UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles The Culture of Knowledge: Constructing “Expertise” in Legal Debates on Marriage and Kinship for Same-Sex Couples in France and the United States A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer 2015 © Copyright by Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer 2015 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION The Culture of Knowledge: Constructing “Expertise” in Legal Debates on Marriage and Kinship for Same-Sex Couples in France and the United States By Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, Los Angeles, 2015 Professor Abigail Cope Saguy, Chair This dissertation asks how and why American and French decision-makers—and those striving to persuade them—use specific kinds of “experts” and “expertise” when debating if same-sex couples should have the right (or not) to marry and found families. To answer these questions, I analyze archival, interview, and ethnographic data to study “expertise”—conceived broadly—in media, legislative, and judicial debates on the U.S. state, U.S. federal, French, and European levels from 1990 to 2013. I find that, despite addressing the same issues, decision- makers draw on divergent categories of “experts” mobilizing types of knowledge that follow systematic cross-national patterns. For instance, French institutions hear professors and intellectuals who discuss gay family rights in the abstract while U.S. institutions hear ordinary citizens whose lived experiences ground academic testimony. Furthermore, some “expertise,” such as economics in the U.S. or psychoanalysis in France, is pervasive in one context but absent in the other. I argue that nationally specific patterns in “expertise” are due to embedded ii institutional logics, legal structures, and knowledge production fields that impact how information is produced, made available, and rendered legitimate nationally and historically. Chapter 1 identifies the people U.S. and French newspapers cite and what they say. U.S. reporting prioritizes ordinary citizens and advocacy organizations using personal experience and legal expertise. In contrast, French reporting prioritizes intellectuals and professionals using psychoanalytic and anthropological concepts. Chapter 2 finds national differences in people testifying before legal and political institutions. In contrast to French legislatures, which draw on famous intellectuals, state agencies, and other elite actors, U.S. legislatures hear more ordinary citizens and activists. Courts, which are central to advancing gay rights in the U.S. but not France, combine personal testimony with empirical science from “expert witnesses.” Chapter 3 describes how these patterns are partly the result of the way lawyers and legislators navigate cultural and institutional constraints as they organize testimony. Chapter 4 explains how knowledge availability also depends on power and resource distribution in fields where academics and professionals work. Finally, Chapter 5 describes how experts’ access to decision- making institutions depends on the relationships they forge with organizations and lawmakers. iii The dissertation of Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer is approved. Eric Fassin Hannah Louise Landecker Edward T. Walker Juliet A. Williams Abigail Cope Saguy, Committee Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2015 iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Chapter 1 “Expertise” in the Media: Coverage of Marriage and Parenting 24 Debates in Le Monde and The New York Times Chapter 2 “Expertise” in U.S. and French Political and Legal Institutions 60 Chapter 3 The Work of the Debates: Negotiating the Institutional Logics of 87 Knowledge Outlets Chapter 4 “Experts” in Their Academic and Professional Fields 131 Chapter 5 “Experts” and their Connections to the Policy Sphere 162 Conclusion 180 Methodological Appendix 192 Works Cited 213 v LIST OF TABLES Introduction Table 1 U.S. State Legalization of Same-sex Marriage, Adoption, and 12 Surrogacy Before Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015 Chapter 1 Table 2 Proportion of Articles by Institutional Domain and Issue Covered 34 Le Monde and The New York Times Table 3 Proportion of Expertise Occurrences by Type and Stance in Le Monde 37 and The New York Times between 1990-2013 Table 4 Types of Social Science and Mental Health Expertise Occurrences in 38 Le Monde and The New York Times Table 5 Proportion of Articles Citing Different Categories of Experts in 46 Le Monde and The New York Times between 1990-2013 Table 6 Experts whose Proportion of Citations Changed Significantly over 48 Sample Period in Le Monde and The New York Times Chapter 2 Table 7 Proportion of Categories of Experts in California Hearings by Stance 62 Table 8 Proportion of Categories of Experts in Texas Hearings by Stance 62 Table 9 Proportion of Categories of Experts in Appeals Briefs to U.S. Supreme 69 Court in Hollingsworth v. Perry Table 10 Proportion of Categories of Experts Heard by Assemblée Nationale 75 and Sénat Judiciary Committees by Stance, Pacs Hearings 1998 Table 11 Proportion of Categories of Experts Heard by Assemblée Nationale 76 and Sénat Judiciary Committees by Stance, Marriage and Adoption Hearings 2012- 2013 Methodological Appendix Table 12 Complete List of Expertise Codes 196 Table 13 Complete List of Category of Experts 198 vi Table 14 Interviewees in U.S. Debates 205 Table 15 Interviewees in French Debates 206 Table 16 Conferences, Seminars, and Events Attended in Person 209 LIST OF FIGURES Introduction Figure 1 Favorable Opinions on Marriage for Same-sex Couples in the US and 15 France from 1995 to 2015 Figure 2 Favorable Opinions on Adoption by Same-Sex Couples in the US and 16 France from 1992 to 2014 Chapter 1 Figure 3 History of Coverage of Expertise in Le Monde and The New York 33 Times, 1990-2013 Figure 4 Type of Expertise in Le Monde, 1990-2013 41 Figure 5 Percent of Favorable and Unfavorable Expertise in Le Monde, 1994-2013 42 Figure 6 Type Expertise in The New York Times, 1990-2013 44 Figure 7 Percent of Favorable and Unfavorable Expertise in The 45 New York Times, 1990-2013 Figure 8 Proportion and Type of Expertise Used by Experts in Le Monde 51 Figure 9 Proportion and Type of Expertise used by Experts in The New 51 York Times vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the support, time, and energy of many people. I owe a debt of gratitude to all those who contributed to its realization. I thank Abigail Saguy, my advisor and mentor, whose careful and thorough guidance throughout my graduate career has been extraordinary. Abigail taught me how to think sociologically, encouraged me to keep trying when confronted with challenges, patiently tutored me in the craft of writing, and pushed me when I needed it. For all this and more, I am very grateful. Many thanks to Éric Fassin, Hannah Landecker, Frédérique Matonti, Daniel Sabbagh, Edward Walker, and Juliet Williams who, as mentors and dissertation committee members, generously offered their advice, feedback, support, and evaluation of my work. I thank my husband, Nicolas Durand, for putting up with me, reading drafts, correcting my French, and sharing this adventure. I also owe much to my parents, Lisa Stambolis and Lania D’Agostino, sister, Anias Stambolis-D’Agostino, and many other family members. I especially acknowledge Françoise Lacroix for hosting me in Garches. I also thank colleagues and friends Benoît Bastard, Erik Bleich, Agnès Chetaille, Jérôme Courduriès, Pauline Delage, Virginie Descoutures, Judith Ezekiel, Mignon Moore, Calvin Morrill, David Paternotte, Violaine Roussel, and Manuela Salcedo for their feedback on my work and help in the field. I thank all those who were willing to let me interview them and entrust me with their stories. Finally, much gratitude goes to the staff in the Sociology Department at UCLA and at the EHESS. This research was supported by funding from the National Science Foundation (grant SES 1226663), the Bourse Chateaubriand of the Ministère des affaires étrangères de France and the Fulbright Commission, the UCLA Center for European and Eurasian Studies, and the UCLA Graduate Division’s Dissertation Year Fellowship program and Chancellor’s Prize. viii VITA EDUCATION 2013 Graduate Certificate. University of California, Los Angeles. Department of Gender Studies. 2010 M.A. University of California, Los Angeles. Department of Sociology 2008 M.A. Université de Toulouse II. Department of English and American Studies 2004 B.A. Dickinson College. Department of French PUBLICATIONS Stambolis-Ruhstorfer, Michael and Abigail Saguy. 2014. “How to Describe it? Why the Term ‘Coming Out’ Means Different Things in the U.S. and France.” Sociological Forum 29(4): 808-829. Stambolis-Ruhstorfer, Michael. 2013. “Labels of Love: How Migrants Negotiate (or Not) the Culture of Sexual Identity.” American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1(3): 321-345. Moore, Mignon and Michael Stambolis-Ruhstorfer. 2013. “LGBT Sexuality and Families at the Start of the Twenty-First Century.” Annual Review of Sociology 39(1): 491-507. Stambolis-Ruhstorfer, Michael. 2005. “Epidemic and Identity: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of AIDS Prevention Approaches in France and the United States.” Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 12: 191-203. GRANTS AND FELLOWSHIPS 2014 Dissertation Year Fellowship. University of California, Los Angeles 2012 Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant # SES 1226663. National Science Foundation 2012 Dissertation Research