Justifying the Legal Treatment of Family and Marriage Flashcards
Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas
What is the key takeaway from this case?
Extra point if you can remember the holding of the case
Living with others is not a fundamental right (rational basis review applied). Cities can use zoning to protect “family values.”
Zoning ordinance excluding more than two unrelated people living together does not violate the Constitution.
Moore v. City of East Cleveland
What was the right established in this case?
What level of scrutiny did this case apply and why?
the fundamental right to establish a home; specifically the right to privacy and family life.
Heightened scrutiny because it interfered with a fundamental right (SDP)
Moore v. City of East Cleveland
What is Pluralism?
How does it relate to the above case?
The concept of Pluralism allows families to live in their own way, against state standardization. It acknowledges the existence of single-parent families, blended families, same-sex couples, and other non-traditional family units.
This concept influenced the court in deciding that an ordinance regulating family composition (limiting “single family”) interferes with the right to privacy and family life.
City of Ladue v. Horn
Why was an Ordinance defining family as blood, marriage, or adoption valid in this case?
Level of scrutiny?
the state has an interest in regulating family definitions for legitimate purposes.
Rational basis = rationally related to a state objective.
Maynard v. Hill
What was the holding and takeaway of this case?
Marriage creates legal rights and obligations beyond a mere civil contract. The state plays a role in defining and regulating marriage, recognizing it as more than a private agreement.
Griswold v. Connecticut
What right did this case highlight?
Marital privacy (right to contraceptives) is constitutionally protected. Recognizes conceptual (marital bedroom) and physical (home) privacy.
States cannot achieve objectives through overly broad and invasive means.
Perry v. Schwarzenegger
What was the holding?
Level of scrutiny?
State law prohibiting same-sex marriage violates Due Process and Equal Protection (right to marry and gender).
Intermediate scrutiny applied because gender-discrimination. Traditional marriage reasons (stability, commitment, etc.) seen as also applying to same-sex couples.
Obergefell v. Hodges
What is the significance of this case, including the holding?
Level of scrutiny?
- legalized same sex marriage in the US. The holding was that States must issue marriage licenses and recognize same-sex marriages.
- Marriage as embodying personal autonomy, individual identity, and social connection. It grants critical rights and benefits.
Strict scrutiny because violates Due Process (marriage as fundamental right) and Equal Protection (gender classification).
