1. What is the name of the case? Hollingsworth v. Perry
a) What is the name held by the petitioner in this case? Summarize the petitioner’s key argument.
Dennis Hollingsworth et al. with Charles J. Cooper speaking for the petitioners. The petitioner argued that a state is within its legal bounds to limit marriage to only between opposite sex, as marriage is a historical social institution whose purpose advances the state’s interest in childbearing.
b) What is the name held by the respondent in this case? Summarize the respondent’s key argument.
Kristen M. Perry, et al. with Thomas B. Olson speaking on behalf of the respondents. The respondent argued that same-sex couples have the same right to marriage as marriage is not actually defined by the couple’s ability for “[r]esponsible procreation”.
2. Describe the “story” or “concern” behind the case. Is the story or concern comparable to Plessy v. Ferguson? Provide three substantive explanations (at least one three sentence paragraph each) outlining why the case and the Supreme Court’s response is or is not comparable to Plessy v. Ferguson (Note: The Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) case opinion may be found on the “U.S. Supreme Court Case Opinions” link on the course home page).
The concern behind this Supreme Court case boils down to whether or not a state can delimit …show more content…
Ferguson and Hollingsworth v. Perry are very similar to each other. In Plessy v Ferguson, the petitioner was a citizen of the United States and simply wanted the same rights and immunities granted to citizens of the United States belonging a white race. Similarly, Hollingsworth v. Perry concerns itself with individuals arguing that they have the same rights and immunities granted to opposite-sex couples within the United States. Summarily, both involve actors believing that they have the same rights and equal protection as the rest of the citizens and see the U.S. as falling short on those
a) What is the name held by the petitioner in this case? Summarize the petitioner’s key argument.
Dennis Hollingsworth et al. with Charles J. Cooper speaking for the petitioners. The petitioner argued that a state is within its legal bounds to limit marriage to only between opposite sex, as marriage is a historical social institution whose purpose advances the state’s interest in childbearing.
b) What is the name held by the respondent in this case? Summarize the respondent’s key argument.
Kristen M. Perry, et al. with Thomas B. Olson speaking on behalf of the respondents. The respondent argued that same-sex couples have the same right to marriage as marriage is not actually defined by the couple’s ability for “[r]esponsible procreation”.
2. Describe the “story” or “concern” behind the case. Is the story or concern comparable to Plessy v. Ferguson? Provide three substantive explanations (at least one three sentence paragraph each) outlining why the case and the Supreme Court’s response is or is not comparable to Plessy v. Ferguson (Note: The Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) case opinion may be found on the “U.S. Supreme Court Case Opinions” link on the course home page).
The concern behind this Supreme Court case boils down to whether or not a state can delimit …show more content…
Ferguson and Hollingsworth v. Perry are very similar to each other. In Plessy v Ferguson, the petitioner was a citizen of the United States and simply wanted the same rights and immunities granted to citizens of the United States belonging a white race. Similarly, Hollingsworth v. Perry concerns itself with individuals arguing that they have the same rights and immunities granted to opposite-sex couples within the United States. Summarily, both involve actors believing that they have the same rights and equal protection as the rest of the citizens and see the U.S. as falling short on those