberal Religion, Howard Lesnick
howard lesnick
This paper uses a classic one-liner attributed to Dostoyoevski’s Ivan Karamozov, "Without God everything is permitted," to explore some differences between what I term traditional and liberal religion. The expansive connotations and implications of Ivan’s words are grounded in the historic association of wrongfulness and punishment, and in a reaction against the late modern challenge to the inexorability of that association, whether in liberal religion or in secular moral thought. The paper argues that, with its full import understood, Ivan’s claim begs critical questions of the meaning and source of compulsion and choice, and of knowledge and belief regarding the …
Respectable Queerness, Yuvraj Joshi
Respectable Queerness, Yuvraj Joshi
Yuvraj Joshi
This Article proposes a new theoretical framework to understand public recognition of gay people and relationships. This framework—called “respectable queerness”—suggests that public recognition of gay people and relationships is contingent upon their acquiring a respectable social identity that is actually constituted by public performances of respectability and by privately queer practices. The challenges posed by such recognition include dissonance between one’s public and private selves and fuelling moralism and entrenching divisions between different queer constituencies.
The Case For Repeal Of India's Sodomy Law, Yuvraj Joshi
The Case For Repeal Of India's Sodomy Law, Yuvraj Joshi
Yuvraj Joshi
This Article surveys some of the arguments for and against the repeal of India’s sodomy law. The first part analyses s.377 of the Indian Penal Code and considers its consequences for India's gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, hijra and kothi persons. The second part provides an overview of the various theoretical and political positions taken in the sodomy law debate. The third part examines the rights-based arguments that have been made in support of repealing or reading down s.377, and the feminist and queer critiques of these arguments. The fourth part considers the arguments against the repeal that have been put …
Baker V. State And The Promise Of The New Judicial Federalism, Charles Baron, Lawrence Friedman
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 …