Law Commons^™

From Sex For Pleasure To Sex For Parenthood: How The Law Manufactures Mothers, Beth A. Burkstrand-Reid

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

As soon as sperm enter a woman, so do law and politics, or so the decades-long disputes surrounding abortion suggest. Now, however, renewed debates surrounding contraceptives show legal and political interference with women’s sexual and reproductive autonomy may actually precede the sperm. This Article argues that, increasingly, women even thinking about having sex are defined socially and legally as “mothers.” Via this broad definition of who is a “mother,” the State extends its reach into women’s decision-making throughout their reproductive lifetime.

This Article argues that the State simultaneously devalues women’s choices to have sex for pleasure, which this Article calls …

A Testament To Power: Mary Woolsey And Dolores Rodriguez As Trial Witnesses In Arizona's Early Statehood, Katrina Jagodinsky

Department of History: Faculty Publications

In 1913, two women made history when they testified before the all-white, all-male jury of the Superior Court of Yavapai County in the State of Arizona v. Juan Fernandez murder trial. Mary Woolsey, an elderly Yavapai widow, and Dolores Rodriguez, a Mexican single mother of three, established the legal precedent for allowing non-English-speaking, non-citizen women to testify in state courts in Arizona when many other western states still did not grant such privileges to indigenous residents. Woolsey and Rodriguez showed that Arizona's indigenous population were competent, if somewhat problematic, members of Arizona's body politic, and their historic involvement in the …

Just Another Brick In The Wall: The Establishment Clause As A Heckler's Veto, Richard F. Duncan

Nebraska College of Law: Faculty Publications

"When rights are incorporated against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment they should advance, not constrain, individual liberty."'

Although the First Amendment explicitly protects individuals against only laws made by "Congress," the Supreme Court has long held that, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the states are forbidden from "depriving" persons of the fundamental individual liberties protected by the First Amendment.' Thus, under the so-called doctrine of incorporation, a particular provision of the First Amendment (as well as of the rest of the Bill of Rights) "is made applicable to the states [only] if the Justices are …