Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cote-Whitacre v. Department of Public Health

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 30, 2006Published

1DissentIreland, J.

I write separately for five reasons. First, I believe that an appellate court must use a neutral, principled approach to decide every case before it. Second, the court articulated such a neutral, principled approach in Goodridge v. Department of Pub. Health, 440 Mass. 309 (2003) (Goodridge), holding that the liberty and equality provisions of the Constitution of Massachusetts prohibit the use of gender distinctions with respect to marriage. Third, Goodridge removed gender as an impediment to marriage (just as Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 [1967], removed race as an impediment), and I believe…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Loving v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Frontiero v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Romer v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. United States Department of Agriculture v. MorenoSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API