Conlawprof Digest, Vol 45, Issue 13

[Caitlin E. Borgmann]

I'm not sure if anyone already responded with this, but Palmore was cited in
the plaintiffs' briefs in Lofton for the proposition that bias against
lesbians and gay men cannot be the basis for a prohibition on adoption by
same-sex couples. The Eleventh Circuit didn't buy it, though.

Caitlin E. Borgmann
Assistant Professor
CUNY School of Law
65-21 Main St.
Flushing, NY 11367
(718) 340-4503
borgmann at mail.law.cuny.edu
 
Faculty webpage:
http://www.law.cuny.edu/app/faculty/faculty_detail.jsp?name=Borgmann,+Caitli
n
Reproductive Rights Prof Blog:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/reproductive_rights/
SSRN Author Page:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=492322



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:21:56 -0700
From: Robert Sheridan <rs at robertsheridan.com>
Subject: Re: palmore v sidoti question
To: Annette Appell <appell at law.unlv.edu>
Cc: aals-familylaw at uidaho.edu, conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Message-ID: <AEB8CBB0-44F5-447B-8D46-0AD711FEB8F6 at robertsheridan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

While we're awaiting responses, may I piggy-back another query  
regarding the same case, please?

Palmore, the marry-a-black, lose-your-baby case, to me, is one of the  
more interesting, perhaps inspiring, cases because of the broad  
principle on which it rests.  It was cited in the professors' brief  
in Lawrence for the proposition that government may not bow down to  
the prejudices of of the public.  That principle, if recognized  
earlier, might have spared considerable trouble, not to mention if  
applied in the future.

My question is whether the case is being relied on by courts in other  
contexts than the two mentioned?  Does it have legs? in other words.

Of course, deciding which views of the public are mere prejudices and  
which have a basis in legitimacy will always be the next question.

rs
sfls

On Jul 23, 2007, at 7:55 AM, Annette Appell wrote:

> Hello, I've cross-posted this question to family and constitutional  
> law
> listserves. On remand after the USSC reversed the Florida court of
> appeal's affirmance of the trial court's change of custody from Mrs.
> Palmore to Mr. Sidoti, the Florida courts relinquished jurisdiction  
> to a
> Texas court where Mr. Sidoti had moved with the child (Melanie).  Can
> anyone tell me or point me to a source that indicates what happened  
> next
> and whether Melanie was ever returned to the custody of her mother?
> Thank you, Annette
>
> -- 
>
> Annette R. Appell
> William S. Boyd Professor of Law
> Associate Dean for Clinical Studies
> William s. Boyd School of Law, UNLV
> 4505 S. Maryland Parkway, Box 1003
> Las Vegas, NV 89154-1003
> o:702-895-2403; c: 702-496-2697; f: 702-895-2081
>
> SSRN Author page:
> http://ssrn.com/author=117894
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see  
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed  
> as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages  
> that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members  
> can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20070723/361f46e9/att
achment-0001.htm 

End of Conlawprof Digest, Vol 45, Issue 13
******************************************