DOCSLIB.ORG

March 9, 2012 | Volume IX Issue 22 Marriage Bill Signed Into Law Drinking from the Quiet Legacy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
March 9, 2012 | Volume IX Issue 22 Marriage Bill Signed Into Law Drinking from the Quiet Legacy OUT March 9, 2012 | Volume IX Issue 22 Marriage Bill Signed into Law Drinking from the Quiet Legacy By vann MillhouSe Women embody a special ability to bring forth life. Possessing the di- vine gift to cultivate seeds internally and externally with gentle yet ag- gressive force cannot be matched. During Women History Month we must take time to educate those around us about the wondrous con- tributions women have bestowed upon us. The National Black Feminist Or- ganization met in 1973 for their first regional meeting which some say provided the footing for other orga- nizations to spring forth. One group in particular that came into fruition after this notorious meeting was the Combahee River Collective. The collective decided on the name to honor Harriet Tubman’s Combahee River raid, which freed over seven hundred slaves. In 1977, the Combahee River Collective put the “Black Feminist Statement” forth. This strong group g ov. Martin o’Malley signs the 2012 Civil Marriage Protection act on March 1 of black women found it necessary to organize around identity politics. Moving into strategic action around By Steve Charing of our work here together, it is the thread of dignity of every child’s health, the dignity the issues concerning society and On March 1, 2012, history was made as human dignity. We are all Americans. And of every individual.” treatment of women, specifically Maryland became the eighth state (plus all of us at end of the day want the same At the conclusion of his brief remarks, women of color was the main fo- Washington, D.C.) to legalize same-sex thing for our children. We want them to live O’Malley said, “Let’s sign the bill,” to a cus. Unlike non color organizations, marriage. With a stroke of a pen, Governor in a loving, caring, and committed home round of thunderous applause and cheers. the collective sought to work in Martin O’Malley signed the Civil Marriage that is protected equally under the law.” House Speaker Michael Busch (D-Anne conjunction with black men. In the Protection Act into law in front of hundreds As an indication of the message Arundel County) and Senate President Combahee River Collective State- of supporters of marriage equality includ- O’Malley plans to make in an effort to beat Thomas V. Mike Miller (D-Prince George’s ment, located in the section entitled ing individuals, couples, parents, allies, back an expected referendum vote come and Calvert Counties) signed the bill with the Genesis of Contemporary Black advocacy organizations and a host of leg- November, he said, “Religious freedom the governor. Feminism, the women proclaim islators in the marble hallway on the first was the very reason for our state’s found- Busch actively supported the measure that, “Although we are feminists and floor of the State House. ing and the heart of religious freedom is and was instrumental in its passage in the lesbians, we feel solidarity with pro- “The way forward is always found the freedom of individual conscience. If House. Miller, who looked like he had just gressive black men....” The same through greater respect for the equal rights there is a thread that unites all of our work been flagged with a tax audit, opposed it gender loving women were revolu- of all,” O’Malley said just prior to signing here it is the thread of human dignity, the but acknowledged candidly on the Senate —continued on page 2 the bill. “If there is a thread that unites all dignity of work, the dignity of the job, the —continued on page 3 newS // LOCAL passings Drinking FroM the Quiet legaCy THOMAS C. REEVES Born in Nashville, Tennessee, in 1939, Tom was ordained a Method- – continued from front page MarCh 27, 1939 – FeBruary 19, 2012 ist minister and pastored a church Co-Publishers tionary in their position in that their move- Thomas Reeves, a retired college profes- in Blue Springs, Alabama, while attend- Jim Becker • Jim Williams [email protected] ment counterparts encouraged separatist sor, lifelong social activist, and occasion- ing Birmingham Southern College, from Executive Editor ideals. Powerful in their thought system al contributor to this newspaper, died of which he graduated in 1960. He went on Jim Becker these women were able to stand strong heart failure Sunday, February 19 at the to get a Master’s of Divinity from Harvard [email protected] in their demands, in recognition of their Manor Care Roland Park Nursing Home at in 1963 and an MA from American Univer- Managing Editor needs, while comprehending those men age 72. He lived in Baltimore from 1968 sity in 1964. Tom did further postgraduate Dana LaRocca [email protected] was socialized into their beings. through the early 1970s and again from study (1964-66) at the Otto Suhr Institute Concerned with racism, sexism, and 2005 until his death. of Political Science and Production Director Bill Andriette classism, the women of the collective knew He lived in Baltimore dur- tom Humboldt University, both Sales Director how to utilize their sisters’ unique skill set ing the height of the Vietnam reeves in Berlin. Mary Taylor to work toward liberation. Active in the civil War and worked tirelessly to From his earliest days [email protected] rights movement, black nationalists, and bring the war and the draft to as a minister, Tom was Leather Columnist Black Panther organizations, the women an end. In the early 1970s, attracted by the example Rodney Burger found that there was a need to put in place he served as executive di- of Martin Luther King, Jr., Contributing Writers a central union where women of color voic- Shawn Bradley • Cathy Brennan • Terrence Brower • rector of the Baltimore Chap- with whom he sometimes Steve Charing • Jeffrey Clagett • Jeffrey Clouser • Chuck Duncan es would be heard. ter of the American Friends’ worked, and was involved • Gerry Fisher • Eva Hersh MD • Sam Kunz • Jessica Lemmo • Greatly affected by male-dominated Service Committee. He also in many protests, march- Jay Loane • Meredith Moise • Vann Mills • Colin Riley • Gregg Shapiro • participants, the women found that becom- co-founded Insight, a social es, and sit-ins. An article ing aware of the deep seeded ideologies action group to support and in the New York times Graphics allowed them to become free to examine mobilize youth in Southeast (April 12, 1960), “Fear Joe Velasquez • Bob Wellington and validate their experiences within an Baltimore. Through his work and Hatred Grip Birming- Cartoonist unsupportive system. with Insight, he discovered a ham,” notes the arrest Bruce Garrett (www.brucegarrett.com) By learning to value their contributions, phenomenon peculiar to that of “Thomas Reeves, a Photographers feelings, and various subjugations, the community – the interaction 21-year-old white student Bruce Garrett • Jay W Photos • Justin Nixon black lesbian feminists were able to dis- of youth with gay men that at Birmingham-Southern Web Editor Anja Saine mantle the stereotypical models for women had been occurring for generations. He College and part-time preacher....” It was [email protected] of color. documented this discovery in an article the earliest of many arrests and stints in Managed Web Services Some of those images dispelled are the “The Boys of Baltimore,” published by the jail that Tom faced for his political activism. The Fusio Group 866-322-7498, www.thefusiogroup.com “bull dagger,” “mammy,” and the “whore.” radical gay newspaper Fag rag. When he In the late ’60s, Tom worked and taught National Advertising Rep Some of the subjects that the collective ad- returned to Baltimore in 2005, he worked in Washington, D.C., teaching at, among Rivendell Media dressed were sterilization abuse, abortion, for several years as a part time adjunct other schools, American University. He 908-232-2021 rape, and health care. Ironically, these are faculty member with the Community Col- was the director of the National Council Founders some the same issues that women still lege of Baltimore County. to Repeal the Draft. From 1969 to ’71, he Jim Becker • Joe Berg • Mike Chase • Lee Mooney (1959-2007) • Jim Williams face today. There is a family tale of descent from was a speechwriter for US senators Mi- The Combahee River Collective defi- the great Virginia patriot, Patrick Henry. chael Gravel, Mike Hatfield, and George Baltimore OUTloud nitely laid the foundation for activists today. Though Tom would agree with “Give me McGovern, the latter two of whom wrote PO Box 4887 Baltimore, MD 21211 In the name of Audre Lorde, Anna Lee, Al- liberty or give me death,” the fiery Thomas introductions to the end of the draft (Ran- 410-244-6780 www.baltimoreoutloud.com ice Walker, Angela Davis, and Francis E. Paine was his real spiritual ancestor. Like dom House and Vintage Press, 1970), a W. Harper, just to name a few; women book Tom co-wrote with Barry Goldwater Paine, Tom was a great organizer and can- Additional Information continue to press forward during this third tankerous visionary. He was a civil-rights speechwriter Karl Hess. baltimore OUTloud is published every other Friday by Pride wave of feminism. activist in the South in the 1950s and ’60s, Tom’s work against the draft brought Media, Ltd. in Baltimore, Maryland. Readers comments and unsolicited materials are welcomed and may be sent to: editor@ As Bell Hooks says, “Feminism is for an anti-Vietnam War campaigner, a gay- him to national prominence. A front-page baltimoreoutloud.com. All materials appearing in this newspaper everyone.” t rights organizer, a voice in the wilderness story in the Harvard crimson (March 2, are the property of Pride Media, Ltd.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Amending the Defense of Marriage Act: a Necessary Step Toward Gaining Full Legal Rights for Same-Sex Couples Nancy Kubasek
    Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law Volume 19 | Issue 3 Article 8 2011 Amending the Defense of Marriage Act: A Necessary Step Toward Gaining Full Legal Rights for Same-Sex Couples Nancy Kubasek Christy Glass Kate Cook Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/jgspl Part of the Sexuality and the Law Commons Recommended Citation Kubasek, Nancy, Christy Glass, and Kate Cook. "Amending the Defense of Marriage Act: A Necessary Step Toward Gaining Full Legal Rights for Same-Sex Couples." American University Journal of Gender Social Policy and Law 19, no. 3 (2011): 959-986. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. KUBASEK 4/30/11 9/1/2011 6:28 PM Kubasek et al.: Amending the Defense of Marriage Act: A Necessary Step Toward Gai AMENDING THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT: A NECESSARY STEP TOWARD GAINING FULL LEGAL RIGHTS FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES NANCY KUBASEK, CHRISTY GLASS, AND KATE COOK I. Introduction ............................................................................................ 959 II. History of the Treatment of Same-Sex Relationships in the United States ............................................................................................... 962 III. Losses Imposed on Same-Sex Couples by Federal DOMA ................ 965 A. Federal Welfare Benefits .......................................................... 968 B. Tax Benefits .............................................................................. 969 C. Additional Benefits ................................................................... 970 IV. Alternative Approaches to Remedying the Problem ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage Equality Comes to the Fourth Circuit Carl Tobias University of Richmond School of Law, [email protected]
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 75 | Issue 4 Article 6 2-19-2019 Marriage Equality Comes to the Fourth Circuit Carl Tobias University of Richmond School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Family Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Carl Tobias, Marriage Equality Comes to the Fourth Circuit, 75 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 2005 (2018), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol75/iss4/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Marriage Equality Comes to the Fourth Circuit Carl Tobias Table of Contents I. Introduction .................................................................... 2006 II. A Brief History of Marriage Equality ........................... 2006 III. Marriage Equality Litigation and Marriage Equality’s Implementation .............................................................. 2013 A. The Fourth Circuit ................................................... 2013 1. Virginia Litigation ............................................. 2014 a. Eastern District Opinion .............................
    [Show full text]
  • "Jews," "Homosexuals," and the Inclusion of Sexual Orientation As a Forbidden Characteristic in Antidiscrimination Laws Marc A
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 2001 A Better Analogy: "Jews," "Homosexuals," and the Inclusion of Sexual Orientation as a Forbidden Characteristic in Antidiscrimination Laws Marc A. Fajer University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, and the Law and Society Commons Recommended Citation Marc A. Fajer, A Better Analogy: "Jews," "Homosexuals," and the Inclusion of Sexual Orientation as a Forbidden Characteristic in Antidiscrimination Laws, 12 Stan. L. & Pol'y Rev. 37 (2001). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Better Analogy: "Jews," "Homosexuals," and the Inclusion of Sexual Orientation as a Forbidden Characteristic in Antidiscrimination Laws by Marc A. Fajer issues such as openly gay and lesbian I. INTRODUCTION A properly n zanced law of people serving in the military, A key issue in the struggle proponents of inclusion often for over civil and political rights antidiscrimijnation would analogize race and sexual orientation lesbians, bisexuals and gay men is protect the decisions of ("the race analogy"), pointing out whether to include "sexual both "J ws" and similarities in the exclusionary orientation" in the list of forbidden treatment of African-Americans and characteristics in traditional anti- "homosexu 7ls" to come of lesbians, bisexuals and gay men discrimination statutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Through Conflicts of Law
    Conflicting Approaches: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Through Conflicts of Law KIMBERLY N. CHEHARDY† “When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. The minority are right.” —Eugene V. Debs1 I. INTRODUCTION On June 29, 2008, Governor David Paterson proceeded down Fifth Avenue in New York City to the enthusiastic cheers of onlookers.2 The last day of New York Pride 2008, Governor Paterson was being honored as a notable participant in the annual gay pride parade.3 The Governor’s role as a leader in the gay rights movement emerged almost immediately after he took office.4 Two months after the resignation of his disgraced predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, Governor Paterson issued an executive directive requiring state agencies to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages.5 Hailing the decision as a major step toward legalizing same-sex marriage in New York, advocates praised Paterson’s vision and compassion.6 Yet, much like the resistance same-sex marriage is meeting across the country, † Juris Doctor candidate, Vermont Law School, 2009; M.H.R., University of Oklahoma; B.A., Loyola University New Orleans. I would like to express my gratitude for the significant assistance provided by Megan Roberts and Professor John Greabe of Vermont Law School. I am also grateful to the members of the Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal for their hard work. 1 Wisdom Quotes, Minorities Quotes, http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_minorities.html (last visited Apr. 14, 2009). 2 Jeremy W. Peters, Celebrating Gay Pride, and Its Friend in Albany, N.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prolegomenon on the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Disenfranchisement of Sexual Minorities
    Alabama Law Scholarly Commons Articles Faculty Scholarship 2005 Navigating Dangerous Constitutional Straits: A Prolegomenon on the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Disenfranchisement of Sexual Minorities Ronald J. Krotoszynski Jr. University of Alabama - School of Law, [email protected] E. Gary Spitko Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_articles Recommended Citation Ronald J. Krotoszynski Jr. & E. G. Spitko, Navigating Dangerous Constitutional Straits: A Prolegomenon on the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Disenfranchisement of Sexual Minorities, 76 U. Colo. L. Rev. 599 (2005). Available at: https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_articles/519 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of Alabama Law Scholarly Commons. UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO LAW REVIEW Volume 76, Number 3 2005 NAVIGATING DANGEROUS CONSTITUTIONAL STRAITS: A PROLEGOMENON ON THE FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT AND THE DISENFRANCHISEMENT OF SEXUAL MINORITIES RONALD J. KROTOSZYNSKI, JR.* AND E. GARY SPITKO** *** Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage.1 "[P]reserving the traditional institution of marriage" is just a kinder way of describing the State's moral disapproval of same-sex 2 couples.
    [Show full text]
  • Trait-Specific Marriage Laws and Heightened Scrutiny
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Cornell Law Library Cornell Law Review Volume 99 Article 2 Issue 5 July 2014 Embracing Loving: Trait-Specific aM rriage Laws and Heightened Scrutiny Christopher R. Leslie Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Christopher R. Leslie, Embracing Loving: Trait-Specific aM rriage Laws and Heightened Scrutiny, 99 Cornell L. Rev. 1077 (2014) Available at: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol99/iss5/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\99-5\CRN502.txt unknown Seq: 1 23-JUL-14 11:40 EMBRACING LOVING: TRAIT-SPECIFIC MARRIAGE LAWS AND HEIGHTENED SCRUTINY Christopher R. Leslie† In the wake of the Supreme Court’s recent Windsor opinion, the focus of marriage equality litigation has returned to challenging state gender-spe- cific marriage laws that make a couple’s right to marry a function of their genders. The outcomes of these future legal challenges will be affected by the level of scrutiny that courts apply. To date, all courts that have applied heightened scrutiny have held same-sex marriage prohibitions to be unconsti- tutional, while courts applying rational basis review have often upheld such laws. Laws that classify or discriminate based on gender are generally subject to heightened scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • The Federal Marriage Amendment: to Protect the Sanctity of Marriage Or Destroy Constitutional Democracy?
    GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2005 The Federal Marriage Amendment: To Protect the Sanctity of Marriage or Destroy Constitutional Democracy? Joan Schaffner George Washington University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Joan E. Schaffner. The Federal Marriage Amendment: To Protect the Sanctity of Marriage or Destroy Constitutional Democracy?, 54 Am. U. L. Rev. 1487 (2005). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT: TO PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF MARRIAGE OR DESTROY CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY? Joan Schaffner [*] 54 AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW 1487 (2005) Table of Contents Introduction: The Call for a Marriage Amendment I. Constitutional Amendment A. Limits on Constitutional Amendments B. Constitutional Amendment by Convention II. Amendments and Individual Rights A. The Repealed Eighteenth Amendment B. The Proposed Anti-Miscegenation Amendment C. The Proposed Anti-Divorce Amendment D. The Proposed Corwin Amendment E. The Proposed Flag-Burning Amendment III. Amendments and Separation of Powers: Amendments Overruling Supreme Court Decisions IV. Amendments and Federalism A. State Experimentation B. Protecting
    [Show full text]
  • Proposition 8 Is Unconstitutional, but Not Because the Ninth Circuit Said So
    NOTE Proposition 8 Is Unconstitutional, But Not Because the Ninth Circuit Said So: The Equal Protection Clause Does Not Support a Legal Distinction Between Denying the Right to Same-Sex Marriage and Not Providing It in the First Place Nathan Rouse* I. INTRODUCTION In 2008, advocates for marriage equality1 lost a hard-fought and contentious campaign battle in California: voters approved Proposition 8 and eliminated the right to same-sex marriage.2 The battle, however, had only begun. Two same-sex couples whose plans to marry had been can- celled by the passage of Proposition 8 sued the state in federal district court, maintaining that Proposition 8 violates the Constitution.3 They won. The district court issued a landmark decision in which the court broadly held that banning same-sex marriage violates both the Equal Pro- * J.D. Candidate, Seattle University School of Law, 2013; B.A., Comparative Literature, Colorado College, 2006. Thanks to Carrie Hobbs, Laura Turczanski, Daniel Lee, and Jamie Corning. And, of course, to Alex. 1. This Note will use the terms “marriage equality” and “same-sex marriage.” Although the term “gay marriage” is widely used, it is noninclusive. For example, the term does not include bi- sexual or transgendered persons. See Patrick Busch, Is Same-Sex Marriage A Threat to Traditional Marriages?: How Courts Struggle with the Question, 10 WASH. U. GLOBAL STUD. L. REV. 143, 143 n.1 (2011). But see Monte Neil Stewart, Genderless Marriage, Institutional Realities, and Judicial Elision, 1 DUKE J. CONST. L. & PUB. POL’Y 1, 5 n.6 (2006) (choosing the term “genderless mar- riage” because “same-sex marriage” suggests something different from opposite-sex marriages).
    [Show full text]
  • Fear and Loathing in Massachusetts: Same-Sex Marriage and Some Lessons from the Ih Story of Marriage and Divorce Joanna L
    Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship 2004 Fear and Loathing In Massachusetts: Same-Sex Marriage and Some Lessons From The iH story of Marriage and Divorce Joanna L. Grossman Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship Recommended Citation Joanna L. Grossman, Fear and Loathing In Massachusetts: Same-Sex Marriage and Some Lessons From The History of Marriage and Divorce, 14 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 87 (2004) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/faculty_scholarship/913 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. FEAR AND LOATHING IN MASSACHUSETTS: SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AND SOME LESSONS FROM THE HISTORY OF MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE JOANNA L. GROSSMAN* In May 2004, Massachusetts became the first and only state in the union to permit same-sex couples to marry.1 A month earlier, Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had announced his intent to enforce a little-known 1913 state law limiting the ability of out-of-state couples to marry in Massachusetts unless their home state would also permit them to marry. 2 "Massachusetts should not become the Las Vegas of same-sex marriage,",3 he declared in a statement to the press. Las Vegas is known for its impulsive and often short-lived marriages, like the 55-hour marriage between Britney Spears and a childhood friend that was annulled Professor, Hofstra Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Til Death Do Us Part: the Difficulties of Obtaining a Same-Sex Divorce Ellen Shapiro [email protected]
    Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy Volume 8 | Issue 2 Article 3 Spring 2013 'Til Death Do Us Part: The Difficulties of Obtaining a Same-Sex Divorce Ellen Shapiro [email protected] Recommended Citation Ellen Shapiro, 'Til Death Do Us Part: The Difficulties of Obtaining a Same-Sex Divorce, 8 Nw. J. L. & Soc. Pol'y. 208 (2013). http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njlsp/vol8/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. Copyright 2013 by Northwestern University School of Law Volume 8 (Spring 2013) Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy ’Til Death Do Us Part: The Difficulties of Obtaining a Same-Sex Divorce Ellen Shapiro* ABSTRACT This Article explores a problem faced by many wedded same-sex couples: the difficulty in obtaining a divorce. Suppose two men from Pennsylvania travel to Massachusetts to obtain a marriage license and return to Pennsylvania shortly thereafter. If their marriage breaks down, the couple will be unable to divorce in the state because Pennsylvania refuses to recognize the marriage for any purpose. Moreover, due to Massachusetts’ residency requirement, the couple cannot simply travel back to Massachusetts to divorce. Because this problem is in part encouraged by state mini- DOMAs, and the Supreme Court has the opportunity to rule on DOMA’s constitutionality, this Article will also explore the various rationales for holding DOMA unconstitutional, how each affects mini-DOMAs, and thus same-sex divorce.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Striptease: How the Failure of the 108Th Congress's Jurisdiction Stripping Bills Were Used for Political Success
    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 14 (2005-2006) Issue 3 Article 13 February 2006 Congressional Striptease: How the Failure of the 108th Congress's Jurisdiction Stripping Bills Were Used for Political Success Laura Fellow Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Jurisdiction Commons Repository Citation Laura Fellow, Congressional Striptease: How the Failure of the 108th Congress's Jurisdiction Stripping Bills Were Used for Political Success, 14 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1121 (2006), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol14/iss3/13 Copyright c 2006 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj CONGRESSIONAL STRIPTEASE: HOW THE FAILURES OF THE 108TH CONGRESS'S JURISDICTION-STRIPPING BILLS WERE USED FOR POLITICAL SUCCESS Laura N. Fellow* INTRODUCTION [L]egal scholars and commentators . have rendered a near-unanimous judgment... [that proposals to make excep- tions to Supreme Court jurisdiction] are ill-conceived and unconstitutional. But that consensus judgment has failed to deter or dampen political support for proposals [to divest Article III federal courts and the Supreme Court of jurisdiction]. Such proposals continue to be made periodically, in seeming correla- tion to corresponding denouncements of some perceived instance of excessive "activism" by the Court.' Written nearly twenty years ago as part of an impassioned plea to stop politically motivated jurisdiction-stripping measures, the situation described above is still on point, with one exception. In the past, congressional proposals to limit federal court jurisdiction have "reflect[ed] a substantive disagreement with the way the Supreme Court, the lower federal courts, or both have resolved particular issues."' 2 However, the trickle of court-curbing bills before the 108th Congress was * Laura Fellow is aJ.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues
    Order Code RL31994 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues Updated June 15, 2005 Alison M. Smith Legislative Attorney American Law Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Same-Sex Marriages: Legal Issues Summary Massachusetts became the first state to legalize marriage between same-sex couples May 17, 2004, as a result of a November 2003 decision by the state’s highest court that denying gay and lesbian couples the right to marry violated the state’s constitution. Currently federal law does not recognize same-sex marriages. This report discusses the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), P.L. 104-199, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages and allows individual states to refuse to recognize such marriages performed in other states, as well as discussing the potential legal challenges to the DOMA. Moreover this report summarizes the legal principles applied in determining the validity of a marriage contracted in another state; surveys the various approaches employed by states to prevent same-sex marriage; and discusses the recent House and Senate Resolutions introduced in the 109th Congress proposing a constitutional amendment (H.J.Res. 39, S.J.Res. 1, and S.J.Res. 13) and limiting Federal courts’ jurisdiction to hear or to determine any question pertaining to the interpretation of DOMA (H.R. 1100). Contents Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) ................................2 Potential Constitutional Challenges to DOMA .......................3 Full Faith and
    [Show full text]