Document Type

Working Paper

Publication Date

3-26-2016

SSRN Discipline

PSN Subject Matter eJournals; LSN Subject Matter eJournals; Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence & Legal Philosophy eJournals; Political Behavior eJournals; Legal Scholarship Network; Social Insurance Research Network; Law School Research Papers - Legal Studies; Law & Society eJournals; Law & Society: Private Law eJournals; Law & Society: Public Law eJournals; AARN Subject Matter eJournals; Political Science Network; Anthropology & Archaeology Research Network

Abstract

Ever since the 1878 case Reynolds v United States polygamists have argued that their plural marriage practices are protected by the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment After Lawrence v Texas polygamists added substantive Due Process arguments under the Fourteenth Amendment's "intimacy privacy" interpretation to their arsenal This article argues that in order for polygamists to find constitutional protection and recognition they must shed their arguments founded in religion and rely instead on substantive Due Process Although First Amendment jurisprudence would subject polygamy bans to a higher level of scrutiny this heightened protection comes at a cost The landmark samesex marriage case United States v Windsor and the opinion's protected liberty interest of "equal dignity" provides polygamy advocates with substantive grounds to protect their plural marriage practices as well as pave the way for recognition of "intimate pluralism" and alternative relationship forms like polyamory and group marriage

Download

Share

COinS