Recognition Of Same-sex Marriage Research Articles

Same-Sex Marriage: Refining the Conflict of Laws Analysis

To be objective about the role of conflict of laws in the treatment of same-sex marriage, it is helpful to start with tolerance for the views of both sides in the substantive debate over whether to permit samesex marriage. I begin with this observation because much of the writing about conflict of laws issues and the recognition of same-sex marriage is far from neutral on that issue. Unless and until the Supreme Court determines that a prohibition on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional as a matter of federal law, it is within the prerogative of each individual state to determine what status to accord to same-sex couples who want to formalize their relationship and/or what rights should attach to such relationships. The view about same-sex marriage that is taken by a particular state (in the United States) or by a particular country reflects the set of values accepted in that community as determined through its own political processes, whether expressed in state constitutional amendments, statutes enacted by the legislature, or by judicial decisions declared in the courts.

Interstate Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages and Civil Unions: A Handbook for Judges

Same-sex marriage is here. Massachusetts now recognizes such marriages, and increasing numbers of same-sex couples have married. Other states have virtually the same status: Vermont recognizes civil unions, and California recognizes domestic partnerships, that have virtually all the rights of marriage. Are these statuses exportable? Will same-sex unions be recognized in other states?The answer should not be mysterious. There is a well developed body of law on the question of whether and when to recognize extraterritorial marriages that are contrary to the forum's public policy. Assuming that courts decide to follow that law, the answer is, it depends. This article will offer a short overview. The answer is somewhat complex, but there are large areas of clarity.

Achieving Competent Family Practice with Same-Sex Parents

Due to the increasing recognition of same-sex marriage in different jurisdictions and growing numbers of parents raising children in the context of a same-sex relationship, it is becoming ever more important for family therapists to attain clinical competence in working with families headed by same-sex parents. This paper takes as its premise that good intentions and general acceptance of diversity are not sufficient in working with this population of families. Rather, clinical competence rests on experience working with lesbian and gay clients and knowledge of the impact of heterosexism on parenting in the context of same-sex relationships. Equally critical to competent family therapy practice is a theoretical framework that pulls together complementary concepts from different bodies of theory to analyze family structures and functions in the social context of heterosexism. To this end, this paper reviews family systems theory, structural social work, ecological systems theory and queer theory with an eye to culling complementary constructs relevant to working with same-sex parents. Specific aspects of family functioning such as maintenance of boundaries around and within families and role differentiation between parents are then explored using this theoretical framework. Finally, implications for the clinician working with families led by same-sex parents are reviewed.

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)

ABSTRACT Recognition of same-sex marriage has been a goal of many in the gay rights movement. With the passage of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), same-sex relationships will not be afforded the same opportunities as heterosexual relationships. This paper will discuss the process leading to the passage of the DOMA, and will argue that the passage of this piece of legislation was a misuse of Article IV, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, “Full Faith and Credit.” The Defense of Marriage Act represents an extraordinary act of Congress, as they have rarely passed legislation under this mandate and have never passed legislation that curtails full faith and credit. Strategies that can be utilized to overcome the constraints of the DOMA will also be included.

The Conservative Case against the Federal Marriage Amendment

This Essay criticizes the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment as inconsistent with the principle of federalism. It argues that after recent Supreme Court decisions on the rights of gays, it is likely that federal and state laws discriminating against the recognition of same-sex marriages are likely to be found unconstitutional. It then argues that a constitutional amendment defining marriage is inconsistent with the purposes behind our federal system of government, and that a more preferable approach would preserve to each state the ability to define marriage for itself.

‘I do’ or ‘we Won’T‘: Legalising Same-Sex Marriage in South Africa

The question whether to extend marriage to same-sex couples is likely to be decided by the courts in the near future. The internationaltrends in this regard are inconsistent and often unprincipled because of the interaction between beliefs about marriage on the one hand, and attitudes towards homosexuality on the other. This article argues that, for reasons of principle, the constitutional guarantee of equality and dignity requires the legal recognition of same-sex marriage. A narrow conception of marriage as being limited to heterosexuals deprives lesbians and gays of material and nonmaterial benefits. It also prevents lesbians and gays from being accepted into mainstream society and thereby leading more enriched lives. Due to the recent developments in South African family law that emphasise the importance of cultural diversity, encourage tolerance, and begin to recognise notions of family which do not fit the Judeo-Christian model, there is reason to believe that the common law definition of marriage can be developed to include same-sex partners. Although domestic partnership regimes are often seen as a sufficient alternative to marriage, they deny same-sex partners spiritual and religious equality and as a result do not meet the transformative goals of the Constitution.

Same-Sex Marriage: The Depth of the Opposition and the Importance of Victory

Legal recognition of same-sex marriage is close at hand. While marriages between two members of the same sex are not yet legal in any state, it is reasonable to suppose that legal sanction is near, at least somewhere in the United States. Such recognition would bring a host of tangible economic consequences, but, occasional efforts at camouflage notwithstanding, everyone knows that very little of the debate is actually about that. Instead, the issue has become a flag worth capturing in the culture wars: proponents herald the coming of same-sex marriage as contributing to the triumph of a secular, just, and humane society; opponents see instead accelerated erosion of the bedrock of stability needed to ground any successful society. One of the difficulties facing advocates of samesex marriage is that some of the fear fueling the opposition is not without basis. The challenge is to come up with a nuanced response to these arguments, one that convinces opponents that same-sex marriage both furthers the kind of stability that should be valued and, in the bargain, better respects values that are widely shared. As most people by now know, judicial developments in Hawaii ignited the smoldering controversy. In 1993, that state's Supreme Court ruled that denying the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples presumptively constituted gender discrimination. The high court remanded the case for a determination by the lower court as to whether the state could carry its heavy burden of showing that such denial was supported by an especially compelling justification. Panicked by these developments, Congress cast aside its long-standing practice of leaving the question of eligibility for marriage to the states, and in 1996 enacted the extraordinary Defense of Marriage Act. The Act accomplishes two goals. First, marriage between two members of the same sex, even if recog-

In Sickness and in Health, in Hawaii and Where Else?: Conflict of Laws and Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

In Sickness and in Health, in Hawaii and Where Else?: Conflict of Laws and Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

Aloha, Marriage? Constitutional and Choice of Law Arguments for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages

Aloha, Marriage? Constitutional and Choice of Law Arguments for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriages