|
||||
|
||||
State DOMAs, Neutral Principles, and the Mobius of State Action
Darrell A. H. Miller University of Cincinnati College of Law Temple Law Review, Vol. 82, 2009 U of Cincinnati Public Law Research Paper No. 09-39 Abstract: This essay uses the Mobius strip as a mathematical metaphor for how state "defense of marriage amendments" (DOMAs) can twist the Shelley v. Kraemer contribution to state action doctrine. It argues that Shelley's core insight -- that judicial enforcement of private agreements can constitute state action and must meet federal Fourteenth Amendment commands -- can be used by state judiciaries to hold that state judicial enforcement of private agreements between same sex-couples is a species of state action forbidden by state DOMA. As explored in this essay, the potential doctrinal contortion of Shelley by state DOMAs is at once a testament to the law of unintended consequences, a cautionary tale about state experimentalism, and comment on the aspiration and limits of neutral principles of adjudication.
Keywords: defense of marriage, same-sex, gay, lesbian, homosexual, gender, constitutional, state action, contract, equal protection, Romer, Lawrence, Shelley, Kraemer, federalism, neutral principles Accepted Paper SeriesDate posted: September 19, 2008 ; Last revised: November 12, 2009Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
||||||||||
© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo3 in 0.141 seconds.