Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Comparing Supreme Court Jurisprudence In Obergefell V. Hodges And Town Of Castle Rock V. Gonzales: A Watershed Moment For Due Process Liberty, Jill C. Engle
Journal Articles
“The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning. When new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed.” -- Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584, …
Reading (Into) Windsor: Presidential Leadership, Marriage Equality, And Immigration Policy, Victor C. Romero
Reading (Into) Windsor: Presidential Leadership, Marriage Equality, And Immigration Policy, Victor C. Romero
Journal Articles
Following the demise of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor, the Obama Administration directed a bold, equality-based reading of Windsor to immigration law, treating bi-national same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples. This Essay argues that the President's interpretation is both constitutionally and politically sound: Constitutionally, because it comports with the Executive's power to enforce immigration law and to guarantee equal protection under the law; and politically, because it reflects the current, increasingly tolerant view of marriage equality. Though still in its infancy, President Obama's policy of treating same-sex beneficiary petitions generally the same as …
The Right To Contract: Use Of Domestic Partnership As A Strategic Alternative To The Right To Marry Same-Sex Partners, Dara Purvis
The Right To Contract: Use Of Domestic Partnership As A Strategic Alternative To The Right To Marry Same-Sex Partners, Dara Purvis
Journal Articles
Shortly after the Civil War, a series of cases argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1866 gave black Americans the right to make contracts, including a marriage contract, with whomever they chose. While the cases were almost uniformly unsuccessful at that time, this paper argues that claims based on private contracts replicating some of marriage’s benefits, stripped of the social and religious freight of marriage, are more compelling. State constitutional amendments banning not only marriage, but any legal recognition of a marriage-like relationship, demonstrate that animus underlies the prohibitions and that the amendments violate the Equal Protection Clause even …