Dignity or discrimination: what paves the road towards equal recognition of same-sex couples in the European Union?Footnote

The article was first presented at the Roundtable on Comparative Constitutional Law at the  Robert H. Smith Center for the Constitution at James Madison's Montpelier, Virginia, USA (Oct 2017).

References

• Ackermann, W. L. (2000). Equality and the South African constitution: The role of dignity. Heidelberg Journal of International Law, 60, 537–556.
   Google Scholar
• Aloni, E. (2016). Commentary on Obergefell v Hodges. In S. M. Kathryn, L. L. Berger, & B. J. Crawford (Eds.), Feminist judgments: Rewritten opinions of the United States Supreme Court (pp. 527–532). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781316411254
   Google Scholar
• Amy Elman, R. A. (2000). The limits of citizenship: Migration, sex discrimination and same-sex partners in EU law. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 38(5), 729–749.10.1111/jcms.2000.38.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker, N. (2012). Not the marrying kind. Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.10.1057/9780230379725
   Google Scholar
• Barroso, L. R. (2012). Here, there, and everywhere: Human dignity in contemporary law and in the transnational discourse. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 35(2), 331–393.
   Google Scholar
• Barry, N. (2006). Defending Luck Egalitarianism. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 23(1), 89–107.10.1111/japp.2006.23.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bełavusaŭ, U. (2017). EU sexual citizenship: Sex beyond the internal market. In D. Kochenov (Ed.), EU citizenship and federalism the role of rights (pp. 417–442). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bełavusaŭ, U., & Kochenov, D. (2016/09). On the ‘entry options’ for the ‘right to love’: Federalizing legal opportunities for LGBT movements in the EU. EUI Working Paper Law. Retrieved August 21, 2017, from http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/40368/LAW_2016_09.pdf?sequence=1
   Google Scholar
• Bell, M. (1999). Shifting conceptions of sexual discrimination at the court of justice. European Law Journal, 5(1), 63–81.10.1111/eulj.1999.5.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Bell, M. (2004). Holding back the tide? Cross-border recognition of same-sex partnerships within the European Union. European Review of Private Law, 12(5), 613–632.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, M. (2012). Gender identity and sexual orientation: Alternative pathways in EU equality law. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 60(1), 127–146.10.5131/AJCL.2011.0017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, C., & Selanec, N. B. (2016). Who is a ‘Spouse’ under the Citizens’ Rights Directive? The prospect of mutual recognition of Same-Sex Marriages in the EU. European Law Review, 41(5), 655–686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1998). Merely cultural. New Left Review, I/227, (January–February), 33–44.
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, P. (2015). A right to donate blood? Permanent deferrals for ’Men who have Sex with Men’ (MSM): Léger. Common Market Law Review, 52(6), 1661–1677.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing, C. M. (Forthcoming). With dignity and justice for all: The jurisprudence of equal dignity and the partial convergence of liberty and equality in American constitutional law. International Journal of Constitutional Law. Retrieved August 05, 2017, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2657586
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, L. (2016). The denial of opposite-sex couples’ access to civil partnership as discrimination? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 38(4), 450–455.10.1080/09649069.2016.1239367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finck, M. (2013). Case Comment: Hay (C-267/12). EUtopialaw. Retrieved August 12, 2017, from http://eutopialaw.com/2013/12/13/case-comment-hay-c-26712
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, N. (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post-socialist’ age. New Left Review, I/212(July–August), 69–93.
   Google Scholar
• Fredman, S. (2011). Discrimination law (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fredman, S. (2016). The reason why: Unravelling indirect discrimination. Industrial Law Journal, 45(2), 231–243.10.1093/indlaw/dww019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fudge, J. (2007). Substantive equality, the supreme court of Canada, and the limits to redistribution substantive equality. South African Journal on Human Rights, 23(2), 235–252.10.1080/19962126.2007.11864922
   Google Scholar
• Grabham, E. (2002). Law v Canada: New directions for equality under the Canadian charter? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 22(4), 641–661.10.1093/ojls/22.4.641
   Google Scholar
• Grant, E. (2007). Dignity and equality. Human Rights Law Review, 7(2), 299–329.10.1093/hrlr/ngm002
   Google Scholar
• Guild, E., Peers, S., & Tomkin, J. (2014). The EU citizenship directive a commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Guth, J. (2011). When is a partner not a partner? Conceptualisations of ‘family’ in EU free movement law. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 33(2), 193–204.10.1080/09649069.2011.617078
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, R. (2015). The right to same-sex marriage: Formalism, realism, and social change in lawrence (2003), Windsor (2013), & Obergefell (2015). Maryland Law Review, 75(1), 271–311.
   Google Scholar
• Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals. In A. W. Wood (Ed.), & A. W. Wood, Trans.) New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kilpatrick, C. (2014). Article 21. In S. Peers, T. Hervey, J. Kenner, & A. Ward (Eds.), The EU charter of fundamental rights: A commentary (pp. 279–603). Oxford: Hart Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Lau, H. (2017). Marriage equality and family diverstiy: Comparative perspectives from the United States and South Africa. Fordham Law Review, 85(6), 2615–2628.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenaerts, K., & Gutman, K. (2016). The comparative law method and the European court of justice: Echoes across the Atlantic. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 64(4), 841–864.10.1093/ajcl/avw017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markard, N. (2016). Dropping the other shoe: Obergefell and the inevitability of the constitutional right to equal marriage. German Law Journal, 17(3), 509–542.
   Google Scholar
• McColgan, A. (2014). Discriminaton, equality and the law. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• McCrudden, C. (2008). Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights. European Journal of International Law, 19(4), 655–724.10.1093/ejil/chn043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreau, S. R. (2004). The wrongs of unequal treatment. University of Toronto Law Journal, 54(3), 291–326.10.1353/tlj.2004.0010
   Google Scholar
• Mulder, J. (2012). Some more equal than others?: Matrimonial benefits and the CJEU case law on the discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 19(4), 505–523.10.1177/1023263X1201900403
   Google Scholar
• Mulder, J. (2017). EU non-discrimination law in the courts: Approaches to sex and sexuality discrimination in EU law. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• O’Cinneide, C. (2015). The constitutionalization of equality within the EU legal order: Sexual orientation as testing ground. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 22(3), 370–395.10.1177/1023263X1502200304
   Google Scholar
• O’Connell, R. (2008). The role of dignity in equality law: Lessons from Canada and South Africa. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 6(2), 267–286.10.1093/icon/mon004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, K. G. (2015). Obergefell v Hodges. Ohio Northern University Law Review, 42(1), 331–359.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, A. E. (2016). When, if not now? An update on civil partnership in Germany. German Law Journal, 17(3), 487–508.
   Google Scholar
• Scheffler, S. (2003). What Is Egalitarianism? Philosophy & Public Affairs, 31(1), 5–39.10.1111/papa.2003.31.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanson, J. (2005). Recognition and redistribution rethinking culture and the economic. Theory, Culture & Society, 22(4), 87–118.10.1177/0263276405054992
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Titshaw, S. (2016a). Same-Sex Spouses as ‘spouses’ under the EU family reunification and citizens directives. Journaal Vreemdelingenrecht(2), 30–41.
   Google Scholar
• Titshaw, S. (2016b). Same-sex spouses lost in translation? How to interpret ‘spouse’ in the E.U. family migration directives. Boston University International Law Journal, 34(1), 45–112.
   Google Scholar
• Toner, H. (2004). Partnership rights, free movement, and EU Law. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Tribe, L. H. (2015). Equal dignity: Speaking its name. Harvard Law Review, 129(1), 16–32.
   Google Scholar
• Tryfonidou, A. (2015). EU free movement law and the legal recognition of same-sex relationships: The case for mutual recognition. Columbia Journal of European Law, 21(2), 195–248.
   Google Scholar
• Vaigė, L. (2012). The problematics of recognition of same-sex marriages originating from member states according to the EU legal regulation. Societal Studies, 4(2), 755–775.
   Google Scholar
• van den Brink, M. (2016). What’s in a Name Case? Some Lessons for the Debate Over the Free Movement of Same-Sex Couples Within the EU. German Law Journal, 421–450.
   Google Scholar
• Weiss, A. (2007). Federalism and the gay family: Free movement of same-sex couples in the United States and the European Union. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, 41(1), 81–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westen, P. (1982). The empty idea of equality. Harvard Law Review, 95(3), 537–596.10.2307/1340593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wintemute, R. (2017). Same-sex survivor pensions in the CJEU (Parris) and the UKSC (Walker). UK Human Rights Blog. Retrieved August 16, 2017, from https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2017/01/09/professor-robert-wintemute-same-sex-survivor-pensions-in-the-cjeu-parris-and-the-uksc-walker/
   Google Scholar
• Yoshino, K. (2015). A new birth of freedom? Obergefell v. Hodges. Harvard Law Review, 129(1), 147–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, I. M. (2001). Equality of whom? Social groups and judgments of injustice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 9(1), 1–18.10.1111/1467-9760.00115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar