A diverse group of scholars and practitioners, including ones from opposite sides in the recent, historic California marriage litigation, will examine some of the constitutional and personal dimensions of the intersections of gender, race, nationality, and sexual orientation as they are reflected in U.S. legal systems and those systems’ varying responses to bias and discrimination.
Mia F. Yamamoto,
Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) defines marriage as between a man and a woman for purposes of the entire U.S. Code, effectively precluding same-sex couples from qualifying for the more than 1,100 federal rights, benefits and responsibilities that come with marriage. Now with same-sex couples marrying in Massachusetts and California, the broad impact of federal discrimination against same-sex couples is finally being felt. What are possible litigation strategies for dismantling this discriminatory law? What work is being done now to prepare to challenge Section 3, and what can you do to help in that effort?
LGBT advocates have been working to develop leaders and make schools safer by supporting Gay/Straight Alliances (GSAs) in schools. However, strategic and coordinated efforts are being employed by the radical right to circumvent the Equal Access Act’s Protections and make Gay/Straight Alliances less accessible in schools. Meanwhile, legal advocates are working hard to prevent anti-gay harassing speech while protecting LGBT-affirming speech. Come to this workshop to get the latest on these complex Constitutional issues and learn how best to advocate, and when to litigate, on behalf of LGBT students.
The laws impacting LGBT people across the United States could hardly be more diverse. Same-sex couples in Massachusetts can get married, while Virginia’s legislature passed a law that purports to ban even “partnership contracts” for gay and lesbian couples. The panel will survey the tax implications of the many forms of government recognition offered to same-sex couples across the nation.