The Center for the Study of Law & Culture at Columbia Law School presents
The Spring 2016 Critical Race Theory Workshop Series
Critical Race Theories of the Law and Politics of Intimate Association
- Spring 2016
Tuesdays, 4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Jerome Greene Hall
435 W 116th St
New York, NY 10027
Law has historically regulated familial and intimate relationships on the basis of race and ethnicity, nationality, gender, sexuality, age, generational location, literacy, religion, and class. Although many of these formal restrictions on family life no longer exist, myriad legal, social, and cultural norms continue to shape and order intimate associations. The colloquium sessions will explore the impact of law and policy on kinship networks and family structure across a number of domains. We will examine these issues within the U.S. context, as well as from global, transnational, and comparative perspectives.
February 23
- Kevin Noble Maillard
Syracuse University College of Law
- Darren Rosenblum
Pace University School of Law
March 8
- Solangel Maldonado
Seton Hall Law
Robin Lenhardt
Fordham University School of Law
Visiting Scholar, Columbia Law School
Center for the Study of Law & Culture
March 22
- Peggy Davis
New York University Law School
Catherine Smith
University of Denver Sturm
College of Law
April 5
- Hedi Viterbo
SOAS, University of London
Zeida Jallad
Columbia Law School, J.S.D. Candidate
April 12
- Dorothy Roberts
University of Pennsylvania Law School
Mignon Moore
Barnard College, Columbia University
Professor Kevin Maillard, Syracuse University College of Law
with comments by Professor Darren Rosenblum, Pace University School of Law
- Tuesday, February 23, 2016
4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Jerome Greene Annex
410 West 117th Street
New York, NY 10027
Single black fathers are more likely to be labeled as absent and irresponsible, even though studies suggest that black men are more likely than other races to have daily involvement with their children. Presumptions of pathological incompetency influence judicial discretion. The average reality greatly contradicts the collective impression, and law and social practice have yet to embrace it.
The Center for the Study of Law & Culture at Columbia Law School presents
The Spring 2016 Critical Race Theory Workshop Series
Professor Solangel Maldonado, Seton Hall Law;
Visiting Scholar, Columbia Law School,
Center for the Study of Law & Culture
with comments by
Professor Robin Lenhardt, Fordham University School of Law
- Tuesday, March 8, 2016
4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Feldberg Space
William & June Warren Hall
1125 Amsterdam Avenue
New York, NY 10027
Although the U.S. Supreme Court struck legal restrictions on interracial intimacy almost fifty years ago, the law continues to influence our romantic choices today. The law helped to create the residential, social, and economic distance between racial and ethnic groups and continues to influence intimate preferences by drawing an artificial line between public and private discrimination. Our intimate choices, as influenced by law, perpetuate racial hierarchy and inequality in society.
The Center for the Study of Law & Culture at Columbia Law School presents
The Spring 2016 Critical Race Theory Workshop Series
Critical Race Theories of theLaw and Politics of Intimate Association
Amicus Briefs in Obergefell v. Hodges
the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent marriage equality decision
- Tuesday, March 22, 2016
4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Jerome Greene Annex
410 West 117th Street
New York, NY 10027
- Download eFlyer
Professor Peggy Davis
New York University Law School
The amicus brief that Professor Davis and the NYU Law School Experiential Learning Lab submitted in the Obergefell case drew on the convergent histories of marriage, race, slavery and emancipation. The brief argued that a broadening of state definitions of marriage and family was understood to be a necessary consequence of the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship, Privileges or Immunities and Due Process Clauses.
Download Professor Davis's Amicus Brief
Professor Catherine Smith
University of Denver
Sturm College of Law
The amicus brief, cited in Obergefell v. Hodges, recounts a powerful body of equal protection jurisprudence that prohibits punishing children to reflect moral disapproval of parental conduct or to incentivize adult behavior.
The Center for the Study of Law & Culture at Columbia Law School presents
The Spring 2016 Critical Race Theory Workshop Series
Critical Race Theories of the Law and Politics of Intimate Association
“Ties of Separation: Analogy, Resistance, and Generational Segregation in North America, Australia, and Israel/Palestine”
- Tuesday, April 5, 2016
4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Jerome Greene Annex
410 West 117th Street
New York, NY 10027
Professor Hedi Viterbo
SOAS, University of London
with comments by Professor Kendall Thomas, Columbia Law School
The recent separation of Palestinian children from their adult counterparts in Israeli custody evinces parallels, in its effects and underlying justifications, with the removal of Indigenous children to boarding schools in the United States and Canada, as well as with Australia’s Aboriginal “stolen generations”. What are the potential and pitfalls of this and similar historical-geographical analogies? And what roles have such analogies already played in discourses surrounding these countries over the last two centuries?
Please email [email protected] for a copy of Professor Viterbo's paper.
Critical Race Theories of the Law and Politics of Intimate Association
“Interracial Marriage and Racial Equality: The Role of Residential Segregation”
- Tuesday, April 12, 2016
4:15 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
- Columbia Law School
Jerome Greene Annex
410 West 117th Street
New York, NY 10027
Professor Dorothy Roberts
University of Pennsylvania Law School
with comments by Professor Mignon Moore
Barnard College, Columbia University
Drawing on an archive of in-depth interviews of black-white couples in Chicago conducted by anthropologist Robert E.T. Roberts between 1937 and 1967, this paper explores the relationship between interracial marriage and residential segregation Although Chicago was not governed by de jure segregation and anti-miscegenation laws, its residential “color line” drastically limited where black-white couples could find housing. While some scholars have interpreted the significance of interracial marriage as a symbol and means of overcoming racial hierarchies, the Chicago couples’ experiences demonstrate that the legal ability to marry across race operates within a racial order that is not transcended by cross-racial intimacy.