The Admissibility of Expert Testimony About Cognitive Science Research on Eyewitness Identification

Eyewitness identifications are important to jurors, especially in criminal trials. Psychological research has shown, however, that eyewitness testimony is systematically fallible in ways that undermine the goals of the rules of evidence. This article assesses the arguments for and against admitting expert testimony concerning cognitive science research about eyewitness identification. The article concludes that experts should in many instances be allowed to testify about the problems with eyewitness identification testimony

Evaluating the Sex Discrimination Argument for Lesbian and Gay Rights

The sex discrimination argument for lesbian and gay rights analyzes laws that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation in terms of sex discrimination. For example, sodomy laws that prohibit only same-sex sexual activities are analyzed as discriminating on the basis of sex because they prohibit women from doing something men are permitted to do, that is, have sex with women. This argument has been championed by some scholars and litigators, and it has persuaded some judges. Edward Stein shows that there are sociological, theoretical, moral, and practical problems facing the sex discrimination argument. He suggests that there are better ways to make the case for lesbian and gay rights

Looking Beyond Full RelationshipRecognition for Couples Regardless ofSex: Abolition, Alternatives, and/orFunctionalism

In the context of recent accomplishments in the quest for full marriage equality for same-sex couples, this article considers three proposals for reform to the law of adult domestic relations: (i) the abolition of the legal institution of marriage; (ii) the development of a broad “menu” of alternative forms of relationship recognition in addition to marriage; and (iii) the embracing of a functionalist approach to relationship recognition whereby relationships that share significant functional attributes with marriages are, in certain ways, given the same legal treatment as marriages. The article contends that advocates and theoreticians should strive for more than just equal access to marriage for same-sex couples. While the abolition of marriage is neither practical nor appropriate given the structure of family law in the United States and the role that marriage plays in it, the article instead advocates for the development and implementation of alternative forms of relationship recognition as well as the embracing of a nuanced form of functionalism

Past and Present Proposed Amendments to the United States Constitution Regarding Marriage

Proposals to amend the Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage were recently actively discussed and voted on in the U.S. Congress. This Article situates arguments for these proposals within the history of attempts to amend the Constitution related to marriage by providing the first detailed, synthetic analysis of such previously proposed amendments. This examination reveals 133 previously proposed amendments to the Constitution relating to marriage, consisting primarily of proposals to prohibit interracial marriage, proposals to prohibit polygamy, and proposals to empower Congress to make uniform laws concerning marriage and divorce. By tracing the arguments made in support of these amendments, this Article reveals a strong resonance between prior attempts to constitutionalize aspects of the institution of marriage and current proposed amendments. The Article also argues that, in hindsight, the previously proposed amendments were not necessary because state and federal legislatures and courts were able to address problems relating to marriage without amending the Constitution and without destabilizing the delicate balance of power between states and the federal government. Against this background, the Article concludes that current proposals to amend the Constitution are similarly neither necessary nor wise

Introducing Lawrence v. Texas: Some Background and a Glimpse of the Future

The Supreme Court\u27s decision in Lawrence v. Texas broke new ground for the legal position of lesbians, gay men and other sexual minorities in the United States. This article reviews the legal background against which Lawrence was decided (focusing on privacy and equal protection arguments). The article then explores the likely implications of this decision, specifically for the recognition of same-sex marriage and the constitutionality of laws that make other sex acts criminal. The article suggests that the most interesting questions after Lawrence concern whether the logic of Justice O\u27Connor\u27s concurrence (that focused on the equal protection argument) will be accepted in the future