Divided We Stand: Gay Marriage Rulings and Official Disobedience Harvard Case Solution & Analysis

Divided We Stand: Gay Marriage Rulings and Official Disobedience Case Solution

Davis stated that she chose to reject marriage licenses toward all couples simply because of her spiritual convictions and claimed the fact that "Marriage is prescribed by The lord to be truly a female and a guy." Utilizing the situation of modern same-sex marriage laws, the situation checks out 2 aspects of the very same coin: at a time and even in a state where exactly same-sex relationship is unlawful, one official chooses to defy the legislation; at an opportunity and in a condition where it is lawful, yet another decides to refuse to follow. The situation asks trainees to think about if when official disobedience-the rejection by a social official, behaving in a main capability, to observe the law-is warranted.

On June, 26, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court figured out that the federal Defense of Marriage Act broke the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment defense of equivalent liberty, efficiently reversing the law. Regardless of the state law, D. Bruce Hanes, a file of wills in Pennsylvania, concurred to honor a demand from 2 females looking for a same-sex marriage license-an action of official defiance that right away tossed Hanes below a nationwide limelight. On June 26, 2015-precisely 2 years later-the Supreme Court concluded that the U.S. Constitution ensured a best to same-sex marriage.

PUBLICATION DATE: August 25, 2016

This is just an excerpt. This case is about LEADERSHIP & MANAGING PEOPLE

Share This

SALE SALE

Save Up To

30%

IN ONLINE CASE STUDY

FOR FREE CASES AND PROJECTS INCLUDING EXCITING DEALS PLEASE REGISTER YOURSELF !!

Register now and save up to 30%.