Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog[Civil Unions]: A Reply to Nussbaum
Readers will not be surprised to learn that I agree with Martha Nussbaum's compelling analysis of this issue. I would be very interested, though, to hear what Rick Garnett and Doug Laycock think of it. Doug has already said that he supports same-sex marriage, so I suppose it's Rick whose response will be most interesting.
There's one element of Martha's analysis that I do want to address. Martha argues that states should permit same-sex marriage. But H.R. 2234 authorizes not same-sex marriage, but civil unions. I have struggled personally with the question whether to endorse a law allowing civil unions, but not same-sex marriage. Because I believe that discrimination against gays and lesbians is ignorant, immoral and inconsistent with our nation's most cherished constitutional values, I deeply believe that full equality, rather than some form of subordinated "separate but equal," is the only proper solution. Nonetheless, I am persuaded by those who know Illinois politics better than I that although the state legislature might legalize civil unions, it will not in the foreseeable future legalize same-sex marriage.
The quandary is whether to settle for a half-a-loaf or whether to stand on principle. On the one hand, accept civil unions while expressly reserving "marriage" for opposite-sex couples seems to me deeply offensive. It has the same moral justification of separate-but-equal in the racial context. It is stigmatizing, insulting and discriminatory. On the other hand, there are very real practical benefits to civil unions that mean a great deal to the day-to-day lives of same-sex couples. So, assuming the recognition of same-sex marriage is not in cards in Illinois at present, what to do? This is similar to the "don't ask, don't tell" question.
I'd be very interested to know what Martha, Rick and Doug think about this.
Full post as published by The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog on May 06, 2009 (boomark / email).
The Civil Rights Act of 1871
Law bans discrimination enacted under color of state law
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Gay Marriage Laws
Where same sex couples can marry
Civil / Human Rights
alleging violations of basic human and civil rights.
RC2 Corp to Pay $1.25 Million Civil Penalty
RC2 Corp to Pay $1.25 Million Civil Penalty >
Faulty Homes
Fleetwood Enterprises Inc. pays HUD $75,000 civil penalty for defective construction.
Health Plan Boycott
Connecticut chiropractic groups to pay $87,000 fine in civil suit.
Becker County
Faces Civil Rights Class Action by Inmates and their Attorneys
Marketing Spam
Member Source Media pays $200,000 civil penalty for deceptive online advertising.

A workable compromise on SSM/civil unions
SC State Senator pushes for civil unions
SSM and religious liberty discussion at the University of Chicago blog
NYT: Gay Couples Say Civil Unions Arent Enough
Will Hawaii become the 5th state to recognize civil unions







