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

Sexuality and the Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Sexuality and the Law

Chaos, Law, And God: The Religious Meanings Of Homosexuality, Jay Michaelson Jan 2008

Chaos, Law, And God: The Religious Meanings Of Homosexuality, Jay Michaelson

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

This Article argues that the religious meaning of homosexuality cannot be explained merely in terms of homophobia, "church and state," or traditional values versus progressive ones. Rather, the regulation of sexuality has a particular religious meaning: sexuality is a primary site in which religious law is engendered, where the lawfulness of religion meets the chaos beyond it. Whether in Biblical times or today, changing the way sexuality is regulated is a threat to the notion of order itself, as construed by Jewish and Christian religion. Arguments about gay rights, same-sex marriage, and related issues are not merely arguments informed by …


The Evolution Of Same-Sex Marriage In Canada: Lessons The U.S. Can Learn From Their Northern Neighbor Regarding Same-Sex Marriage Rights, Christy M. Glass, Nancy Kubasek Jan 2008

The Evolution Of Same-Sex Marriage In Canada: Lessons The U.S. Can Learn From Their Northern Neighbor Regarding Same-Sex Marriage Rights, Christy M. Glass, Nancy Kubasek

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

The broad differences between the United States and Canadian cases raise important questions about the social, political and legal factors that have promoted the extension of marriage rights in Canada while retarding similar efforts in the U.S. This article will compare the recent history of same-sex marriage laws in the United States and Canada. We argue that proponents of same-sex marriage as well as lawmakers could learn important lessons from the recent legalization of same-sex marriage in Canada. Section II develops a framework for comparing the U.S. and Canadian experience with same-sex marriage law. The next section traces Canada's recent …


Same-Sex Marriage And Federalism, Nancy J. Knauer Jan 2008

Same-Sex Marriage And Federalism, Nancy J. Knauer

Nancy J. Knauer

The increasing willingness of states to recognize same-sex relationships illustrates the central theme of this Symposium: federalism provides states the freedom to experiment with novel solutions to pressing social issues. The development of progressive policies seems to bear out Justice Brandeis' optimistic vision of federalism where "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country." With respect to same-sex relationships, however, state level reform efforts have not been uniformly progressive. To the contrary, the vast majority of these efforts prohibit the …


Rhetorical Atavism And The Narrative Of Progress In The Debate Over Marriage Equality, Courtney Megan Cahill Jan 2008

Rhetorical Atavism And The Narrative Of Progress In The Debate Over Marriage Equality, Courtney Megan Cahill

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.


State Domas, Neutral Principles, And The Möbius Of State Action, Darrell A. H. Miller Jan 2008

State Domas, Neutral Principles, And The Möbius Of State Action, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

This essay uses the Mobius strip as a mathematical metaphor for how state "defense of marriage amendments" (DOMAs) can twist the Shelley v. Kraemer contribution to state action doctrine. It argues that Shelley's core insight -- that judicial enforcement of private agreements can constitute state action and must meet federal Fourteenth Amendment commands -- can be used by state judiciaries to hold that state judicial enforcement of private agreements between same sex-couples is a species of state action forbidden by state DOMA. As explored in this essay, the potential doctrinal contortion of Shelley by state DOMAs is at once a …


“A Painful Process Of Waiting”: The New York, Washington, New Jersey, And Maryland Dissenting Justices Understand That “Same-Sex Marriage” Is Not What Same-Sex Couples Are Seeking, Barbara Cox Jan 2008

“A Painful Process Of Waiting”: The New York, Washington, New Jersey, And Maryland Dissenting Justices Understand That “Same-Sex Marriage” Is Not What Same-Sex Couples Are Seeking, Barbara Cox

Faculty Scholarship

This essay focuses on the recent decisions by the highest courts of four states rejecting the claims of individuals in same-sex relationships that they must be permitted to marry the partner of their choice. In the cases of Hernandez v. Robles, Andersen v. King County, Lewis v. Harris, and Conaway v. Deane, a majority or plurality of each court determined that the bans preventing individuals in same-sex couples from marrying were constitutional. Understanding these cases is particularly important as additional state supreme courts address the cases of similar plaintiffs pending before them.


Marriage And Practical Knowledge, Robert F. Nagel Jan 2008

Marriage And Practical Knowledge, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.


Longing For Loving, Katherine M. Franke Jan 2008

Longing For Loving, Katherine M. Franke

Faculty Scholarship

Our task in this Symposium is to place Loving v. Virginia in a contemporary context: to interpret, if not reinterpret, its meaning in light of the settings in which race, sexuality, and intimacy are being negotiated and renegotiated today. So we might ask, in what way are Mildred and Richard Loving role models for us today? How, if at all, does the legal movement for marriage equality for interracial couples help us think through our arguments and strategies as we struggle today for marriage equality for same-sex couples?

One way to frame these questions is to ask whether there is …


Chapman Dialogues: Same Sex Marriage - Response To Professor Eskrdige, Lawrence Rosenthal Dec 2007

Chapman Dialogues: Same Sex Marriage - Response To Professor Eskrdige, Lawrence Rosenthal

Lawrence Rosenthal

This essay, a revision of remarks originally delivered as part of the Chapman Dialogues series at Chapman University School of Law, is a response to the remarks of Professor William Eskridge of Yale Law School making the case for the recognition of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. The essay argues that the judicial establishment of a right in the face of deeply entrenched social norms, prior to the time at which the political groundwork necessary for the enforcement of the right has been laid, risks a powerful and ultimately counterproductive backlash.