Cardozo Public Law, Policy and Ethics Journal
Abstract
The article examines the strategic approaches used in same-sex marriage litigation, contrasting the methods employed in Perry v. Schwarzenegger with those in Baehr v. Miike. It argues that Perry's focus on challenging the factual underpinnings of government rationales for same-sex marriage restrictions provides a stronger legal foundation compared to Baehr's emphasis on the relationship between statutes and their purposes. By grounding its case in extensive factual analysis, Perry sets a strategic precedent for future litigation, making it more difficult for appellate courts to overturn the ruling.
Disciplines
Law | Sexuality and the Law
Recommended Citation
Samuel Yaggy,
A Tale of Two Cases: Baehr v. Miike, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, and the Future of Same-Sex Marriage Litigation,
10
Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J.
217
(2011).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cplpej/vol10/iss1/8