Law Commons^™

Amicus Brief In "Obergefell V. Hodges", Tanya M. Washington, Catherine Smith, Lauren Fontana, Susannah Pollvogt

Faculty Publications By Year

Supreme Court precedent establishes that the government may not punish children for matters beyond their control. Same-sex marriage bans and non-recognition laws (“marriage bans”) do precisely this. The states argue that marriage is good for children, yet marriage bans categorically exclude an entire class of children – children of same-sex couples – from the legal, economic and social benefits of marriage.

This amicus brief recounts a powerful body of equal protection jurisprudence that prohibits punishing children to reflect moral disapproval of parental conduct or to incentivize adult behavior. We then explain that marriage bans punish children of same-sex couples because …

When Harvard Said No To Eugenics: The J. Ewing Mears Bequest, 1927, Paul A. Lombardo

Faculty Publications By Year

James Ewing Mears (1838-1919) was a founding member of the Philadelphia Academy of Surgery. His 1910 book, The Problem of Race Betterment, laid the groundwork for later authors to explore the uses of surgical sterilization as a eugenic measure. Mears left $60,000 in his will to Harvard University to support the teaching of eugenics. Although numerous eugenic activists were on the Harvard faculty, and who of its Presidents were also associated with the eugenics movement, Harvard refused the Mears gift. The bequest was eventually awarded to Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia. This article explains why Harvard turned its back …

If The Supreme Court Listens To Millennials, Same Sex Marriage Will Become Legal, Tanya M. Washington

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Post-Mortem Sperm Retrieval And The Social Security Administration: How Modern Reproductive Technology Makes Strange Bedfellows, Mary F. Radford

Faculty Publications By Year

This article was prepared in conjunction with the Thurgood Marshall School of Law March, 2009 symposium on "Emerging Issues in Estate Planning, Probate & Trust Law." The article examines a relatively new assisted reproduction technique through which the sperm of a man who has recently died is retrieved after his death, cryopreserved, and then later used by a woman (spouse, partner, or other) to produce a child. While much has been written about posthumously-conceived children (children conceived from sperm that were banked by the father while he was alive), there has to date been little examination of the ramifications of …

Expedited Partner Therapies For Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Legal And Policy Approaches, James G. Hodge, Erin C. Fuse Brown

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Sexual Harassment And Disparate Impact: Should Non-Targeted Workplace Sexual Conduct Be Actionable Under Title Vii?, Kelly Cahill Timmons

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

State Common-Law Choice-Of-Law Doctrine And Same-Sex "Marriage": How Will States Enforce The Public Policy Exception?, L. Lynn Hogue

Faculty Publications By Year

Growth in the number of states legalizing same-sex marriages and civil unions that increasingly mirror the rights afforded married partners has brought renewed focus on the issue of extra-territorial recognition of those relationships. The public policy exception is a primary, state-law-based impediment to the recognition of foreign marriages that do not conform to the forum state's definition of marriage. This article discusses the role of the public policy exception in rejecting recognition of foreign marriages and argues that the public policy exception has constitutional underpinnings that are rooted in principles of federalism and the protection of state sovereignty which inheres …

Turning Back The Clock On Sexual Abuse Of Children: Amending Virginia's Statute Of Limitations, Paul A. Lombardo

Faculty Publications By Year

No abstract provided.

Wimberly And Beyond: Analyzing The Refusal To Award Unemployment Compensation To Women Who Terminate Prior Employment Due To Pregnancy, Mary F. Radford

Faculty Publications By Year

In Wimberly v. Labor & Industrial Relations Commission, the Supreme Court interpreted section 3304(a)(12) of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), which requires that states not dent unemployment benefits "solely on the basis of pregnancy," as an antidiscrimination statue, rather that one requiring preferential treatment for pregnant and formerly pregnant women. Professor Mary Radford argues that given the ambiguous legislative history and other Supreme Court precedent in the area of unemployment compensation, Wimberly could just as easily have held that FUTA's language requires preferential treatment to pregnant and formerly pregnant women. She further argues that given the current realities that …