WOMEN AND THE LAW Syllabus Spring 1999 Eleanor Stein Spring 1999 Office Hours by Appointment The purpose of this course is twofold. The first goal is to survey the history of the impact of the U.S. legal system upon women. We will examine some of the principal areas of this impact, touching on women in their varying roles in society: (I) overview of the treatment of women under law; (II) women in the market economy (education, employment, equal protection of the laws, sexual harassment, entitlements); (III) women in the family (divorce, parental rights, imprisoned women); (IV) women seeking control over their own bodies (reproductive freedom, sexual orientation);(V) women as recipients of violence (rape, pornography, international human rights). We will conclude by exploring (VI) feminist jurisprudence and briefly examining the history and status of women in the legal profession. The second goal is to serve as a preliminary introduction to the legal system, its formal procedural framework, and its methods. We will read primary legal text-- statutes and judicial opinions--and assignments will consist of drafting legal documents and oral argument. REQUIRED MATERIALS Lindgren, J. Ralph and Taub, Nadine, The Law of Sex Discrimination (2nd edition, West Publishing) Course Packets: Shipmates, Stuyvesant Plaza, Albany Or by hand COURSE OUTLINE Tuesday, March 30, 1999 (I) Introduction and Overview: historical survey of the treatment of women under law Course requirements Why study women and the law? Outline of legal system: sources of law How to read a case Reading: Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. 130 (1873) "[t]he civil law, as well as nature herself, has always recognized a wide difference in the respective spheres and destinies of man and woman. Man is, or should be, woman's protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life." Bradwell v. Illinois, 83 U.S. 130 (1873), concurring opinion of Justice Bradley (II) Women in the Market Economy Tuesday, April 6, 1999 -- the early cases, the protection of working women Reading: Lindgren, pp. 1-50 Law, "The Found ers on Families," excerpts Muller v. Orego n, 208 U.S. 412 (1908) Goesart v. Clea ry, 335 U.S. 464 (1948) The two sexes differ in structure of body, in the functions to be performed by each, in the amount of physical strength, in the capacity for long continued labor, particularly when done standing, the influence of vigorous health upon the future well-being of the race, the self-reliance which enables one to assert full rights, and in the capacity to maintain the struggle for subsistence. This difference justifies a difference in legislation, and upholds that which is designed to compensate for some of the burdens which rest upon her... Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908) Thursday, April 8, 1999--civil rights, the womens movement, equal protection and Title VII Reading: Lindgren, 51-85, 144-163, 224-231 Equal Pay Act of 1963 Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964 Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971) Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973) Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976) Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321 (1977) Orr v. Orr, 440 U.S. 268 (1979) Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981) Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989) There can be no doubt that our Nation has had a long and unfortunate history of sex discrimination. Traditionally, such discrimination was rationalized by an attitude of romantic paternalism which, in practical effect, put women, not on a pedestal, but in a cage... Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973) Tuesday, April 13, 1999--equal educational opportunity Reading: Lindgren, 264-314 Vorcheimer v. School District of Philadelphia, 532 F.2d 880 (1976) Mississippi University for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982) U.S. v. Virginia (1996) Cohen v. Brown University, 991 F.2d 888 (1st Cir. 1993) "Coeducation, h istorically, is a novel educational theory" Miss. Univ. for Women v. Hogan, 458 U.S. 718 (1982), dissenting opinion of Justice Powell Thursday, April 15, 1999--sexual harassment Reading: Lindgren, pp. 201-206, 210-216 Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986) Harris v. Forkl ift Systems, Inc., 126 L.Ed 2d 295 (1993) visiting lectur ers Tuesday, April 20, 1999--the feminization of poverty: entitlements Reading: Lindgren, 224-228, 374-379 Law, "Women, Wo rk, Welfare, and the Preservation of Patriarchy," 131 U. of Penn. L. Rev. 1249 Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) Mathews v. Eldr idge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) Dandridge v. Wi lliams, 397 U.S. 471 (1970) New York State Constitution Greater Upstate Law Project white paper on new developments in procedure (III) Women in the Family Thursday, April 22, 1999--work and family: pregnancy and childrearing Reading: Lindgren, 61-65, 380-393 Family Medical Leave Act Geduldig v. Aie llo, 417 U.S. 484 (1974) General Electri c Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125 (1976) Newport News Sh ipbuilding v. EEOC (1983) Weinberger v. W iesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636 (1975); Rhode excerpts on Weinberger first assignmen t--memo to client--due (IV) Women and the means of Reproduction Tuesday, April 27, 1999--marriage, children, and property Reading: Lindgren, 380-410 Braschi v. Stah l, 74 N.Y. 2d 201 (1989) O'Brien v. O'Br ien, 66 N.Y. 2d 576 (1985) Schuster v. Sch uster, 90 Wash. 2d 626 (Sup. Ct. Wash. 1978) Alison D. v. Vi rginia M., 572 N.E.2d 27 (1991) Thurs. April 29, 1999 --sterilization, contraception, sexual orientation Reading: Lindgren, 414-440, 447-460 Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927). Gould, Stephen Jay, "Carrie Buck's Daughter" Skinner v. Oklahoma (1946) Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Carey v Pop Services International (1977) People v. Onofre, 51 N.Y. 2d 476 (1980) Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1985) "A right of pri vacy older than the Bill of Rights." Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) second assignment--ordinance or judicial opinion--due Tuesday, May 4, 1999--freedom of choice Reading: Lindgren, 414-466 Roe v. Wade and Doe v Bolton (1973) Ginsburg, "Some Thoughts on Autonomy and Equality in Relation to Roe v. Wade, 63 North Carolina L. Rev. 375 (1983) City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1983)) Harris v. McRae (1980) Hope v. Perales 1994 Executive Order Sara Paretsky lecture, Writers Institute (V) Women and Violence Thurs., May 6, 1999--rape and pornography Reading: Lindgren, 477-504, 508-516 People v. Liberta, 64 N.Y. 2d 152 (1984) Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, 450 U.S. 464 (1 981) Violence Against Women Act law review on pornography and freedom of speech International Criminal Court Amicus Brief on rape as genocide in Rwanda third assignment--oral argument--due Tues., May 11--intimate violence and self-defense Reading: Lindgren, 345-353 Bruno v. Codd, Ireland v. Smith State v. Kelly International criminal court amicus brief Video and Visiting lecturer third assignment--oral argument--continued (VI) Feminist Jurisprudence and Women in the Legal Profession Makeup class--the feminist critique and women in law Reading: Lindgren, 118-137 Buffalo Law School symposium Report of Commission on women in the courts COURSE REQUIREMENTS NOTE: You must complete the following course requirements in order to receive a passing grade in this course. If you do not understand them, I am available for you to seek clarification until you do. 1. There will be three written assignments, one with an oral component. There will be no examinations. These assignments simulate actual legal tasks. They are intended to test your familiarity with the case law and other assigned materials, and to give you experience with the practical aspects of law. The first two assignments will be, essentially, short papers. Each will account for 20% of your final grade. The first assignment will be in the form of your memo, as an attorney, to your client. Aa to the second assignment, you may either draft, as a member of the Albany City Council, a city ordinance; or write a short judicial opinion. The third assignment will account for 30% of your final grade, and will be in the form of a five- minute oral argument; accompanying the argument will be your outline of argument, indicating your sources. 2. 20% of your grade will be based on your participation in classroom discussion, demonstrating your familiarity with the assigned reading. 3. 10% of your grade will be based on your attendance in class. You are expected to sign in at the beginning of each class, and it is your responsibility to be on time and sign in. Absences will be excused with medical documentation. Eleanor Stein 489-2241 steinjones@global2000.net