This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Smith, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Framing Same-sex Marriage in Canada and the United States: Goodridge, Halpern and The National Boundaries of Political Discourse

Trent University, Canada

The article draws on post-positivist policy analysis and social movement theory to explore the impact of law in shaping the politics of social movement claims and discursive construction of same-sex marriage as public policy issue in Canadian and American politics. Using the concept of framing, the article discusses the ways in which lesbian and gay rights claimants in Canada and the USA have framed the issue of same-sex marriage in two landmark North American rulings on same-sex marriage, Halpern (Ontario) and Goodridge (Massachusetts). The article finds that, despite differences in legal policy legacies between Canada and the USA, there is a common rights frame governing lesbian and gay struggles over same-sex marriage. Although working with different legal frameworks, judicial precedents, statutory law and human rights protections, courts reached remarkably similar conclusions about same-sex marriage and largely endorsed nearly all of the elements in the rights frame put forth by lesbian and gay litigants. Despite similarities in the framing of lesbian and gay rights issues in the two countries, the article demonstrates that the central difference in the same-sex marriage debate in Canada and the USA concerns the place of the rights frame within the broader political culture.

Key Words: Canada and the USA • framing • judicial decisions • same-sex marriage • social movements

References

• Baehr v Lewin (1993) 74 Haw. 530, 852 P.2d 44
• Baker et al. v State of Vermont et al. (1999) 170 Vt. 194, 744 A.2d 864
• Brause and Dugan v Bureau of Vital Statistics (1998) No. 3AN-95-6562 CI, 1998 WL 88743 (Alaska Super. Ct. Feb. 27)
• Goodridge v Department of Public Health (2003) Mass. S.J.C. (08860)
• Halpern et al. v Canada (2003) O.A.C. 405
• Lawrence v Texas (2003) 539 US 558
• Loving v Virginia (1967) 388 US 1, 18 L ed 2d 1010, 87 S Ct. 1817
• M v H (1999) S.C.J. No. 23
• Perez v Sharp (1948) 32 Cal. 2d 711, 198 P.2d 17
• Romer v Evans (1996) 517 US 620
• Adam, Barry D. (2003) ‘The Defense of Marriage Act and American Exceptionalism: The "Gay Marriage" Panic in the United States’ , Journal of the History of Sexuality 12: 259-276 .
• Adams, Michael (2003) Fire and Ice: The United States, Canada and the Myth of Converging Values. Toronto: Penguin .
• Andersen, Ellen Ann (2005) Out of the Closets and Into the Courts: Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights Litigation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan .
• Bailey, Mary (2004) ‘Regulation of Cohabitation and Marriage in Canada’ , Law & Policy 26(1): 153-175 .
• Blais, A., Patrick Fournier, Elisabeth Gidengil, Neil Nevitte and Joanna Everitt (2006) ‘Election 2006’ , Globe and Mail, 1 February.
• Bonauto, Mary (2001) ‘Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, Massachusetts’, Superior Court County of Suffolk No. 01-1647-A, 20 August.
• Bonauto, Mary, Jennifer L. Levi, Gary D. Buseck, Bennett H. Klein and Karen L. Loewy (2002) ‘Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants’, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Supreme Judicial Court, Suffolk County, No. SJC-08860, 8 November.
• Bonauto, Mary, Jennifer L. Levi, Gary D. Buseck, Bennett H. Klein and Karen L. Loewy (2003) ‘Reply Brief of Plaintiffs-Appellants’, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Supreme Judicial Court, Suffolk County, No. SJC-08860, 30 January.
• Boyd Susan and Claire F. L. Young (2003) ‘From Same Sex to No Sex? Trends Towards Recognition of (Same-sex) Relationships in Canada’ , Seattle Journal of Social Justice 1(3): 757-793 .
• Centre for Research and Information on Canada (CRIC) (2002) The Charter: Dividing or Uniting Canadians. Montreal: CRIC .
• Chauncey, George (2004) Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality. New York: Basic Books .
• Cohen, Cathy (1999) Boundaries of Blackness: AIDS and the Breakdown of Black Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
• Cossman, Brenda (2002) ‘Sexing Citizenship, Privatizing Sex’ , Citizenship Studies 6(4): 483-506 .[CrossRef]
• Duggan, Lisa (1992) ‘Making It Perfectly Queer’ , Socialist Review 22(1): 11-32 .
• Dupuis, Martin (2002) Same Sex Marriage, Legal Mobilization and the Politics of Rights. New York: Peter Lang .
• Egale (2001a) Egale’s Factum to the Ontario Court in the Ontario Marriage Challenge (Amended Factum of the Intervener). Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Division Court), 12 October.
• Egale (2001b) Reports from the Court in the Ontario Marriage Challenge Day 1. Available at: http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=51&item=293
• Egale (2001c) Press Release: Ontario Court Hears Landmark Same-Sex Marriage Challenges. Ottawa: Egale
• Egale (2005) Ontario Marriage Challenge. Ottawa: Egale .
• Elliott, R.et al. (2001) Factum in Halpern and MCCT and Canada et al. Toronto .
• Epp, Charles R. (1998) The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
• Epstein, Steven (1987) ‘Gay Politics, Ethnic Identity: The Limits of Social Constructionism’ , Socialist Review 17: 9-54 .
• Eskridge, William N. Jr. (2000) ‘No Promo Homo: The Sedimentation of Antigay Discourse and the Channeling Effect of Judicial Review’ , New York University Law Review 75 (November): 1327-1378 .
• Fischer, Frank (2003) Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
• Fletcher, Joseph F. and Paul Howe (2000) ‘Canadian Attitudes Toward the Charter and Courts in Comparative Perspective’ , Choices 6: 3-3 .
• Fraser, Nancy (2003) ‘Rethinking Recognition: Overcoming Displacement and Reification in Cultural Politics’, pp. 21-34 in Barbara Hobson (ed.) Recognition Struggles and Social Movements: Contested Identities, Agency and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
• Gagnon, Alain-G. and François Rocher (1997) ‘Nationalisme Libéral et Construction Identitaire: La Représentation de la "Nation" dans la Dynamique Québec-Canada’ , Revue Internationale d’Etudes Canadiennes 16: 51-68 .
• Gidengil, Elizabeth, André Blais, Joanna Everitt, Patrick Fournier and Neil Nevitte (2005) ‘Back to the Future: Making Sense of the 2004 Federal Election in Canada’ . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, University of Western Ontario, June.
• GLAD (2002) ‘GLAD Suit Seeking Civil Marriage for Gays and Lesbians Backed by Local and National Organizations’, Boston: GLAD .
• GLAD (2005) Goodridge Plaintiffs. Available at: http://www.glad.org/marriage/goodridge_plaintiffs.shtml
• Goffman, Erving (1974) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. London: Harper and Row .
• Goldberg-Hiller, Jonathan and Neal Milner (2003) ‘Rights as Excess: Understanding the Politics of Special Rights’ , Law & Social Inquiry 28(4): 1075-1118 .
• Herman, Didi (1997) The Antigay Agenda: Orthodox Vision and the Christian Right. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
• Jacobs, Andrew M. (1996) ‘Romer Wasn’t Built in a Day: The Subtle Transformation in Judicial Argument over Gay Rights’ , Wisconsin Law Review 893: 893-940 .
• Jenson, Jane (1989) ‘"Different" but not "Exceptional": Canada’s Permeable Fordism’ , Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 26(1): 69-94 .
• Josephson, Jyl (2005) ‘Citizenship, Same-sex Marriage, and Feminist Critiques of Marriage’ , Perspectives on Politics 3(2): 269-284 .[CrossRef]
• Lind, Amy (2004) ‘Legislating the Family: Heterosexist Bias in Social Welfare Policy Frameworks’ , Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare XXXI: 21-35 .
• McAdam, Doug (1996) ‘The Framing Function of Movement Tactics: Strategic Dramaturgy in the American Civil Rights Movement’, pp. 338-356 in D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
• McCarthy, John D., Jackie Smith and Mayer N. Zald (1996) ‘Accessing Public, Media, Electoral, and Governmental Agendas’, pp. 291-311 in D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald (eds) Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
• McCarthy, Martha A. and Joanna L. Radbord (2001) Factum for the Applicant Couples.
• Meyer, David S. and Suzanne Staggenborg (1996) ‘Movements, Countermovements, and the Structure of Political Opportunity’ , American Journal of Sociology 101(6): 1628-1660 .[CrossRef]
• Morgan, Rhiannon (2004) ‘Advancing Indigenous Rights at the United Nations: Strategic Framing and Its Impact on the Normative Development of International Law’ , Social & Legal Studies 13(4): 481-500 .[Abstract]
• Nevitte, Neil (1996) The Decline of Deference. Peterborough: Broadview Press .
• Phelan, Shane (2001) Sexual Strangers: Gays, Lesbians, and Dilemmas of Citizenship. Philadelphia, PA: Routledge .
• Reimer, Sam (2003) Evangelicals and the Continental Divide: The Conservative Protestant Subculture in Canada and the United States. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press .
• Richardson, Diane (2005) ‘Desiring Sameness? The Rise of a Neoliberal Politics of Normalisation’ , Antipode 37(3): 515-535 .[CrossRef]
• Scheiderman, David (1992) ‘Dual(ling) Charters: The Harmonics of Rights in Canada Quebec’ , Ottawa Law Review 24: 235-263 .
• Scheingold, Stuart A. (1974/2004) The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press .
• Smith, Anna Marie (2001) ‘The Politicization of Marriage in Contemporary American Public Policy: The Defense of Marriage Act and the Personal Responsibility Act’ , Citizenship Studies 5(3): 303-320 .[CrossRef]
• Smith, Miriam (1998) ‘Nationalisme et politiques des mouvements sociaux: Les droits des gais et lesbiennes et l’incidence de la charte canadienne au Québec’ , Politique et Sociétés XVII: 113-140 .
• Smith, Miriam (2004) ‘Segmented Networks: Linguistic Practices in Canadian Lesbian and Gay Rights Organizing’ , Ethnicities 4(1): 99-124 .[Abstract]
• Stychin, Carl F. (1997) ‘Queer Nations: Nationalism, Sexuality and the Discourse of Rights in Quebec’ , Feminist Legal Studies V: 3-34 .
• Stychin, Carl F. (2003) Governing Sexuality: The Changing Politics of Citizenship and Law Reform. Oxford: Hart .
• Tribe, Lawrence H. (2004) ‘Lawrence v. Texas: The "Fundamental Right" That Dare Not Speak Its Name’ , Harvard Law Review 117: 1893-1955 .
• Warner, Michael (1999) The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics, and the Ethics of Queer Life. New York: Free Press .
• Wilcox, Clyde (2000) Onward Christian Soldiers? The Religious Right in American Politics. Boulder, CO: Westview .

Social & Legal Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1, 5-26 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0964663907073444


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Smith, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?