Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWardle, Lynn
dc.date2021-11-25T13:35:08.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:54:14Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:54:14Z
dc.date.issued2016-01-07T08:31:53-08:00
dc.identifieryjlf/vol17/iss1/11
dc.identifier.contextkey7992456
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/6919
dc.description.abstractThe principle of "federalism in family law" is long-established and deeply embedded in the United States. It is an essential part of the unique American concept of shared sovereignty and a primary manifestation of the key constitutional organizing principle of federalism. However, judicial respect for and application of the principle of federalism in family law has not been consistent, especially in recent decades. In many decisions during the past thirty years, federal courts (especially) have simply ignored the principle of federalism in family law, and the judicial doctrine of deference to federalism in family law seems to have eroded significantly. In several high-profile decisions involving disputed applications of or controversial references to federalism in family law, however, the Rehnquist Court has begun a modest revival of the doctrine of federalism in family law.
dc.titleTyranny, Federalism, and the Federal Marriage Amendment
dc.source.journaltitleYale Journal of Law & Feminism
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:54:14Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlf/vol17/iss1/11
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1229&context=yjlf&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
14_17YaleJL_Feminism221_2005_.pdf
Size:
2.831Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record