From Slavery to Same-Sex Marriage: Comity Versus Public Policy in Inter-jurisdictional Recognition of Controversial Domestic relations

Recognition across state and national borders of controversial forms of domestic relationships have existed throughout the history of conflict of laws, creating tension between two important principles: respect for comity and protection of valued domestic public policies. Drawing upon several examples, and particularly the history of international and intrastate recognition of slavery (a “domestic relationship”) in Anglo-American history, the article shows that despite the comity-based presumption of respect for legal status created in other jurisdictions, when strong public policies protective of domestic relations and status have been implicated, American states consistently have declined to give interstate recognition to those controversial forms of domestic relationship that are being imported. The article examines several examples of this and reviews the principles that are historically established in dealing with such conflicts, and suggests the relevance of this history and these principles for interstate recognition of same-sex marriage and other controversial contemporary domestic relationships

From Slavery to Same-Sex Marriage: Comity Versus Public Policy in Inter-jurisdictional Recognition of Controversial Domestic relations

Recognition across state and national borders of controversial forms of domestic relationships have existed throughout the history of conflict of laws, creating tension between two important principles: respect for comity and protection of valued domestic public policies. Drawing upon several examples, and particularly the history of international and intrastate recognition of slavery (a “domestic relationship”) in Anglo-American history, the article shows that despite the comity-based presumption of respect for legal status created in other jurisdictions, when strong public policies protective of domestic relations and status have been implicated, American states consistently have declined to give interstate recognition to those controversial forms of domestic relationship that are being imported. The article examines several examples of this and reviews the principles that are historically established in dealing with such conflicts, and suggests the relevance of this history and these principles for interstate recognition of same-sex marriage and other controversial contemporary domestic relationships

Divorce Violence and the No-Fault Divorce Culture

One of the major purposes for no-fault divorce reform was to reduce the hostility historically associated with divorce-related litigation. Generally it was believed that eliminating fault grounds for divorce would reduce or eliminate animosity and belligerent conflict. Yet, the continued existence of pervasive serious violence associated with divorce-related litigation a quarter of a century after the adoption of no-fault divorce laws defies the claims and expectations of no-fault divorce reformers. This Article considers some of the connections between divorce and violence, and specifically between no-fault divorce and acts of serious violence by those affected by contemporary divorce-related litigation. The focus of this examination is the no-fault divorce culture. This culture is composed of the attitudes, beliefs, and expectations of society that have been influenced by the rules, systems, and values that constitute, underlie, and are imbedded in our no-fault divorce laws, legal system, and practices