HON303/WMS303: WOMEN & LAW
	Topics, Notes, Assignments I (go to Part II)

Part I: Overall Conceptual Framework

January 27: Course overview and discussion of readings

• Required Readings: Katha Pollit, “Feminism's Unfinished Business” (The Atlantic Monthly, November 1997); Leslie Simon, “PC Backlash: A Woman's Story”

February 1: Introduction to the judicial system and legal principles, including historical background and key cases

• Required Readings: Basic Legal Concepts: Notes; “Sex Classification and the Supreme Court: Judicial Scrutiny,” by Heather D. Slack (senior thesis of student at Kenyon College discussing judicial scrutiny in relation to the VMI case); for the following Supreme Court cases, read at least the abstract or excerpts and if you have time skim the edited decision or even the full text decision:
  • Bradwell v. Illinois (1873)—excerpts (Jerome O'Callaghan, SUNY Cortland)
  • Minor v. Happersett (1875)—excerpts (Jerome O'Callaghan, SUNY Cortland); edited decision (Cornell LII); full decision (Cornell LII)
  • Muller v. Orgeon (1908)—abstract (Oyez); edited decision (Cornell LII); full decision (FindLaw)
  • Goesaert v. Cleary (1948)—excerpts (Jerome O'Callaghan, SUNY Cortland); full decision (FindLaw)
  • Hoyt v. Florida (1961)—abstract (Oyez); edited decision (Cornell LII); full decision (FindLaw)
  • Reed v. Reed (1971)—abstract (Oyez); edited decision (Cornell LII); full decision (FindLaw)
  • Frontiero v. Richardson (1973)—abstract (Oyez); edited decision (Cornell LII); full decision (FindLaw)
• Recommended Links:
  • Adjudication and Courtroom Workgroup, from the University of Nevada's online course in Criminal Justice
  • Comprehensive Outline on Equal Protection: “This page provides an analytical outline of issues critical to interpreting the equal protection clause as it applies to gender.”
  • Text Assist for Introduction to Equal Protection, by Karl Manheim, Loyola Law School (see especially the linked flowcharts)
  • The new equal protection—classification by sex (annotation of the Fourteenth Amendment)
  • “From Protection to Equal Opportunity: The Revolution in Women's Legal Status,” by Jo Freeman (lengthy scholarly article originally published in Women, Politics and Change, 1990)

February 3–15: Introduction to feminism and feminist legal theory, including historical background and major issues and controversies

• February 3—Required Readings: Sandra Lipsitz Bem. “Introduction,” The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality (Yale University Press, 1993), 1-5; Chamallas, “Thinking Like a Feminist,” 9-22, and “Backlash: Proliferation of Critics of Feminist Legal Theory,” 112-133; Key Feminist Theoretical Concepts.
• February 8—Required Readings: Leslie Bender, “A Lawyer's Primer on Feminist Theory and Tort,” Feminist Legal Theory: Foundations, ed D. Kelly Weisberg (Temple University Press, 1993), 58-74.
• Recommended Links:
  • “Feminist Jurisprudence: Equal Rights or Neo-Paternalism?” by Michael Weiss and Cathy Young (Cato Policy Analysis No. 256, June 19, 1996). This article, by a male adjunct law professor and a female columnist who wrote a book called Gender Wars, illustrates the backlash that Chamallas describes. The article is also posted on two other web sites, including MenWeb: Men's Voices Magazine

Questions for Written Assignment, due February 8

• February 10—Required Readings: Chamallas, “Three Stages of Feminist Legal Theory,” 23-20; Kimberle Crenshaw, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics,” Feminist Legal Theory: Foundations, ed. D. Kelly Weisberg (Temple University Press, 1993), 383-395.
• February 15—Required Readings: Sandra Lipsitz Bem, “Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality,”The Lenses of Gender (Yale University Press, 1993), 176-196; Envisioning and Creating the Future.
• Recommended Links:
  • “Remedying Employment Discrimination Against African-American Males: Stereotypical Biases Engender a Case of Race Plus Sex Discrimination,” by Floyd D. Weatherspoon (Washburn Law Journal 36.1, Fall 1996). This rather long and complex article argues that after DeGraffenreid the courts have begun to allow sex plus race discrimination claims for African-American women but not for African-American men.

Questions for Written Assignment, due February 15

Part II: Specific Issues

Family Issues

February 17–22: Marriage and Divorce

• February 17—Required Readings: Deborah Rhode. “Competing Perspectives on Family Policy.” Justice and Gender: Sex Discrimination and the Law. Harvard University Press, 1989. 132-54. Cases: Jones v. Hallahan (1973) and M.T. v. J.T. (1976)
• February 22—Required Readings: June Carbone and Margaret Brinig. “Rethinking Marriage: Feminist Ideology, Economic Change, and Divorce Reform.” Cases and Materials in Family Law. Ed. Judith Areen. 3rd ed. Foundation Press, 1992. 102-116
• Recommended Links:
  • Handout on Marriage Regulation, by Leslie Harris (University of Oregon)
  • Law about Marriage: an Overview (Cornell LII)
  • Law about Divorce: an Overview (Cornell LII)
  • New York Divorce Law FAQ (LawGuru)
  • “Same-Sex Marriage: The State of the Law,” by Patricia Novotny & Gwynne L. Skinner (1998); includes timeline of court cases that has a 1999 update from Partners Task Force on the Vermont, Hawaii and Alaska cases
  • “Gay Rites,” by Wendy Kaminer, The American Prospect 11.8 (February 28, 2000). A fairly good overview of the state of the law regarding homosexuality, especially same-sex marriage.
  • “Report: Legislative Efforts to Strengthen Marriage,” by Leslie A. Mark (Public Law Research Institute Reports 1998). See especially the section on Covenant Marriage
  • Marriage and Family Processes (Kearl's Guide to the Sociology of the Family)—a series of pages with interesting ideas and extensive links
  • “Which, then, would be the ‘husband’ and which the ‘wife’?”: Some Introductory Thoughts on Contesting ‘the Family’ in Court, by Jenni Millbank (Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law 3.3, 1996). “This article will focus on a number of cases concerning ‘family’ in recent years and the new directions that these claims are taking. . . .This paper will focus on Australian case law and then draw links with developments in cases, mostly from Canada, in recent years.”
  • “Same-Sex Marriage? Baehr v. Miike and the Meaning of Marriage,” by David Orgon Coolidge (South Texas Law Review: March 1997). This long article uses the Hawaii case to reflect on what marriage means and how the law should treat it.
  • “The Constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act in the Wake of Romer v. Evans,” by Barbara A. Robb
  • Divorce: a rather acrimonius exchange between columnist Katha Pollitt and David Blankenhorn of the Institute for American Values, published in the online journal Slate

Questions for Written Assignment, due February 22

February 24–29: Motherhood, Parenthood, and Custody Issues

• February 24—Required Readings: Carol Sanger. “M Is For the Many Things.” Weisberg, 874-881; Regina Austin, “Sapphire Bound!” Weisberg, 908-915; Marie Ashe and Naomi R. Cahn. “Child Abuse: A Problem for Feminist Theory.” Weisberg, 916-929.
• February 29—Required Readings: Mary Ann Mason. “The De-Regulation of Family Law: In Whose Best Interests?” The Responsive Community 3.2 (1993): 43-51; . “Child Custody: Solomon's Choice,” by Nancy Zalusky Berg (Views, Summer 1995; see also Factors Guiding Custody Decisions in Minnesota); Case: Garska v. McCoy (Supreme Court of West Virginia, 1981).
• Recommended Links:
  • “The Politics of Fetal/Maternal Conflict,” by Ruth Hubbard (Global Reproductive Health Forum Research Library, Harvard University)
  • “A Pregnant Pause: Are Women Who Undergo Fertility Treatments to Achieve Pregnancy Within the Scope of Title VII's Pregnancy Discrimination Act?,” by Cintra D. Bentley (Chicago-Kent Law Review 73.1, 1998)
  • Law about Child Custody: an Overview (Cornell LII)
  • “The Determination of Child Custody in the USA,” by Joan B. Kelly
  • “Factors Affecting Children's Power to Choose Their Caretakers in Custody Proceedings,” by Eric Speth (Custody Newsletter, December 13, 1995)
  • “The Primary Caretaker Theory: Backsliding To the ‘Tender Years’ Doctrine,” by Ronald K. Henry
  • “In the Best Interests of the Child: Modern Custody Disputes Favor Fathers' Rights Over Child's Welfare, Says Family Law Professor,” by Patricia McBroom (Berkeleyan, 27 January 1999)
  • “ Lagging behind the Times: Parenthood, Custody, and Gender Bias in the Family Court,” by Cynthia A. McNeely
  • “The ‘Unprecedented Intrusion’: A Survey and Analysis of Selected Grandparent Visitation Cases,” by Joan C. Bohl (Coalition for the Restoration of Parental Rights)
  • “Child Support Comes of Age: A New Ethic of Parental Responsibility,” by June Carbone
  • Support Guidelines.com
  • “Delinquent parents may see cars ‘booted’,” by Frank Eltman (The Associated Press, 15 February 2000)
  • In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.H.O., a Minor (Supreme court of New Jersey, 1998)

Questions for Written Assignment, due February 29

March 2–7: Reproductive Rights—Abortion

• March 2—Required Readings: Catharine A. MacKinnon, “Privacy v. Equality: Beyond Roe v. Wade,” Weisberg, 985-994; Reva Siegel, “Reasoning from the Body: A Historical Perspective on Abortion Regulation and Questions of Equal Protection,” Weisberg, 995-1006; Case: Roe v. Wade (1973) Excerpts from Justice Blackmun, Opinion of the Court. Weisberg, 953-961.
• March 7—Required Readings: Laurie Nsiah-Jefferson, “Reproductive Laws, Women of Color, and Low-Income Women,” Weisberg, 1007-1018; Frederica Mathewes-Green, “The Bitter Price of ‘Choice’”; Martha Bayles, Feminism and Abortion (The Atlantic Monthly, April 1990).
• Recommended Links:
  • Abortion Law Homepage. This is a supersite with a great deal of information about legal aspects of abortion. Besides the full-text version of Roe v. Wade, there is an edited text of the 6 judicial opinions, the full text of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, an explanation of various constitutional issues (including privacy), and much more.
  • Buck v. Bell (U.S. Supreme Court, 1927). This is the edited version of a case regarding the forced sterilization of a mentally disabled girl.
  • Abortion: Information (Global Reproductive Health Forum Research Library, Harvard University)
  • “Principles governing Reproductive Freedom,” by Rachel N. Pine and Sylvia A. Law (The Lawyers, November 1993)
  • Fact Sheet: Why Abortion Bans are Unconstitutional (Planned Parenthood)
  • Roe v. Wade at Twenty-five (Comment, The Progressive, February 1998)
  • Abortion: All Sides to the Issue (Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance). This site tries to put into perspective the moral and ethical dilemmas posed by abortion
  • New York Times Abortion Special Forum
  • Moral Debates of Our Times: Abortion
  • “Twenty-Five Years of Supreme Court Abortion Decisions,” by Richard Coleson (National Right to Life News, January 1998). This issue is devoted to articles about the 25th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Questions for Written Assignment, due March 7

March 9–21: Surrogacy and Adoption

• March 9—Required Readings: Lori Andrews, “Surrogate Motherhood: The Challenge for Feminists,” Weisberg, 1092-1104; Richard Posner, “The Ethics and Economics of Enforcing Contracts of Surrogate Motherhood,” Weisberg, 1105-1109; Gena Corea, “Junk Liberty,” Weisberg, 1112-1115; Case: In the Matter of Baby M. (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1988). Weisberg, 1063-1079.
• March 21—Required Readings: Anita Allen, “The Socio-Economic Struggle for Equality: The Black Surrogate Mother,” Weisberg, 1117-1125; Nancy Dowd, “A Feminist Analysis of Adoption,” Weisberg, 1149-1166.
• Recommended Links:
  • The American Surrogacy Center Legal Overview & Resources. This is a good metasite with information about laws, cases, etc. The home page has articles relating to medical, psychological, and personal dimensions of surrogacy.
  • Ethical Issues in Surrogate Motherhood. A Policy Statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP News 9.7, July 1992) .
  • Genetic Mother v. Surrogate Mother: Which Mother Does the Law Recognize? (Touro International Law Review 6, 1995). A comparison of Jewish law, American law, and English law.
  • “Surrogate Motherhood: Boon or Baby-selling—the Unresolved Questions” (excerpts), by Nancy W. Machinton (Marquette Law Review, Fall 1987)
  • “Feminist Bioethics: Toward Developing a ‘Feminist’ Answer to the Surrogate Motherhood Question,” by Rosemarie Tong (Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 6.1, 1996). This is part of a special issue devoted to Feminist Perspectives on Bioethics.
  • “Feminism, Law, and Bioethics,” by Karen H. Rothenberg. this article looks at feminist legal theory from the perspective of liberal, cultural, and radical feminism, concentrating on the issue of egg donation.
  • “The Politics of Surrogacy Narratives: Notes toward a Research Project,” by E. Anne Kaplan (Global Reproductive Health Forum Research Library, Harvard University)
  • Changing Conceptions: How Science and Law Are Shaping Future Generations (a conference at Chicago-Kent School of Law, December 5, 1997; transcripts of many of the sessions are included)
  • “High-tech Conception: A New Legal Landscape,” by Vicki Quade (Illinois Institute of Technology Catalyst, Winter 1997)
  • There is even an online store for surrogate parents: Expressions of the Heart—the Online Surrogacy Gift Shop

Questions for Written Assignment, due March 21

NB: As a substitute for the March 21 written assignment, students may attend the Wednesday March 8 program “Women and Prison, ” a talk by Sr. Elaine Roulet, Chaplain, Bedford Hills Women's Prison, 7:00 pm, Student Campus Center C. If this option is chosen, 1) write a summary of the program, describing its main points and content; 2) explain your response to this program: Did you enjoy it? What were the main things you learned? 3) explain how the program's content relates to at least one aspect of the legal theory that we have been studying. Hand in this response on March 21.

Go to Topics, Notes, Assignments, Part II.