Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano
Transgender Inpportunity And Inequality: Evaluating The Crossroads Between Immigration And Transgender Individuals, Alexandra Caggiano
Seattle University Law Review
Despite being married to a U.S. citizen, non-citizen transgender individuals and non-citizen spouses married to transgender U.S. citizens still face deportation today due to current immigration policies. When forced to return to their home countries, transgender individuals are likely to encounter violence from those who perpetuate hate towards transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. Instead of protecting these individuals, the United States continues to send people back to their native countries solely because those individuals do not fall within the narrowly constructed definition of marriage some states use that is legally recognized by federal courts. Transgender individuals receive disparate treatment as …
Immigration After Doma: How Equal Is Marriage Equality?, John Medeiros
Immigration After Doma: How Equal Is Marriage Equality?, John Medeiros
Journal of Public Law and Policy
Nearly 36,000 United States citizens are currently living with their foreign-born same-sex partners. Until recently, same-gendered binational spouses have been unable to avail themselves of the immigration advantages shared by their heterosexual counterparts, largely because of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines “marriage” at the federal level as “a legal union between one man and one woman.” This dual treatment changed, however, in the summer of 2013, when the Supreme Court heard the case of United States v. Windsor, which challenged Section 3 of DOMA. In Windsor, the Court held that by restricting …
Consistency Is Key: To Preserve Legislative Intent The Irs Must Afford Legal Recognition To Non-Marital Relationships In A Post-Doma World, Shane R. Martins
Consistency Is Key: To Preserve Legislative Intent The Irs Must Afford Legal Recognition To Non-Marital Relationships In A Post-Doma World, Shane R. Martins
Marquette Elder's Advisor
Although the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Windsor v. US allows for federal recognition of same-sex marriages, the Internal Revenue Service will only grant spousal recognition to couples residing in states that term same-sex unions as marriages. Consequently, spousal treatment will not be extended to non-marital relationships, even in states that treat their Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships as “marital equivalents.” Given that spousal recognition for federal tax purposes was intended to ensure geographic uniformity and horizontal equity, the IRS must grant spousal recognition to couples who are in relationships that their respective state identifies as a “marital equivalent”.
Is The Full Faith And Credit Clause Still "Irrelevant" To Same-Sex Marriage?: Toward A Reconsideration Of The Conventional Wisdom, Steve Sanders
Is The Full Faith And Credit Clause Still "Irrelevant" To Same-Sex Marriage?: Toward A Reconsideration Of The Conventional Wisdom, Steve Sanders
Indiana Law Journal
Essays on the Implications of Windsor and Perry
Exit, Voice, And Loyalty As Federalism Strategies: Lessons From The Same-Sex Marriage Debate, Ernest A. Young
Exit, Voice, And Loyalty As Federalism Strategies: Lessons From The Same-Sex Marriage Debate, Ernest A. Young
University of Colorado Law Review
No abstract provided.
Evolving Values, Animus, And Same-Sex Marriage, Daniel O. Conkle
Evolving Values, Animus, And Same-Sex Marriage, Daniel O. Conkle
Indiana Law Journal
In this Essay, I contend that a Fourteenth Amendment right to same-sex marriage will emerge, and properly so, when the Supreme Court determines that justice so requires and when, in the words of Professor Alexander Bickel, the Court’s recognition of this right will “in a rather immediate foreseeable future . . . gain general assent.” I suggest that we are fast approaching that juncture, and I go on to analyze three possible justifications for such a ruling: first, substantive due process; second, heightened scrutiny equal protection; and third, rational basis equal protection coupled with a finding of illicit “animus.” I …