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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Making It Up: Lessons For Equal Protection Doctrine From The Use And Abuse Of Hypothesized Purposes In The Marriage Equality Litigation, Steve Sanders Jan 2017

Making It Up: Lessons For Equal Protection Doctrine From The Use And Abuse Of Hypothesized Purposes In The Marriage Equality Litigation, Steve Sanders

Articles by Maurer Faculty

To survive rational basis scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, a law must serve a governmental purpose which is at least legitimate. It is well established that legitimate purposes can sometimes be found through speculation and conjecture-that is, they may be hypothesized-in order to avoid the difficulties of identifying actual purpose or the specter of courts second-guessing legislative judgments. But hypothesized purposes can be abused, and such abuse was rampant in the states' defenses of their bans on same-sex marriage, bans which were ultimately invalidated in Obergefell v. Hodges.

This Article draws on the federal marriage litigation as a lens …


Pavan V. Smith: Equality For Gays And Lesbians In Being Married, Not Just Getting Married, Steve Sanders Jan 2017

Pavan V. Smith: Equality For Gays And Lesbians In Being Married, Not Just Getting Married, Steve Sanders

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.


Intimate Liberties And Antidiscrimination Law, Deborah A. Widiss Jan 2017

Intimate Liberties And Antidiscrimination Law, Deborah A. Widiss

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In assessing laws that regulate marriage, procreation, and sexual intimacy, the Supreme Court has recognized a “synergy” between guaranteeing personal liberties and advancing equality. Courts interpreting the antidiscrimination laws that govern the private sector, however, often draw artificial and untenable lines between “conduct” and “status” to preclude protections for individuals or couples who face censure because of their intimate choices. This Article exposes how these arguments have been used to justify not only discrimination against the lesbian and gay community, but also discrimination against heterosexual couples who engage in non-marital intimacy or non-marital childrearing.

During the 1980s and 1990s, several …