Marital Immunity, Intimate Relationships, and Improper Inferences: A New Law on Sexual Offenses by Intimates

111 Pages Posted: 7 Sep 2003

Date Written: August 2003

Abstract

Today, to one degree or another, marital immunity for sexual offenses persists in over half the states. Underlying the marital rape immunity has been the assumption that when a woman enters into a marriage, she is giving her ongoing consent to sexual intercourse. Professor Michelle Anderson argues that states must abolish this immunity to make the law formally neutral on the marital status of the parties. However, Professor Anderson argues, such formal neutrality is insufficient. The ideology of ongoing consent underlying the marital rape immunity has infected the way the legal system treats sexual offenses among intimates who are not married. The legal system often assumes that ongoing consent also exists between non-married intimates. Professor Anderson argues against the ideology of ongoing consent in both settings and proposes a new, single rule: evidence of a past or continuing sexual relationship between the complainant and the defendant is not itself a defense to a criminal sexual offense and, by itself, does not prove consent to the sexual act.

Keywords: rape law, marital immunity, marital rape immunity, intimates, criminal sexual offense

Suggested Citation

Anderson, Michelle J., Marital Immunity, Intimate Relationships, and Improper Inferences: A New Law on Sexual Offenses by Intimates (August 2003). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=439504 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.439504

Michelle J. Anderson (Contact Author)

Brooklyn College ( email )

Brooklyn, NY 11215
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
430
Abstract Views
4,321
Rank
123,817
PlumX Metrics