Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorEinspahr, Jennifer E., 1974-
dc.contributor.authorLombardini, Brianna
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-09T00:08:19Z
dc.date.available2019-11-09T00:08:19Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.urihttps://cache.kzoo.edu/handle/10920/37264
dc.description45 p.en_US
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, I will analyze the extent to which Supreme Court power exists, the ways in which Supreme Court power is expressed, and the presence of power in other areas of the judiciary. In order to address this objective, I will examine the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, the monumental case that legalized same-sex marriage nationally in 2015. This case has been the subject of great ridicule and backlash. As a result, some local authorities have refused to implement the decision, marrying only heterosexual couples or choosing to not perform marriages at all. The gap between the Supreme Court and the implementation of policy is particularly clear in this case, but also opens many other unanswered questions. Through an analysis of this case in comparison and relation to theoretical arguments, I will emphasize the importance of Appeals, and other kinds of "middle" courts, in the broader discussion, the importance of communication between levels, as well as the potential advantages and risks of this gap. This argument has been divided into three parts: theoretical arguments, case study, and implementation. The section dedicated to the examination of theoretical arguments will make the gaps in explanation apparent. Following an evaluation of arguments, I will introduce the case study, Obergefell v. Hodges, and attempt to apply the presented theoretical arguments to the facts and realities of the case. From this application, I will more closely examine the ways in which the absence of scholarship on this issue reflects an absence of judicial policy and communication and its potential results. The conclusions garnered from these examinations are both worrisome and hopeful for the power of individuals in the judiciary and flexibility in implementation of law.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.relation.ispartofKalamazoo College Political Science Senior Individualized Projects Collection
dc.rightsU.S. copyright laws protect this material. Commercial use or distribution of this material is not permitted without prior written permission of the copyright holder. All rights reserved.
dc.titleQuestionable Adherence State Court Adherence to Obergefell v. Hodges and the legitimacy of the Supreme Courten_US
dc.typeThesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Political Science Senior Individualized Projects [797]
    This collection includes Senior Individualized Projects (SIP's) completed in the Political Science Department. Abstracts are generally available to the public, but PDF files are available only to current Kalamazoo College students, faculty, and staff.

Show simple item record