Law Commons^™

At A Cross-Road: Anti-Same-Sex Marriage Policies And Principles Of Equity: The Effect Of Same-Sex Cohabitation On Alimony Payments To An Ex-Spouse, Jill Bornstein

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In the wake of anti-gay marriage policies in the United States, courts and state legislature alike are struggling to reconcile these policies with well-established principles of equity in the law. This note examines states' anti-same-sex marriage policies as they relate to the states' respective policies regarding alimony termination. Generally, upon divorce, the dependent spouse from a dissolving marriage will receive alimony payments from the independent spouse until the death or remarriage of the dependent spouse. Many states have expanded the definition of "remarriage" to include a dependent spouse's cohabitation with another individual in a financially interdependent, conjugal relationship. Terminating alimony …

Doma And The Internal Revenue Code, Patricia A. Cain

Faculty Publications

The purpose of this article is to make the argument that I think needs to be made: DOMA, as applied to the Internal Revenue Code as a whole, is unconstitutional because it lacks a rational basis.

Let me explain, up front, that my constitutional argument about § 3 has nothing to do with whether Congress has the power to enact such legislation. Congress, after all, does have the power to levy taxes and control our borders. Thus, Congress should have the power to determine which married couples can file a joint return and which non-citizen spouses can be given preferential …

Celebrating The Differences That Could Make A Difference: United States V. Virginia And A New Vision Of Sexual Equality, Courtney Megan Cahill

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

The Short, Puzzling(?) Life Of The Civil Union, John G. Culhane

John G. Culhane

In the battle for marriage equality, equal protection has proven to be a more successful strategy than fundamental rights. This outcome is perhaps surprising, given that civil unions arguably afford at least "formal" equality to same-sex couples. Yet the supreme courts of Connecticut and California have emphasized the denial of equality that the difference in names connotes - civil unions or domestic partnerships v. marriage - and therefore have moved dramatically towards real equality. These two courts were the first to declare that sexual orientation is a suspect (California) or quasi-suspect (Connecticut) classification, thereby radically changing the debate and the …