{"title":"Before Loving : The Lost Origins of the Right to Marry","authors":"Michael Boucai","doi":"10.26054/0KFFY1GN4Y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For almost two centuries of this nation’s history, the basic contours of the fundamental right to marry were fairly clear as a matter of natural, not constitutional, law. The right encompassed marriage’s essential characteristics: conjugality and contract, portability and permanence. This Article defines those four dimensions of the natural right to marry and describes their reflections and contradictions in positive law prior to Loving v. Virginia (1967). In that landmark case, the Supreme Court enforced a constitutional “freedom to marry” just when marriage’s definitive attributes were on the brink of legal collapse. Not only did wedlock proceed in Loving’s wake to lose its exclusive claims to licit sex and legitimate procreation, personal autonomy in those very domains gained independent constitutional protection. Drained of its conjugal essence, today’s constitutional right to marry is thus an anachronism, the vestige of a bygone consensus about what, if anything, “marriage” fundamentally is.","PeriodicalId":83442,"journal":{"name":"Utah law review","volume":"2020 1","pages":"69-176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utah law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26054/0KFFY1GN4Y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
For almost two centuries of this nation’s history, the basic contours of the fundamental right to marry were fairly clear as a matter of natural, not constitutional, law. The right encompassed marriage’s essential characteristics: conjugality and contract, portability and permanence. This Article defines those four dimensions of the natural right to marry and describes their reflections and contradictions in positive law prior to Loving v. Virginia (1967). In that landmark case, the Supreme Court enforced a constitutional “freedom to marry” just when marriage’s definitive attributes were on the brink of legal collapse. Not only did wedlock proceed in Loving’s wake to lose its exclusive claims to licit sex and legitimate procreation, personal autonomy in those very domains gained independent constitutional protection. Drained of its conjugal essence, today’s constitutional right to marry is thus an anachronism, the vestige of a bygone consensus about what, if anything, “marriage” fundamentally is.
在这个国家近两个世纪的历史中,结婚这一基本权利的基本轮廓是相当明确的,它是自然法而非宪法法的问题。这一权利包含了婚姻的基本特征:配偶性和契约性、可移植性和持久性。本文定义了婚姻自然权利的这四个维度,并描述了它们在1967年Loving v. Virginia(1967)案之前在成文法中的反映和矛盾。在那个具有里程碑意义的案件中,当婚姻的决定性属性处于法律崩溃的边缘时,最高法院强制执行了宪法规定的“结婚自由”。婚姻不仅在拉文之后失去了对合法性行为和合法生育的排他性要求,在这些领域的个人自主权也获得了独立的宪法保护。今天的宪法规定的结婚权利,失去了其婚姻本质,因此是一种时代错误,是过去关于“婚姻”本质是什么的共识的残余。