The DeBoer v. Snyder Trial, 2014

2021 ◽  
pp. 171-190
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Department Chair ◽  
Professional Organization ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 13 tells the story of the DeBoer v. Snyder trial, the expert testimony on both sides, and how the witnesses called to defend Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban were found to be entirely lacking in credibility. Defense witness Douglas Allen presented graphs that he admitted were not even intended to be accurate. Defense witness Mark Regnerus’ testimony was disavowed by his department chair and criticized by his professional organization. The plaintiffs’ expert witnesses described the scholarly consensus about the health of children raised by same-sex couples. This scholarly consensus was accepted by Judge Friedman. The DeBoer trial resulted in a victory for plaintiffs DeBoer and Rowse and their children, but the Sixth Circuit reversed the decision on constitutional grounds, necessitating a showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Early 2000s

2021 ◽  
pp. 131-144
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
State Laws ◽  
State Supreme Court ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 9 tells the story of Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 Supreme Court decision that finally struck down the remaining state laws that criminalized sodomy. In 2004 Massachusetts became the first state in the U.S. to have marriage equality, following the state supreme court decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health. Opponents of gay rights fought furiously to overturn marriage equality in Massachusetts, but once straight people saw that marriage equality cost them nothing, the opposition faded away. Gay rights groups in Massachusetts prevailed despite having many institutional disadvantages. In California in 2008, Proposition 8 was passed by voters to reintroduce a same-sex marriage ban.

scholarly journals SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND THE SAME OLD CONSTITUTION*

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (2 & 3) ◽  
pp. 2005
Author(s):  
Ronalda Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Social Institution ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Do So

The Reference re Same-Sex Marriage1 is not a major opinion on the rights of same-sex couples in Canada, but it is nonetheless an important and fascinating case. There are only a few lines that are about the “rights” of same-sex couples. Did the Supreme Court of Canada “duck” the issue? Was the Court carefully gauging how much or little political capital it had and making a political decision to say as little as possible on this topic? The Court certainly displayed strategic brilliance, but it did not do so in the name of avoiding the “political” hot topic of same-sex marriage. It is factually difficult to maintain the view that the Supreme Court of Canada is loath to enter into this political debate. It has been the lead social institution in Canada in terms of responding to the claims of gays and lesbians to equality in law,2 and it has never been shy of dealing with topics simply because they involve controversial political issues.3 Rather, the Court’s brilliance lies in its minimalist and almost weary tone. This approach had the effect of taking the wind out of the sails of those opposed to same-sex marriage: the same-sex advocates definitely win the constitutional race, but they do so because according to the Supreme Court, there is no provincial constitutional headwind that can stop them. In short, provinces can complain all they want about the federal position in favour of same-sex marriage, but the wedding will go on despite and over their objections to the ceremony.

What Obergefell v. Hodges Should Have Said

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Movement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
Political Struggle ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right

The authors of this book, sitting as a hypothetical Supreme Court, rewrite the famous 2015 opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, which guaranteed same-sex couples the right to marry. In eleven incisive opinions, the authors offer the best constitutional arguments for and against the right to same-sex marriage, and debate what Obergefell should mean for the future. In addition to serving as Chief Justice of this imaginary court, the book's editor provides a critical introduction to the case. He recounts the story of the gay rights litigation that led to Obergefell, and he explains how courts respond to political mobilizations for new rights claims. The social movement for gay rights and marriage equality is a powerful example of how — through legal imagination and political struggle — arguments once dismissed as “off-the-wall” can later become established in American constitutional law.

After Obergefell: On Marriage and Belonging in Carson McCullers’s Member of the Wedding

2019 ◽  
pp. 131-144
Author(s):  
Sarah Song
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Civil Unions ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Temporal And Spatial ◽  
The Law

The 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges was a historic day for gay rights as well as for the institution of marriage. The Court's decision led many of the states that introduced marriage equality prior to Obergefell to eliminate civil unions on the grounds that same-sex couples could now get married. A reading of Carson McCullers's novel The Member of the Wedding in the context of Obergefell reveals the shadow marriage casts over nonmarital affinities and relationships. McCuller's protagonist, Frankie, desires not to join the wedding as a member but to disrupt it. Through Frankie's wedding fantasies, McCullers illuminates forms of belonging that are ostensibly outside the law and that move across temporal and spatial boundaries, unseating marriage as the measure of all relationships.

The Courts Begin to Appreciate Gay Rights: Romer and Baehr, 1996

2021 ◽  
pp. 86-101
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Gay Rights ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
State Court ◽  
Marriage Equality ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
First Time ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 6 describes two important breakthroughs in the courts for gay rights. In 1996 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Romer v. Evans in favor of gay plaintiffs from Colorado who had had their rights reduced by a voter referendum. The Supreme Court upheld state court rulings which had overturned the referendum. The Romer decision, written by Anthony Kennedy, was the first Supreme Court decision to affirmatively defend the rights of gay people. In the fall of 1996 in Hawaii a same-sex marriage trial, Baehr v. Miike, showed for the first time that the opponents of marriage equality had no scientific or empirical basis for preventing same-sex marriages from being recognized. The marriage plaintiffs won in court, but the voters of Hawaii reinstated the same-sex marriage ban. Hawaii did not become a marriage equality state until 2013.

The Holy Wars of Marriage

2017 ◽  
pp. 92-116
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
The State ◽  
Recent History ◽  
Moral Issue ◽  
Same Sex ◽  
Same Sex Marriage ◽  
Same Sex Couples ◽  
Faith Based

This chapter will focus on the biggest moral issue in recent history-the debate over same-sex marriage. This unprecedented case began in 1990 when three same-sex couples applied for marriage licenses from the State of Hawaii. They were refused and challenged the state's decision. In May 1993, the Hawaiian Supreme Court ruled the state needed to show compelling reasons why the same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry. Although the battle in Hawaii began in the court, it ended up in the state legislature where it spread rapidly across the nation. Legislators have responded to the promotion of same-sex marriage by sponsoring and passing bills claiming that it contravenes their faith based principles.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document