Skip to content
Topics
Stories

Gay rights after gay marriage

In the 2003 case of Goodridge v. Depart­ment of Public Health, the Mass­a­chu­setts Supreme Court voted 4–3 to legalize same-​​sex mar­riage. Though the land­mark case rep­re­sented the nation’s first unqual­i­fied court vic­tory in the fight for mar­riage equality, many people from across the country dis­agreed with the decision.

The public back­lash was swift. North­eastern alumnus and adjunct pro­fessor Rod­erick L. Ire­land, an asso­ciate jus­tice on the Mass­a­chu­setts Supreme Court who sided with the majority, received thou­sands of hateful emails, let­ters, and phone calls. Radio adver­tise­ments pressed him to step down while angry oppo­nents stalked to his church, urging mem­bers of the con­gre­ga­tion to excom­mu­ni­cate him. And yet Ire­land did not waver, did not think twice about con­tin­uing to serve on the bench.

“Crit­i­cism is democ­racy in action,” explained Ire­land, who was sworn in as Chief Jus­tice of the Mass­a­chu­setts Supreme Court in 2010. “People have a right to their own opin­ions and hearing people say, ‘I dis­agree,’ is not some­thing a judge takes personally.”

Ire­land was one of three pan­elists who reflected on the per­sonal, public, and polit­ical ram­i­fi­ca­tions of same-​​sex mar­riage on Wednesday evening in the Raytheon Amphithe­ater. The event, “Gay Rights after Gay Mar­riage,” rep­re­sented the sixth install­ment in an edu­ca­tional series on civic sus­tain­ability, which is hosted by Dis­tin­guished Pro­fessor of Polit­ical Sci­ence Michael Dukakis in con­junc­tion with the Pres­i­den­tial Council on Inclu­sion and Diver­sity. The series—Con­flict. Civility. Respect. Peace. North­eastern Reflects—is orga­nized by the Col­lege of Social Sci­ences and Human­i­ties, the School of Law, and the Office of Stu­dent Affairs, and will return in 2014.

In addi­tion to Ire­land, the pan­elists com­prised Mary Bonauto, a North­eastern alumna and the civil rights director of Gay & Les­bian Advo­cates & Defenders; and Suzanna Wal­ters, a pro­fessor of soci­ology and director of the Women’s, Gender, and Sex­u­ality Studies pro­gram at Northeastern.

North­eastern law pro­fessor Mar­garet Burnham mod­er­ated the two-​​hour dis­cus­sion, which chal­lenged the pan­elists to reflect on the impli­ca­tions of two land­mark deci­sions in the fight for same-​​sex rights: the 2003 case in Mass­a­chu­setts and last summer’s Supreme Court ruling against the Defense of Mar­riage Act.

Bonauto served as lead counsel in Goodridge v. Depart­ment of Public Health and led GLAD’s chal­lenges to the con­sti­tu­tion­ality of Sec­tion 3 of DOMA, which defined mar­riage as a legal union between one man and one woman.

She empathized with the quartet of Mass­a­chu­setts Supreme Court judges who were cen­sured for voting in favor of same-​​sex mar­riage, saying that “no court will ever suffer as much as this one did.”

“They real­ized they would take a pounding for standing for their prin­ci­ples,” she added, “but these same prin­ci­ples caused people to rally for this deci­sion, which lifted up gay people in this state and across the nation.”

According to GLAD, 54 per­cent of the U.S. pop­u­la­tion favored same-​​sex mar­riage in July of this year, up from 27 per­cent in 1996.

“None of this would have hap­pened without the work of people who weren’t con­tent to sit on the side­lines and got deeply involved in polit­ical life in the city, the state, and the country,” said Dukakis, who appointed Ire­land to the Mass­a­chu­setts Court of Appeals in 1990, when he was governor.

Wal­ters said mar­riage equality is a “civil rights no-​​brainer,” but ques­tioned whether the gay rights movement’s acute focus on same-​​sex mar­riage has inad­ver­tently detracted from other con­cerns within the community.

“There’s only so much gay money to go around,” said Wal­ters, noting that activists spent $44 mil­lion trying to defeat Propo­si­tion 8 in the 2008 Cal­i­fornia state elec­tions. “Focusing on gay mar­riage means less focus on equal access to employ­ment and the per­se­cu­tion of the LGBT com­mu­nity abroad.”

“No other social move­ment worth its salt has been so iden­ti­fied with a single civil right,” she added. “Abor­tion rights are cen­tral to fem­i­nist demands, but they never crowded out other con­cerns such as vio­lence against women.”

In the Q-​​and-​​A ses­sion, a senior studying Spanish and jour­nalism asked the pan­elists to dis­cuss the sim­i­lar­i­ties and dif­fer­ences between gay rights in the U.S. and abroad. “Our way of under­standing sexual iden­tity is par­tic­ular and not nec­es­sarily shared by other nations, which have dif­ferent his­to­ries of thinking about the body and its rela­tion­ship to desire and iden­tity,” Wal­ters said. “As we engage in inter­na­tional strug­gles around gay mar­riage, we need to under­stand the terms of the dis­course may be very different.”

– By Jason Kornwitz

More Stories

Racial justice protests were not a major cause of COVID-19 infection surges, new national study finds

08.11.2020

Here’s what could happen if the U.S. suspends federal pandemic unemployment benefits

08.10.2020

Black women asked their party for what they wanted. What happens next?

08.13.20
In the News