Supremacy by Law

The One Man One Woman Marriage Requirement and Antimiscegenation Law

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12759363
AutoresJacqueline Battalora (autor correspondente)
Ano2008
Volume7
Fascículo3-4
Páginas145-169
Data de publicação2008-07-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Bisexuality (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1529-9716 • E-ISSN: 1529-9724
EditoraTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/15299710802170771
OpenAlexW2075004926
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas12

This article is concerned with epistemology and the assertion of supremacy. Focusing on the resources deployed to make marriage restrictions logical, this article investigates their descriptive and structural underpinnings. I juxtapose support for the Defense of Marriage Act and Federal Marriage Amendment with antimiscegenation case law and examine descriptions of fact, the patterns they shape, and the underlying structure that holds them together. These laws are an arena of contestation not only over policy choices but over God and nature, and ultimately difference. I pay attention to the ways in which constructions of difference work to exclude and erase and I argue that these laws share a common structure of supremacy. Dualistic constructions of difference work to erase those whose bodies threaten the clear lines that justify exclusion by law. Those who are multiracial, where whiteness is a contributor, and those who are bisexual represent such a threat to racial marriage bans on the one hand and same sex marriage bans on the other. The formula of difference-making, erasure, and supremacy in law has important implications not only for challenging marriage restrictions today but to measure future law and policy

Assertion · Political science · Racism · Sociology · White supremacy · Work (physics · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Law · Political Philosophy and Ethics