Constitutional Confusion: The Case for the Minnesota Marriage Amendment
Teresa Stanton Collett
University of St. Thomas School of Law (Minnesota)
William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 33, p. 1029, 2007
U of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-20
This article makes the case for an amendment to the constitution of Minnesota defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It opens with a brief survey of the wave of litigation that has followed the United States Supreme Court opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, in which plaintiffs asserted state constitutional claims for recognition of same-sex unions as marriages. The article then explores the strengths and limits of Baker v. Nelson, a Minnesota federal district court decision rejecting any federal claim to recognition. Same-sex advocates often argue this case forecloses any attempt to force recognition of same-sex unions through Minnesota courts. I argue, however, that the threat of judicial redefinition of marriages arises from recognition by a single state district court in a class action, similar in manner to the method used to decriminalize sodomy in Minnesota, prior to Lawrence v. Texas.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 30
Keywords: Constitutional law, Lawrence v. Texas, same sex marriage, marriage amendmentAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: June 14, 2007
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.484 seconds