Fourteenth Amendment Commons^™

There's Nothing Rational About It: Heightened Scrutiny For Sexual Orientation Is Long Overdue, Daniel J. Galvin Jr.

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

In this Article, I argue that sexual orientation meets the burden established by Supreme Court jurisprudence for suspect classification and, therefore, should receive heightened scrutiny under Fourteenth Amendment equal protection analysis. After decades of using the fundamental rights analysis to aid lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals in their pursuit of equality, addressing the fundamental right to marry and the fundamental right to privacy, the Supreme Court must address the elephant in the courtroom: that sexual orientation meets all of the factors set by the Court in equal protection cases for suspect classification.

Gays, lesbians, and bisexual individuals (LGBs) meet the …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

No abstract provided.

How U.S. Family Law Might Deal With Spousal Relationships Of Three (Or More) People, Edward D. Stein

Articles

For much of this nation's history, the vast majority of people have believed that being married to more than one person at the same time is deeply problematic. Further, polygamous marriage has never been legal in the United States. Despite this, some people have been in plural or group relationships and some of these people have wished to gain legal recognition for these relationships. The arguments for recognizing such relationships are persuasive, but the prospects for legalization of polygamous marriage seem slim in the near future. This Article offers a suggestion of how the law of domestic relations might deal …

Fifty Shades And Fifty States: Is Bdsm A Fundamental Right? A Test For Sexual Privacy, Elizabeth Mincer

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Privacy's Double Standards, Scott Skinner-Thompson

Publications

Where the right to privacy exists, it should be available to all people. If not universally available, then privacy rights should be particularly accessible to marginalized individuals who are subject to greater surveillance and are less able to absorb the social costs of privacy violations. But in practice, there is evidence that people of privilege tend to fare better when they bring privacy tort claims than do non-privileged individuals. This disparity occurs despite doctrine suggesting that those who occupy prominent and public social positions are entitled to diminished privacy tort protections.

This Article unearths disparate outcomes in public disclosure tort …

The Loving Analogy: Race And The Early Same-Sex Marriage Debate, Samuel W D Walburn

The Purdue Historian

In the early same-sex marriage debates advocates and opponents of marriage equality often relied upon comparing mixed-race marriage jurisprudence and the Loving v Virginia decision in order to conceptualize same-sex marriage cases. Liberal commentators relied upon the analogy between the Loving decision in order to carve out space for the protection of same-sex marriage rights. Conservative scholars, however, denounced the equal protection and due process claims that relied on the sameness of race and sexuality as inexact parallels. Finally, queer and black radicals called the goal of marriage equality into question by highlighting the white supremacist and heterosexist nature of …

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 …

Same-Sex Sex And Immutable Traits: Why Obergefell V. Hodges Clears A Path To Protecting Gay And Lesbian Employees From Workplace Discrimination Under Title Vii, Matthew W. Green Jr.

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This article is set forth in five parts. Part II is largely descriptive and focuses on two aspects of Obergefell: (1) the Court's clarification that adult, private, consensual, same-sex sexual intimacy is a fundamental right, protected by the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause and (2) the Court's recognition that leading mental health and medical groups consider sexual orientation to be immutable. Part III examines how courts and the EEOC have treated sexual orientation discrimination under Title VII and contains a normative discussion which argues—consistent with the position of other commentators, some courts, and the EEOC—that sexual orientation …

Undignified: The Supreme Court, Racial Justice, And Dignity Claims, Darren Lenard Hutchinson

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court has interpreted the Equal Protection Clause as a formal equality mandate. In response, legal scholars have advocated alternative conceptions of equality, such as antisubordination theory, that interpret equal protection in more substantive terms. Antisubordination theory would consider the social context in which race-based policies emerge and recognize material distinctions between policies intended to oppress racial minorities and those designed to ameliorate past and current racism. Antisubordination theory would also closely scrutinize facially neutral state action that systemically disadvantages vulnerable social groups. The Court has largely ignored these reform proposals. Modern Supreme Court rulings, however, have invoked the …

Prostitution Policy: Legalization, Decriminalization And The Nordic Model, Ane Mathieson, Easton Branam, Anya Noble

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Don’T Risk It; Wait Until She’S Sober, Patrick John White

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Let’S Talk About Sex: A Call For Guardianship Reform In Washington State, Sage Graves

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Living Under The Boot: Militarization And Peaceful Protest, Charlotte Guerra

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Let’S Invest In People, Not Prisons: How Washington State Should Address Its Ex-Offender Unemployment Rate, Sara Taboada

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

His Feminist Facade: The Neoliberal Co-Option Of The Feminist Movement, Anjilee Dodge, Myani Gilbert

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

In Her Words: Recognizing And Preventing Abusive Litigation Against Domestic Violence Survivors, David Ward

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Persistence And Resistance: Women’S Leadership And Ending Gender-Based Violence In Guatemala, Serena Cosgrove, Kristi Lee

Seattle Journal for Social Justice

No abstract provided.

The Erosion Of The Rule Of Law When A State Attorney General Refuses To Defend The Constitutionality Of Controversial Laws, Rena M. Lindevaldsen

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Case For Lgbt Equality: Reviving The Political Process Doctrine And Repurposing The Dormant Commerce Clause, Terri R. Day, Danielle Weatherby

Brooklyn Law Review

As a reaction to the Supreme Court’s historic marriage equality decision earlier this summer, many Southern state legislators opposing the trend toward LGBT-protective laws have proposed legislation that would essentially prohibit municipalities from carving out new antidiscrimination protections for the LGBT community. Conservative Senator Bart Hester spearheaded the passing of one of these “anti” antidiscrimination laws in Arkansas, and states like Texas, West Virginia, Michigan, and Oklahoma are not far behind. These “Hester-type laws” are strikingly similar to the Colorado amendment struck down by the Romer v. Evans Court 20 years ago. Both the Colorado amendment and the new wave …

Thou Shall Not Adopt: Sexual Orientation Discrimination In The Adoption Process, Peter Gallucci

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note addresses the issue of sexual orientation discrimination in the adoption process, highlighting how religious-based adoption agencies often deny services to LGBTQ+ couples, despite the growing need for foster care placements. It critiques current laws that permit such discrimination and proposes an enhanced version of the Every Child Deserves a Family Act to ensure equal adoption rights while mitigating the impact on states and foster children.

Housing Intersex Juvenile Offenders, Janae Hunte

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the legal and societal challenges faced by intersex individuals, particularly in the U.S. prison system, arguing that current laws and policies fail to adequately protect their rights. It highlights the need for standardized guidelines and protections, advocating for federal standards that respect intersex individuals' autonomy and safety in prison housing. The analysis focuses on the intersection of medical normalization practices, constitutional rights, and legislative shortcomings, emphasizing the importance of addressing these issues through legal reform and policy changes.

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 …

(Same) Sex, Lies, And Democracy: Tradition, Religion, And Substantive Due Process (With An Emphasis On Obergefell V. Hodges), Stephen M. Feldman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Substantive due process issues implicitly concern voice. Whose voice will be heard? Although such issues often remain submerged, the Justices occasionally translate them into disputes over democratic participation and power. The Supreme Court’s most important substantive due process decision in years, Obergefell v. Hodges, entailed such a battle over democracy. The multiple dissenting opinions insisted that the decision demeaned the opponents of same-sex marriage, many of whom were inspired by traditional values and religious convictions. The majority explicitly disagreed, reasoning that the case resolved the rights of same-sex couples to marry and did not diminish the opponents’ voices. The dissenters …

Sexual Minority Stigma And System Justification Theory: How Changing The Status Quo Impacts Marriage And Housing Equality, Jordan A. Blenner

Department of Psychology: Dissertations, Theses, and Student Research

Sexual minorities (i.e. lesbians and gay men) experience systemic discrimination throughout the United States. Prior to the Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), in many states, same-sex couples could not marry and sexual minorities were not protected from sexual orientation housing discrimination (Human Rights Campaign, 2015). The current, two-experiment study applied Jost and Banaji’s (1994) System Justification Theory to marriage and housing discrimination. When sexual minorities question dissimilar treatment, thereby threatening the status quo, members of the heterosexual majority rationalize sexual minority discrimination to maintain their dominant status (Alexander, 2001; Brescoll, Uhlmann, & Newman, 2013; Citizens for Equal …

The Reed Case: The Seed For Equal Protection From Sex-Based Discrimination, Or Polite Judicial Hedging?, John P. Murphy Jr.

Akron Law Review

Reed is yet another example of how the Equal Protection Clause may be used to strike down state statutes which embody arbitrary classifications that are neither fairly nor substantially related to the object of the statute, and which bring about the invidious discrimination that is repugnant to the Fourteenth Amendment. It must stressed that the outcome of Reed is clearly commendable in terms of justice. What is troublesome is the fact that one may contend that the Supreme Court hedged, perhaps avoided, an excellent opportunity in which to expand the constitutional scope of the Equal Protection Clause. Reed afforded the …

Intestacy Concerns For Same-Sex Couples: How Variations In State Law And Policy Affect Testamentary Wishes, Megan Moser

Seattle University Law Review

As the number of same-sex couples increases in the United States, concerns regarding the evolution of federal and state law, with respect to rights for same-sex couples, also continue to rise. As marriage is not always available to same-sex couples, they often face very different legal issues than couples in a traditional marriage. Because marriage is typically not a legal cause of action, the question of a marriage’s validity often arises incidentally to another legal question, such as the disposition of a decedent’s estate.

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 …

At Long Last Marriage, Jack B. Harrison

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

Over time, the Supreme Court has made clear its belief that marriage is one of the most significant and fundamental rights provided protection under the Constitution. In his opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, Justice Douglas characterized marriage as a “coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the [point] of being sacred[,]” describing it as “an association that promotes a way of life . . . a harmony in living . . . [and] a bilateral loyalty.” The Court in Griswold clearly found that marriage was deserving of protection not solely because it was the locus …

Obergefell'S Squandered Potential, Peter Nicolas

Articles

No abstract provided.

Gayffirmative Action: The Constitutionality Of Sexual Orientation-Based Affirmative Action Policies, Peter Nicolas

Articles

Twenty-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court established a consistency principle in its race-based equal protection cases. That principle requires courts to apply the same strict scrutiny to racial classifications designed to benefit racial minorities—such as affirmative action policies—as they do to laws invidiously discriminating against them. The new consistency principle, under which discrimination against whites is subject to strict scrutiny, conflicted with the Court's established criteria for declaring a group to be a suspect or quasi-suspect class entitled to heightened scrutiny, which focused on such considerations as the history of discrimination against the group and its political powerlessness.

As …