Backlash Politics: How Constitutional Litigation Has Advanced Marriage Equality in the United States

By Eskridge, William N. | Boston University Law Review, March 2013 | Go to article overview

Backlash Politics: How Constitutional Litigation Has Advanced Marriage Equality in the United States


Eskridge, William N., Boston University Law Review


INTRODUCTION

There are few issues that excite lawyers and law students more than same- sex marriage recognition. The sheer drama of the issue is hard to match. A generation ago, so-called "homosexuals" cowered in the closet, hated or scorned by most Americans and fearful that any open relationship would lead to loss of employment, social ostracism, loss of professional license (including the license to practice law), police harassment, and possibly even imprisonment and rape within prison. Today, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans in states like Massachusetts face little or no state discrimination and enjoy all the same legal rights and duties as straight persons. That equality extends to civil marriage in Massachusetts and eight other states, as well as the District of Columbia.1 Another ten states recognize civil unions or their rough equivalent for same-sex couples.2

LGBT people have moved from outlaws to in-laws in a generation. That is as dramatic a change in fundamental social attitudes as this nation has ever seen. For lawyers, the gay rights movement ranks alongside the civil rights and women's rights movements as one of the landmark social movements of the last century. Like those previous social movements, the gay rights movement has contributed to the ongoing transformation of family law and has successfully deployed constitutional litigation, as well as legislation to advance its agenda. Unlike the civil rights and women's rights movements, however, most marriage equality litigation has been carried out under state constitutions rather than the U.S. Constitution, though that is rapidly changing. The gay marriage analog to the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Loving v. Virginia3 is the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's 2003 decision in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health.4

This Article will provide an account of this constitutional success story but will also analyze a cautionary narrative. Specifically, I shall consider Gerald Rosenberg's thesis that courts cannot effect social change, a thesis Professor Rosenberg has extended to the marriage equality litigation.5 His general argument is that "courts can almost never be effective producers of significant social reform. At best, they can second the social reform acts of the other branches of government."6 Consistent with conventional wisdom among legal academics, Rosenberg maintains that courts have neither the capacity nor the legitimacy to craft and implement complicated and far-reaching changes in social policy.7 His more distinctive point is that when courts innovate through recognition of important constitutional rights, they are not only ineffectual but counterproductive, because they deflect social movement energy from more productive channels and produce "backlash" from energized countermovements.8

Thus, in the 2008 edition of his book, Hollow Hope, Rosenberg argued that Goodridge and other state court decisions were incomplete "victories" that left lesbian and gay couples with only some of the thousands of marital rights enjoyed by married heterosexual couples.9 A primary reason for this was backlash: "As a result of litigation, same-sex marriage proponents face legislative and constitutional obstacles on both the state and federal level that did not exist before they turned to litigation," including the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), enacted as a direct response to Hawaii's constitutional litigation.10 While acknowledging that one might consider the combined results as "two steps forward, one step back," Rosenberg considered the results to be more accurately described as "one step forward, two steps back."11

Professor Rosenberg's learned analysis has been subjected to strong critique. My colleagues, Professors Linda Greenhouse and Reva Siegel, for example, take Rosenberg and other backlash theorists to task for their analysis of Roe v. Wade, which those theorists read as creating a tidal wave of pro-life opposition to a woman's right to choose abortion. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Backlash Politics: How Constitutional Litigation Has Advanced Marriage Equality in the United States
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.