Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- SelectedWorks (4)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- University of Michigan Law School (3)
- Emory University School of Law (2)
- Barry University School of Law (1)
-
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Cleveland State University (1)
- Duke Law (1)
- Florida A&M University College of Law (1)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (1)
- Pepperdine University (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of Washington School of Law (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Articles (3)
- Popular Media (3)
- Adam Lamparello (2)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Faculty Scholarship (2)
-
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Florida A & M University Law Review (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Jacob M Reif (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (1)
- Nancy J. Knauer (1)
- Pepperdine Law Review (1)
- St. Mary's Law Journal (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class (1)
- Yuvraj Joshi (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 25 of 25
Full-Text Articles in Law
Thinly Rooted: Dobbs, Tradition, And Reproductive Justice, Darren L. Hutchinson
Thinly Rooted: Dobbs, Tradition, And Reproductive Justice, Darren L. Hutchinson
Faculty Articles
In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. These two cases held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed a right of women to terminate a pregnancy. Roe reflected over 60 years of substantive due process precedent finding and reaffirming a constitutional right of privacy with several animating themes, including bodily integrity, equality, and dignity. The Court’s substantive due process doctrine had established that the analysis in such cases would involve multiple points of inquiry, such as tradition, contemporary practices, and …
Love Is Love: The Fundamental Right To Love, Marriage, And Obergefell V. Hodges, Reginald Oh
Love Is Love: The Fundamental Right To Love, Marriage, And Obergefell V. Hodges, Reginald Oh
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process fundamental rights doctrine is about love. It is, at least, based on a close reading of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, the case in which the Supreme Court held that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right of individual autonomy and dignity.
Part I of this Article discusses the concept of love. Part II examines Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell and argues that it expresses unconditional love for LGBT people in tone, language, and substance. Part III argues that, in Obergefell, Kennedy’s key reasons for concluding that marriage is …
Two Constitutional Rights, Two Constitutional Controversies, Michael J. Perry
Two Constitutional Rights, Two Constitutional Controversies, Michael J. Perry
Faculty Articles
My overarching aim in the Article is to defend a particular understanding of two constitutional rights and, relatedly, a particular resolution of two constitutional controversies. The two rights I discuss are among the most important rights protected by the constitutional law of the United States: the right to equal protection and the right of privacy. As I explain in the Article, the constitutional right to equal protection is, at its core, the human right to moral equality, and the constitutional right to privacy is best understood as a version of the human right to moral freedom. The two controversies I …
Dissenting From History: The False Narratives Of The Obergefell Dissents, Christopher R. Leslie
Dissenting From History: The False Narratives Of The Obergefell Dissents, Christopher R. Leslie
Indiana Law Journal
According to a quote attributed to numerous philosophers and political leaders, “History is written by victors.”1 In the legal battle over same-sex marriage, those opposed to marriage equality have attempted to disprove this age-old adage. In response to the majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges—which held that state laws banning same-sex marriage violate the Fourteenth Amendment—each of the four dissenting Justices issued his own dissenting opinion. Every one of these dissents misrepresented the circumstances and precedent leading up to the Obergefell decision. Collectively, the Obergefell dissenters have valiantly tried to rewrite America’s legal, constitutional, and social history, all in an …
Contemplating Masterpiece Cakeshop, Terri R. Day
Contemplating Masterpiece Cakeshop, Terri R. Day
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
From Law Reform To Lived Justice: Marriage Equality, Personal Praxis, And Queer Normativity In The United States, Francisco Valdes
From Law Reform To Lived Justice: Marriage Equality, Personal Praxis, And Queer Normativity In The United States, Francisco Valdes
Articles
No abstract provided.
Fundamental Rights In A Post-Obergefell World, Peter Nicolas
Fundamental Rights In A Post-Obergefell World, Peter Nicolas
Articles
In this Article, I identify and critically examine three substantive criticisms raised by the dissents in the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which struck down state laws and constitutional provisions barring same-sex couples from marrying within the state or having their out-of-state marriages recognized by the state. First, that the majority improperly framed the right at issue broadly as the right to marriage instead of narrowly as the right to same-sex marriage, conflicting with the Court's holding in Washington v. Glucksberg that in fundamental rights cases the right at issue must be framed narrowly, and in …
Gay Rights Versus Religious Freedom, And The Influence Of Obergefell V. Hodges On Distinguishing The Dividing Line, Kathleen Rainey Mcstravick
Gay Rights Versus Religious Freedom, And The Influence Of Obergefell V. Hodges On Distinguishing The Dividing Line, Kathleen Rainey Mcstravick
St. Mary's Law Journal
Obergefell v. Hodges, a United States Supreme Court case, added more fuel to the fire, leaving many to wonder how to voice religious opposition to same-sex marriages, and what are the second order effects for religious opposition in light of the new rule. The Court held the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Obergefell, brings the conflict between freedom of religion and LGBT rights to a new level by questioning how far freedom of religion can be used to refuse anti-discrimination statutes regarding sexual …
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 …
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Ruled, Adam Lamparello
Obergefell V. Hodges: How The Supreme Court Should Have Ruled, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
In Obergefell, et al. v. Hodges, Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion legalizing same-sex marriage was based on “the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie,” and “indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.” Kennedy’s opinion was comprised largely of philosophical ramblings about liberty that have neither a constitutional foundation nor any conceptual limitation. The fictional opinion below arrives at the same conclusion, but the reasoning is based on equal protection rather than due process principles. The majority opinion holds that same-sex marriage bans violate the Equal Protection Clause because they: (1) discriminate on the basis of gender; (2) promote gender-based stereotypes; and …
Justice Kennedy's Decision In Obergefell: A Sad Day For The Judiciary, Adam Lamparello
Justice Kennedy's Decision In Obergefell: A Sad Day For The Judiciary, Adam Lamparello
Adam Lamparello
Same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marriage under the Equal Protection Clause, not under Justice Kennedy’s self-serving and ever-changing definition of liberty. The long-term impact of Kennedy’s decision will be to the Court’s institutional legitimacy. Chief Justice Roberts emphasized that the legitimacy of this Court ultimately rests “upon the respect accorded to its judgments,” which is based on the perception—and reality—that we exercise humility and restraint in deciding cases according to the Constitution and law.” Justice Kennedy’s decision eschewed these values, giving the Court the power to discover “new dimensions of freedom,” and to ensure that all citizens, through …
More Than A Piece Of Paper: Same-Sex Parents And Their Adopted Children Are Entitled To Equal Protection In The Realm Of Birth Certificates, Shohreh Davoodi
More Than A Piece Of Paper: Same-Sex Parents And Their Adopted Children Are Entitled To Equal Protection In The Realm Of Birth Certificates, Shohreh Davoodi
Chicago-Kent Law Review
In Adar v. Smith, the Fifth Circuit held that Louisiana’s policy of refusing to issue accurate birth certificates to the children of out-of-state, same-sex adoptive parents does not deny those families equal protection of the law. This comment demonstrates that Louisiana’s policy does in fact violate the Equal Protection Clause. There are two ways Louisiana’s policy infringes on the rights of these families. First, the policy burdens fundamental rights stemming from the family autonomy of both parents and children. Second, the policy discriminates against out-of-state same-sex parents, treating them like second-class citizens. These concerns are strong enough that the …
The Ninth Circuit's Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian Bartrum
The Ninth Circuit's Treatment Of Sexual Orientation: Defining “Rational Basis Review With Bite”, Ian Bartrum
Michigan Law Review First Impressions
On February 10, Nevada's Democratic attorney general decided to stop defending the state's constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, which is currently under review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Perhaps even more surprising, Nevada's Republican governor agreed with that decision, concluding that the "case is no longer defensible in court." Ironically, all of this came after the plaintiffs had lost their case in the district court. But the federal constitutional landscape surrounding same-sex marriage is rapidly shifting, and in the nation's largest circuit change is coming quickly indeed. The latest upheaval—the decision that in fact prompted …
Navigating A Post-Windsor World: The Promise And Limits Of Marriage Equality, Nancy J. Knauer
Navigating A Post-Windsor World: The Promise And Limits Of Marriage Equality, Nancy J. Knauer
Nancy J. Knauer
When the 2013 landmark decision in U.S. v. Windsor invalidated part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), it was hailed as a landmark civil rights victory, but its implementation has been far from seamless. The federal government has not applied a uniform rule for marriage recognition, applying a state-of-domicile rule for some purposes (Social Security) and a broader state-of-celebration rule for others (e.g., federal tax matters). Moreover, Windsor did not directly address the state-level marriage prohibitions that remain in place in the majority of states. As a result, the United States continues to be a patchwork of marriage laws …
"Not Without Political Power": Gays And Lesbians, Equal Protection, Darren Lenard Hutchinson
"Not Without Political Power": Gays And Lesbians, Equal Protection, Darren Lenard Hutchinson
UF Law Faculty Publications
The Supreme Court purportedly utilizes the suspect class doctrine in order to balance institutional concerns with the protection of important constitutional rights. The Court, however, inconsistently applies this doctrine, and it has not precisely defined its contours. The political powerlessness factor is especially undertheorized and contradictorily applied. Nevertheless, this factor has become salient in recent equal protection cases brought by gay and lesbian plaintiffs. A growing body of and federal and state-court precedent addresses the flaws of the Court's suspect class doctrine. This Article discusses the inadequacies of the suspect class doctrine and highlights problems within the emerging scholarship and …
Texas Hold ’Em - The State Refuses To Allow Same-Sex Couples Married Elsewhere To Get Divorced. Is This The Next Constitutional Showdown Over Marriage Equality?, Sonja R. West, Dahlia Lithwick
Texas Hold ’Em - The State Refuses To Allow Same-Sex Couples Married Elsewhere To Get Divorced. Is This The Next Constitutional Showdown Over Marriage Equality?, Sonja R. West, Dahlia Lithwick
Popular Media
The court papers don’t tell us all that much about what happened between the couple described only as “J.B.” and “H.B.” We can assume there once was love and then, at some point, there wasn’t. Their parting, we’re told, was amicable. The problem is that J.B. and H.B. are both men. The other problem is that they live in Texas. The two were married in Massachusetts in 2006, where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2004. They later moved to Texas, and now want to get divorced. Texas, however, won’t let them. And they cannot get divorced in Massachusetts either, …
What Is Anthony Kennedy Thinking?, Sonja R. West
What Is Anthony Kennedy Thinking?, Sonja R. West
Popular Media
Supreme Court watchers have long made a national sport out of parsing Justice Anthony Kennedy’s every word. From issues as diverse as the death penalty, terrorism, and gay rights, Kennedy has been the only conservative justice to vote with the court’s more liberal wing. It’s not surprising, therefore, that as we wait for the court’s decision on same-sex marriage bans, the search for clues to Kennedy’s thinking has shifted into high gear.
In March, during the oral argument about California’s same-sex marriage ban, Kennedy said that he was “trying to wrestle” with a “difficult question” about the constitutionality of same-sex …
Think Of The Children: Advancing Marriage Equality By Renewing The Focus On Same-Sex Adoption Litigation, Jacob M. Reif
Think Of The Children: Advancing Marriage Equality By Renewing The Focus On Same-Sex Adoption Litigation, Jacob M. Reif
Jacob M Reif
No abstract provided.
The Constitutional Right To (Keep Your) Same-Sex Marriage, Steve Sanders
The Constitutional Right To (Keep Your) Same-Sex Marriage, Steve Sanders
Michigan Law Review
Same-sex marriage is now legal in six states, and tens of thousands of same-sex couples have already gotten married. Yet the vast majority of other states have adopted statutes or constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. These mini-defense of marriage acts not only forbid the creation of same-sex marriages; they also purport to void or deny recognition to the perfectly valid same-sex marriages of couples who migrate from states where such marriages are legal. These nonrecognition laws effectively transform the marital parties into legal strangers, causing significant harms: property rights are potentially altered, spouses disinherited, children put at risk, and financial, …
Why Obama’S Words Didn’T Go Far Enough, Sonja R. West, Dahlia Lithwick
Why Obama’S Words Didn’T Go Far Enough, Sonja R. West, Dahlia Lithwick
Popular Media
When President Obama announced his support of same-sex marriage, he talked broadly about “equality” and “fairness.” He spoke of “opposing discrimination against gays and lesbians” and making sure that nobody is treated as “less than full citizens when it comes to their legal rights.” It was a powerful moment—historic and emotional. In the Aaron Sorkin version, the orchestra would have soared at this point as the supporting cast members exchanged teary-eyed yet knowing nods.
But then President Obama described how these rights should be protected and the music stopped with a squawk. Same-sex marriage, he said, is not in fact …
Marriage In California: Is The Federal Lawsuit Against Proposition 8 About Applying The Fourteenth Amendment Or Preserving Federalism? , Charles M. Cannizzaro
Marriage In California: Is The Federal Lawsuit Against Proposition 8 About Applying The Fourteenth Amendment Or Preserving Federalism? , Charles M. Cannizzaro
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
I Do. Is That Okay With You?: A Look At How Most States Are Circumventing The Full Faith And Credit Clause And Equal Protection Clause To Not Recognize Legal Same-Sex Marriages From Other States And Its Effect On Society, Rebecca Hameroff
Florida A & M University Law Review
Due to statutes, bans, and the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, states do not have to recognize legal same-sex marriages from sister states that recognize same-sex marriage. This paper examines the denial of the fundamental right to marriage for same-sex couples, the violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution by not recognizing same-sex marriages legally performed in other states. It starts by looking at the impact these practices have on same-sex couples and the toll it …
The Role Of Courts Vis-À-Vis Legislatures In The Same-Sex Marriage Context: Sexual Orientation As A Suspect Classification, Ingrid M. Lofgren
The Role Of Courts Vis-À-Vis Legislatures In The Same-Sex Marriage Context: Sexual Orientation As A Suspect Classification, Ingrid M. Lofgren
University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class
No abstract provided.
State Domas, Neutral Principles, And The Möbius Of State Action, Darrell A. H. Miller
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 …
Polygamy And Same-Sex Marriage, David L. Chambers
Polygamy And Same-Sex Marriage, David L. Chambers
Articles
In the American federal system, state governments bear the responsibility for enacting the laws that define the persons who are permitted to marry. The federal government, throughout our history, has accepted these definitions and built upon them, fixing legal consequences for those who validly marry under state law. Only twice in American history has Congress intervened to reject the determinations that states might make about who can marry. The first occasion was in the late nineteenth century when Congress enacted a series of statutes aimed at the Mormon Church, prohibiting polygamy in the Western territories and punishing the Church and …