1.

Record Nr.

UNINA9910956533003321

Autore

Pierceson Jason <1972->

Titolo

Courts, liberalism, and rights : gay law and politics in the United States and Canada / / Jason Pierceson

Pubbl/distr/stampa

Philadelphia, : Temple University Press, 2005

ISBN

9786611093990

9781281093998

1281093998

9781592134021

1592134025

Edizione

[1st ed.]

Descrizione fisica

1 online resource (265 p.)

Collana

Queer politics, queer theories

Disciplina

342.7108/7

Soggetti

Homosexuality - Law and legislation - United States

Gay rights - United States

Homosexuality - Law and legislation - Canada

Gay rights - Canada

Courts

Liberalism

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Note generali

Description based upon print version of record.

Nota di bibliografia

Includes bibliographical references (p. [199]-246) and index.

Nota di contenuto

Contents; Acknowledgments; 1 Introduction; 2 U.S. Federal Courts and Gay Rights: A History of Hesitancy; 3 Liberalism and Gay Politics: Rights and Their Critics; 4 Toward a Better Liberalism; 5 Sodomy Laws, Courts, and Liberalism; 6 Lessons from Continued Sodomy Adjudication; 7 Courts and Same-Sex Marriage in the United States:Hawaii and Alaska; 8 Courts and Same-Sex Marriage in the United States: Vermont; 9 Developments after Vermont: An Evolving Jurisprudence and Its Backlash; 10 Canada: Rethinking Courts, Rights, and Liberalism; 11 Courts, Social Change, and the Power of Legal Liberalism

12 ConclusionNotes; Index

Sommario/riassunto

In the courts, the best chance for achieving a broad set of rights for gays and lesbians lies with judges who view liberalism as grounded in an expansion of rights rather than a constraint of government activity.



At a time when most gay and lesbian politics focuses only on the issue of gay marriage, Courts, Liberalism, and Rights guides readers through a nuanced discussion of liberalism, court rulings on sodomy laws and same-sex marriage, and the comparative progress gays and lesbians have made via the courts in Canada. As debates continue about the ability of court