Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
That Thing That You Do: Comment On Joseph Massad’S 'Empire Of Sexuality', Lama Abu-Odeh
That Thing That You Do: Comment On Joseph Massad’S 'Empire Of Sexuality', Lama Abu-Odeh
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Massad’s thesis is simple, in fact, perfect in its simplicity. Empire is a terrible force that wants to penetrate, overpower and hegemonize. It has a center, a headquarters if you like, the West. It functions with two arms: capitalism (later neoliberal) and Euro-American hegemony. The first arm represents the objective drive of capital that transforms sites and cultures as it spreads the market in the shape of commodity exchange. It has become a universal system, Massad contends, though with varying effects on the center (West) from the periphery (rest). Whereas its march on the former has been totally transformative, in …
The Incoherence Of Marital Benefits, Robin West
The Incoherence Of Marital Benefits, Robin West
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
En route to finding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) an unconstitutional violation of the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Windsor v. United States gave short shrift to one of Congress's primary arguments in defense of the Act: that the federal government has a compelling interest in limiting federal marriage benefits to opposite-sex couples because traditional marriage has the laudable purpose-or function-of channeling the heterosexual sex that creates children into a way of life that provides the optimal environment for the rearing of those children. In other words, DOMA aims to minimize irresponsible …
Reflections On Sexual Liberty And Equality: "Through Seneca Falls And Selma And Stonewall", Nan D. Hunter
Reflections On Sexual Liberty And Equality: "Through Seneca Falls And Selma And Stonewall", Nan D. Hunter
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Essay uses the opportunity to examine Roe v. Wade forty years after it was decided and Lawrence v. Texas ten years after it was decided as a platform from which to analyze the status of the civil rights paradigm in American law. A comparison of the two decisions illustrates an important and new point about how civil rights law is deployed to achieve very different goals.