Book contents
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Feminist Judgments Series Editors
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments Series
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Commentary on Reynolds v. United States
- 3 Commentary on McGuire v. McGuire
- 4 Commentary on Dandridge v. Williams
- 5 Commentary on Wisconsin v. Yoder
- 6 Commentary on Marvin v. Marvin
- 7 Commentary on Kulko v. Superior Court of California
- 8 Commentary on Daly v. Daly
- 9 Commentary on Michael H. v. Gerald D.
- 10 Commentary on DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services
- 11 Commentary on Simeone v. Simeone
- 12 Commentary on Borelli v. Brusseau
- 13 Commentary on Turner v. Rogers
- 14 Commentary on In the Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S.
- 15 Commentary on Matter of A-B-
- 16 Commentary on Sessions v. Morales-Santana
- Index
2 - Commentary on Reynolds v. United States
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 July 2020
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Feminist Judgments Series Editors
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments Series
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Advisory Panel for Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Commentary on Reynolds v. United States
- 3 Commentary on McGuire v. McGuire
- 4 Commentary on Dandridge v. Williams
- 5 Commentary on Wisconsin v. Yoder
- 6 Commentary on Marvin v. Marvin
- 7 Commentary on Kulko v. Superior Court of California
- 8 Commentary on Daly v. Daly
- 9 Commentary on Michael H. v. Gerald D.
- 10 Commentary on DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services
- 11 Commentary on Simeone v. Simeone
- 12 Commentary on Borelli v. Brusseau
- 13 Commentary on Turner v. Rogers
- 14 Commentary on In the Matter of the Parentage of a Child by T.J.S. and A.L.S.
- 15 Commentary on Matter of A-B-
- 16 Commentary on Sessions v. Morales-Santana
- Index
Summary
Reynolds v. United States is a struggle by men against men, reflecting men’s fears, described in men’s terms. In 1879, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a law criminalizing bigamy did not infringe upon individuals’ First Amendment right to free exercise of religion – the Constitution protects religious beliefs but not necessarily religious practices like polygamy. Women – the ostensible subjects and victims of polygamy, then known as one of the “twin relics of barbarism” along with slavery – are barely seen or heard in the case as it progresses to the Supreme Court, as Justice Kessler’s dissent makes clear. Yet, in Reynolds, the tropes of women’s place in the world as men imagine it are very much present, even today.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Feminist Judgments: Family Law Opinions Rewritten , pp. 14 - 36Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020