Upload File

emulating the u.s

2
OPINION » LEAD Published: June 30, 2015 01:39 IST | Updated: June 30, 2015 03:01 IST June 30, 2015 Emulating the U.S.’s rainbow moment SUHRITH PARTHASARATHY AP The decision in Obergefell will go down in the annals as a culmination of decades of struggle by gay rights activists for equal treatment. Photo shows the White House illuminated in rainbow colours on Friday. The lessons from the reasoning behind the verdict in the U.S. on same sex marriage, if correctly applied, ought to reverberate across the world, including in India, where gay people are still denied their most basic freedoms In a historic verdict rendered on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court, through a fivetofour vote, declared laws that prohibit samesex marriages in the country as unconstitutional. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion, written on behalf of the majority, is not only evocatively worded, but it also presents a dazzling defence of human dignity and individual autonomy. There is, in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Justice Kennedy wrote in Obergefell v. Hodges, an implicit right to marry, which requires states to compulsorily licence a marriage between two individuals of the same sex. The opinion is a victory for civil liberties in America, and the lessons from its reasoning, if correctly applied, ought to reverberate across the world, including here in India, where we continue to unconstitutionally — and unconscionably — deny gay men, women and transgenders even their most basic freedoms. Right to equality This decision in Obergefell will go down in the annals as a culmination of decades of struggle by gay rights activists for equal treatment. It was only in 1986, after all, in Bowers v. Hardwick, that the court had found nothing unconstitutional about laws penalising consensual sex between homosexuals. To argue that sodomy was “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty,” as the petitioners did, wrote Justice Byron White in Bowers, was, “at best, facetious.” It took 17 years for Bowers to be formally overruled (in Lawrence v. Texas), but, today, the court deserves credit for moving, in less than three decades, from viewing arguments in support of autonomy of gay individuals as frivolous to recognising their rights to be treated as equal beings. There were, in all, 16 petitioners in Obergefell, which included 14 samesex couples and two men, whose samesex partners were now deceased. Their cases emanated from the states of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee, each of which recognised marriage solely as a union between man and woman. The first petitioner, Jim Obergefell, wanted the state of Ohio to recognise him as the surviving spouse of John Arthur, whom he had legally married in Maryland. As Justice Kennedy recounted, Obergefell and Arthur had been in a committed relationship for more than 20 years, when they discovered, in 2011, that Arthur was suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease), which causes a progressive degeneration of the body. Knowing that Arthur’s life was in immediate peril, he and Obergefell decided to wed, travelling from Ohio to Maryland, where samesex marriages were permitted. Arthur’s condition was so poor that the wedding ceremony was conducted on the tarmac in Baltimore, where the medical transport plane that had brought Arthur was stationed. Arthur died three months later, but, in spite of their lawful marriage, the state of Ohio refused to recognise Obergefell as Arthur’s surviving spouse. The other petitions in the case also comprised, as Justice Kennedy wrote, equally compelling stories. None of them represented, as some of the justices in the minority contended, any erosion of societal norms, and all of them revealed, with stark clarity, why the denial of a right to marry an individual of the same sex struck at the core of one’s essential freedom.

Upload: rishi-kamal

Post on 16-Aug-2015

229 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

Report

DESCRIPTION

us

TRANSCRIPT

OPINIONLEADPublished:June30,201501:39IST|Updated:June30,201503:01ISTJune30,2015EmulatingtheU.S.srainbowmomentSUHRITHPARTHASARATHYAPThedecisioninObergefellwillgodownintheannalsasaculminationofdecadesofstrugglebygayrightsactivistsforequaltreatment.PhotoshowstheWhiteHouseilluminatedinrainbowcoloursonFriday.ThelessonsfromthereasoningbehindtheverdictintheU.S.onsamesexmarriage,ifcorrectlyapplied,oughttoreverberateacrosstheworld,includinginIndia,wheregaypeoplearestilldeniedtheirmostbasicfreedomsInahistoricverdictrenderedonFriday,theU.S.SupremeCourt,throughafivetofourvote,declaredlawsthatprohibitsamesexmarriagesinthecountryasunconstitutional.JusticeAnthonyKennedysopinion,writtenonbehalfofthemajority,isnotonlyevocativelyworded,butitalsopresentsadazzlingdefenceofhumandignityandindividualautonomy.Thereis,inthe14thAmendmenttotheU.S.Constitution,JusticeKennedywroteinObergefellv.Hodges,animplicitrighttomarry,whichrequiresstatestocompulsorilylicenceamarriagebetweentwoindividualsofthesamesex.TheopinionisavictoryforcivillibertiesinAmerica,andthelessonsfromitsreasoning,ifcorrectlyapplied,oughttoreverberateacrosstheworld,includinghereinIndia,wherewecontinuetounconstitutionallyandunconscionablydenygaymen,womenandtransgenderseventheirmostbasicfreedoms.RighttoequalityThisdecisioninObergefellwillgodownintheannalsasaculminationofdecadesofstrugglebygayrightsactivistsforequaltreatment.Itwasonlyin1986,afterall,inBowersv.Hardwick,thatthecourthadfoundnothingunconstitutionalaboutlawspenalisingconsensualsexbetweenhomosexuals.Toarguethatsodomywasimplicitintheconceptoforderedliberty,asthepetitionersdid,wroteJusticeByronWhiteinBowers,was,atbest,facetious.Ittook17yearsforBowerstobeformallyoverruled(inLawrencev.Texas),but,today,thecourtdeservescreditformoving,inlessthanthreedecades,fromviewingargumentsinsupportofautonomyofgayindividualsasfrivoloustorecognisingtheirrightstobetreatedasequalbeings.Therewere,inall,16petitionersinObergefell,whichincluded14samesexcouplesandtwomen,whosesamesexpartnerswerenowdeceased.TheircasesemanatedfromthestatesofMichigan,Kentucky,OhioandTennessee,eachofwhichrecognisedmarriagesolelyasaunionbetweenmanandwoman.Thefirstpetitioner,JimObergefell,wantedthestateofOhiotorecognisehimasthesurvivingspouseofJohnArthur,whomhehadlegallymarriedinMaryland.AsJusticeKennedyrecounted,ObergefellandArthurhadbeeninacommittedrelationshipformorethan20years,whentheydiscovered,in2011,thatArthurwassufferingfromamyotrophiclateralsclerosis(LouGehrigsdisease),whichcausesaprogressivedegenerationofthebody.KnowingthatArthurslifewasinimmediateperil,heandObergefelldecidedtowed,travellingfromOhiotoMaryland,wheresamesexmarriageswerepermitted.ArthursconditionwassopoorthattheweddingceremonywasconductedonthetarmacinBaltimore,wherethemedicaltransportplanethathadbroughtArthurwasstationed.Arthurdiedthreemonthslater,but,inspiteoftheirlawfulmarriage,thestateofOhiorefusedtorecogniseObergefellasArthurssurvivingspouse.Theotherpetitionsinthecasealsocomprised,asJusticeKennedywrote,equallycompellingstories.Noneofthemrepresented,assomeofthejusticesintheminoritycontended,anyerosionofsocietalnorms,andallofthemrevealed,withstarkclarity,whythedenialofarighttomarryanindividualofthesamesexstruckatthecoreofonesessentialfreedom.OndignityandlibertyThe14thAmendmenttotheU.S.Constitution,underwhichtheseappealsultimatelysucceeded,provides,amongotherthings,thatthestateshallnotdepriveanypersonoflife,liberty,orproperty,withoutdueprocessoflaw,andthatthestateshallnotdenytoanypersontheequalprotectionofthelaws.AlthoughJusticeKennedysreasoningisoccasionallyrhetoricalaflourish,whichalbeitreadslyricallyhespecificallyreliesbothonthedueprocessandtheequalprotectionclausesinrecognisingarighttosamesexmarriage.Thethrustofhisreasoning,however,liesingivingrecognitiontothefundamentaldignityofgaypeople,andtheirautonomytomakeethicalchoicesabouttheirlives,aliberty,whichJusticeKennedywrote,oughttoaccrueequallytoindividualsregardlessoftheirsexuality.Relyinguponprecedent,Obergefellreiteratedthattherighttomarry,toestablishahomeandtobringupchildrenisprotectedbytheDueProcessclauseofthe14thamendment.Byvirtueoftheirexclusionfromtheinstitutionofmarriage,samesexcouplesaredeniedtheconstellationofbenefitsthattheStateshavelinkedtomarriage,wroteJusticeKennedy.Thisharmresultsinmorethanjustmaterialburdens.Samesexcouplesareconsignedtoaninstabilitymanyoppositesexcoupleswoulddeemintolerableintheirownlives.Whatsmore,indenyingpeoplearighttomarryindividualsofthesamesex,theStatesalsoviolated,inJusticeKennedysopinion,therighttoequalprotectionofthelaws,whichcanhelptoidentifyandcorrectinequalitiesintheinstitutionofmarriage,vindicatingpreceptsoflibertyandequalityundertheConstitution.VoiceofdissentInasharplyworded,andastonishinglyblinkered,dissentingopinion,JusticeAntoninScaliawrote,TheSupremeCourtoftheUnitedStateshasdescendedfromthedisciplinedlegalreasoningofJohnMarshallandJosephStorytothemysticalaphorismsofthefortunecookie.JusticeKennedysstyle,inJusticeScaliaswords,wasaspretentiousasitscontentisegotistic.Itshardtomisstheirony.JusticeScaliasdissentisvitriolic,constitutingapersonalattackonJusticeKennedy,andisalsoembeddedinauniqueandunjustifiablephilosophyoftextualoriginalism,whichisbackedneitherbytheConstitutionnorbygoodreason.AsJusticeKennedypointedout,ininterpretingtheEqualProtectionClause,theCourthasrecognizedthatnewinsightsandsocietalunderstandingscanrevealunjustifiedinequalitywithinourmostfundamentalinstitutionsthatoncepassedunnoticedandunchallenged.ChiefJusticeRobertshowever,inamoreprincipleddissentingopinionthanJusticeScalias,asksatellingquestion:oughtittobetheprerogativeofnineunelectedjusticestodeterminewhetherademocraticallyenactedlawviolateswhatintheirnotionconstitutesafundamentalright?Tothis,too,JusticeKennedyhasagoodresponse.TheNationscourtsareopentoinjuredindividuals,hewrote,whocometothemtovindicatetheirowndirect,personalstakeinourbasiccharter.Anindividualcaninvokearighttoconstitutionalprotectionwhenheorsheisharmed,evenifthebroaderpublicdisagreesandevenifthelegislaturerefusestoact.Thecourt,heopined,istaskedsimplywiththejobofdeterminingalegalquestion:whetherlawsdenyingarighttosamesexmarriageviolatetheConstitution.Theanswer,inthemajoritysopinion,wasaresoundingyes.IndiancontextThecurveofconstitutionalisminIndianodoubtdifferssignificantlyfromthedevelopmentofAmericanconstitutionallaw.Also,foreignjudgmentsdonotalwayslendthemselveswelltoconstitutionalinterpretation.But,wheretheyarerelevant,andwheregenuineparallelscanbedrawn,itsalwaysvaluabletoheedtoandtounderstandthereasoningbehindaforeigndecision.Nodoubt,noteveryaspectofJusticeKennedysopinioninObergefellwouldapplyintheIndiancontext.ButareadingofhisdecisionoughttoserveasanimportantreminderofthedeepdamagewreakedbytheIndianSupremeCourtsdecisioninDecember2013,inSureshKumarKoushalv.NazFoundation.Here,inajudgmentauthoredbyJusticeG.M.Singhvi,thecourtobduratelydismissedtherelevanceofforeignauthoritiesinupholdingthevalidityofSection377oftheIndianPenalCode,which,amongotherthings,effectivelycriminaliseshomosexualacts.Inwhatturnedouttobeaharmfulandflawedopinion,therewasnodiscussionwhatsoeveronhowtheIndianConstitutioninsofarasitappliedtoSection377wasdifferentfromitsAmericanequivalentanditsapplicationtolawsdiscriminatingagainstgaypeople.Wellreasonedargumentsquestioningtheinequalityofaclassificationbasedonsexualityweredismissedwithequalflippancy.Instead,thecourtofferedastrangedeferencetosupposedparliamentarywisdom.InObergefell,JusticeKennedyrefutespreciselythekindofundemocraticintransigenceshownbytheIndianSupremeCourtinKoushal.JusticeKennedypointsoutwhyjudicialreviewinmatterssuchasthis,wherefundamentalrightsareatstake,iscentraltoanappositefunctioningofademocracy.Whatsmore,heforcefullytellsuswhydiscriminationagainsthomosexualsisamatterthattravelstotheveryrootofhumandignity.Thesexualityofanindividualisfundamentaltothepersonsautonomy,anditisanethicalchoicethatgoesbeyondarealmwherethestatecanlawfullyoperate.ThesepreceptsareapplicableasmuchtotheguaranteeofequalprotectionundertheIndianConstitutionastheyaretothe14thamendmentofitsU.S.counterpart.InIndia,muchlikeintheUnitedStates,thepowerofthecourtstojudiciallyreviewactsoflegislaturederivesitselffromprinciplesofdemocracy,properlyunderstood.Infact,theIndianpeoplehaveadditionallybeenbestowedwithaspecificfundamentalrighttoapproachtheSupremeCourtdirectlytoquestionlaws,whichviolatetheirbasicliberties,guaranteedinPartIIIoftheConstitution.Therefore,itoughttobeamatterofshametousthattheIndianSupremeCourt,inKoushal,chosetodismississuesofsuchgraveconstitutionalconcernwithfacileneglect.WhenthecourtultimatelyhearsacurativepetitionfiledagainstitsdecisioninKoushal,itmustreflectprofoundlyontheconcernsthatJusticeKennedysopinioninObergefellhighlights.ItmustseektounderstandwhySection377disturbschoices,whicharecentraltothepersonallibertyexpresslyguaranteedbyourConstitution.Itmustregard,withgreatestrespect,theprotection,whichourConstitutionprovidestogaypersons,ofarighttobetreatedasequalindividuals.(SuhrithParthasarathyisanadvocatepractisingattheMadrasHighCourt).Printableversion|Jul2,20158:20:24AM|http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/emulatingtheussrainbowmoment/article7368040.eceTheHindu


Cloaking the Clock: Emulating Clock Skew in Controller ...Cloaking the Clock: Emulating Clock Skew in Controller Area Networks Sang Uk Sagong , Xuhang Ying , Andrew Clarky, Linda Bushnell

Tunable neuromimetic integrated system for emulating ... · Tunable neuromimetic integrated system for emulating ... Keywords: neuromimetic analog integrated circuits, biological

Grid Connected Inverters Emulating Synchronous Generators

ClimART: A Benchmark Dataset for Emulating Atmospheric

Emulating Human Leg Impairments and Disabilities on

Biomimicry emulating nature’s genius

EMULATING THE DIRECT BLISTER FURNACE (DBF) PROCESS WITH COAL …mdx2.plm.automation.siemens.com/sites/default/files/Presentation/... · EMULATING THE DIRECT BLISTER FURNACE (DBF)

Emulating complex simulations by machine learning methods

EMULATING THE CHARACTERS OF THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD …

Biomimicry: Emulating Nature's Genius

Emulating volcanic ash fall for multi‑scale analysis · Emulating volcanic ash fall for multi-scale analysis: Development of the VAPAHR tool and application to the Asia-Pacific

Steve Apfelbaum, "Emulating Nature"

Emulating a Combo Organ Using Faust

Emulating the GLink Chip-Set with FPGA Serial Transceivers ... · Emulating the GLink Chip-Set with FPGA Serial Transceivers in the ATLAS Level-1 Muon Trigger Alberto Aloisio, Francesco

Emulating a Cooperative Behavior in a Generic Emulating …ceur-ws.org/Vol-110/paper5.pdf · Emulating a Cooperative Behavior in a Generic Association Rule Visualization Tool

Software for Emulating the Sampled Values Transmission in

Emulating Models of Good Governance: Learning from the

Emulating Computer Networks with Netkitwiki.netkit.org/netkit-labs/netkit_tutorial/Emulating Computer...All the slides in this presentation, ... (GARR) assignment of OSPF weights

Emulating Optimal Replacement with a Shepherd Cache

Neurokernel: An Open Source Platform for Emulating the

Emulating Human Essay Scoring With Machine Learning Methods

Emulating I2C Bus Master by using FlexIO · Emulating I2C Bus Master by using FlexIO . 1. Introduction This application note lists the steps to use the FlexIO module for emulating

CrystalNet: Faithfully Emulating Large Production · PDF fileCrystalNet: Faithfully Emulating Large Production Networks SOSP ’17, Oct 2017, Shanghai, China Root Cause Proportion

Bio-Emulation: biomimetically emulating nature utilizing a

Wireless Networks In-the-Loop: Emulating an RF front-end

Closer to the Cloud - A Case for Emulating Cloud Dynamics by Controlling the Environment

Development of Honeypot System Emulating Functions of

Emulating Seymour Duncan Triple Shot w Switches

Emulating Natural Forest Landscape Disturbances

Emulating Goliath Storage Systems with David

Emulating the Intelligence of Nature · The discovery of the triadic intelligence that underlies nature allowed emulating the evolution of living beings, which have a genetic strategy

Wireless Networks In-the-Loop: Emulating an RF … Engineering Lab Prof. Dr.rer.nat. Friedrich K. Jondral Wireless Networks In-the-Loop: Emulating an RF front-end in GNU Radio Sebastian

Research Article Emulating Multiple Inheritance in Fortran

Emulating Accomplished People

P2 Bahrain-Saudi ties ‘worth emulating’