Is Full Marriage Equality for Same-Sex Couples Next? The Immediate and Future Impact of the Supreme Court's Decision in United States v. Windsor

C. Archibald
{"title":"Is Full Marriage Equality for Same-Sex Couples Next? The Immediate and Future Impact of the Supreme Court's Decision in United States v. Windsor","authors":"C. Archibald","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2312079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As people across the political spectrum sat on the edge of their seats last summer, the Supreme Court waited until the last possible moment to issue its two same-sex marriage decisions. One, decided on a technicality, did nothing to answer the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The other, United States v. Windsor, was a landmark decision, as it struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and found that same-sex couples validly married under state law must have their marriages recognized under federal law. However, the Windsor opinion limits its holding to “those in lawful marriages,” and so has no immediate effect on the laws of the more than 30 states where same-sex marriage is still prohibited. This article will analyze the Windsor opinion and show how it makes it more likely that courts in the future will find that state same-sex marriage prohibitions are unconstitutional.","PeriodicalId":83444,"journal":{"name":"Valparaiso University law review. Valparaiso University. School of Law","volume":"13 1","pages":"695-713"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Valparaiso University law review. Valparaiso University. School of Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2312079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As people across the political spectrum sat on the edge of their seats last summer, the Supreme Court waited until the last possible moment to issue its two same-sex marriage decisions. One, decided on a technicality, did nothing to answer the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. The other, United States v. Windsor, was a landmark decision, as it struck down Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act and found that same-sex couples validly married under state law must have their marriages recognized under federal law. However, the Windsor opinion limits its holding to “those in lawful marriages,” and so has no immediate effect on the laws of the more than 30 states where same-sex marriage is still prohibited. This article will analyze the Windsor opinion and show how it makes it more likely that courts in the future will find that state same-sex marriage prohibitions are unconstitutional.
下一步是同性婚姻完全平等吗?最高法院对美国诉温莎案判决的当前和未来影响
去年夏天,当各个政治派别的人都坐在座位的边缘时,最高法院一直等到最后一刻才发布两项同性婚姻裁决。其中一个是技术性的,没有回答同性伴侣是否有宪法规定的结婚权利。另一起是美国诉温莎案(United States v. Windsor),这是一个具有里程碑意义的判决,因为它推翻了《联邦婚姻保护法》(Federal Defense of Marriage Act)第3条,认定根据州法律合法结婚的同性伴侣的婚姻必须得到联邦法律的承认。然而,温莎的意见将其裁决限制在“合法婚姻的人”,因此对30多个仍然禁止同性婚姻的州的法律没有直接影响。本文将分析温莎的意见,并说明它如何使法院在未来更有可能发现州同性婚姻禁令违宪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信