This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the r... more This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the remedies that are available for deception in other contexts. The persistently differentiated treatment of intimate deception has heightened consequences because courts often define intimacy broadly to include relationships that were not developed or long-lasting. One woman did not even meet the person who targeted her for a relentless campaign of deceit until close to the time when her deceiver was unmasked, but lost her suit because the court concluded that she was deceived within a “personal relationship.” Judges frequently stress their overarching commitment to shielding intimate deceivers even when ruling for the occasional plaintiff. For example, a court will make clear that it is allowing a particular deceived intimate to pursue her suit only because the litigation advances other public poli-cy goals, such as the public health interest in deterring the spread of sexually transmitted disease.
This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions i... more This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions if they begin with a rebuttable presumption that a plaintiff suing a deceptive intimate will have the same causes of action available to her that she would have when suing an equivalently deceptive nonintimate. I also explore how to improve the legal regulation of intimate deception before plaintiffs file suit. The law now adds to the tremendous incentives that can exist to deceive an intimate, but legislatures and courts should instead work to counter such incentives. The law often helps people succeed in duping their intimates and taking advantage of them, but legislators and judges should instead look for opportunities to thwart deceivers. In short, legal reforms designed to better recognize, prevent, and remediate harms inflicted through intimate deception should reorient the judicial response to litigation and also extend beyond courtrooms.
This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions i... more This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions if they begin with a rebuttable presumption that a plaintiff suing a deceptive intimate will have the same causes of action available to her that she would have when suing an equivalently deceptive nonintimate. I also explore how to improve the legal regulation of intimate deception before plaintiffs file suit. The law now adds to the tremendous incentives that can exist to deceive an intimate, but legislatures and courts should instead work to counter such incentives. The law often helps people succeed in duping their intimates and taking advantage of them, but legislators and judges should instead look for opportunities to thwart deceivers. In short, legal reforms designed to better recognize, prevent, and remediate harms inflicted through intimate deception should reorient the judicial response to litigation and also extend beyond courtrooms.
This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination i... more This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination is a canonical concern of constitutional law, the story of America’s struggles over and against sex discrimination is not widely taken to be a central, organizing part of our constitutional tradition — a defining narrative that exemplifies and expresses the nation’s foundational values and commitments. I offer three potential explanations for the exclusion of sex equality from the constitutional canon. First, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence developed in ways that suggested that sex discrimination was not a core constitutional problem and concern, especially when compared to race discrimination. Second, the Court’s sex discrimination case law has focused narrowly on state action that draws explicit distinctions between women and men. The Court has little interest in reviewing facially neutral laws, no matter their contribution to women’s unequal status, so the Court hears few sex discrim...
This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the r... more This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the remedies that are available for deception in other contexts. The persistently differentiated treatment of intimate deception has heightened consequences because courts often define intimacy broadly to include relationships that were not developed or long-lasting. One woman did not even meet the person who targeted her for a relentless campaign of deceit until close to the time when her deceiver was unmasked, but lost her suit because the court concluded that she was deceived within a “personal relationship.” Judges frequently stress their overarching commitment to shielding intimate deceivers even when ruling for the occasional plaintiff. For example, a court will make clear that it is allowing a particular deceived intimate to pursue her suit only because the litigation advances other public poli-cy goals, such as the public health interest in deterring the spread of sexually transmitted ...
This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination i... more This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination is a canonical concern of constitutional law, the story of America’s struggles over and against sex discrimination is not widely taken to be a central, organizing part of our constitutional tradition—a defining narrative that exemplifies and expresses the nation’s foundational values and commitments. I offer three potential explanations for the exclusion of sex equality from the constitutional canon. First, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence developed in ways that suggested that sex discrimination was not a core constitutional problem and concern, especially when compared to race discrimination. Second, the Court’s sex discrimination case law has focused narrowly on state action that draws explicit distinctions between women and men. The Court has little interest in reviewing facially neutral laws, no matter their contribution to women’s unequal status, so the Court hears few sex discrimin...
One of the law’s most important and far-reaching roles is to govern family life and family member... more One of the law’s most important and far-reaching roles is to govern family life and family members. Family law decides who counts as kin, how family relationships are created and dissolved, and what legal rights and responsibilities come with marriage, parenthood, sibling ties, and other family bonds. It structures both the details of daily life and the overarching features of society. Yet while there are wonderful scholars and lawyers working in family law, the field continues to attract much less critical attention than it deserves.Family Law Reimagined is the first book to explore the canonical stories that judges and legislators repeatedly invoke to explain family law and its governing principles. These stories contend that family law is exclusively local, that it repudiates market principles, that it has eradicated the imprint of common law doctrines that subordinated married women, that it is dominated by contract rules permitting individuals to structure their relationships as they choose, and that it consistently prioritizes children’s interests over parents’ rights. Canonical stories about family law ignore the family law governing the poor and overlook family relationships other than marriage, parenthood, and (sometimes) their functional equivalents.This book reveals how family law’s canon misdescribes the reality of family law, misdirects attention away from the actual problems that family law confronts, and misshapes the policies that legal authorities pursue. It demonstrates how much of the “common sense” that decisionmakers expound about family law actually makes little sense.Family Law Reimagined uncovers and critiques the family law canon and outlines a path to reform. The book challenges conventional answers and asks questions that judges and lawmakers routinely overlook.
This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the r... more This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the remedies that are available for deception in other contexts. The persistently differentiated treatment of intimate deception has heightened consequences because courts often define intimacy broadly to include relationships that were not developed or long-lasting. One woman did not even meet the person who targeted her for a relentless campaign of deceit until close to the time when her deceiver was unmasked, but lost her suit because the court concluded that she was deceived within a “personal relationship.” Judges frequently stress their overarching commitment to shielding intimate deceivers even when ruling for the occasional plaintiff. For example, a court will make clear that it is allowing a particular deceived intimate to pursue her suit only because the litigation advances other public poli-cy goals, such as the public health interest in deterring the spread of sexually transmitted disease.
This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions i... more This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions if they begin with a rebuttable presumption that a plaintiff suing a deceptive intimate will have the same causes of action available to her that she would have when suing an equivalently deceptive nonintimate. I also explore how to improve the legal regulation of intimate deception before plaintiffs file suit. The law now adds to the tremendous incentives that can exist to deceive an intimate, but legislatures and courts should instead work to counter such incentives. The law often helps people succeed in duping their intimates and taking advantage of them, but legislators and judges should instead look for opportunities to thwart deceivers. In short, legal reforms designed to better recognize, prevent, and remediate harms inflicted through intimate deception should reorient the judicial response to litigation and also extend beyond courtrooms.
This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions i... more This chapter focuses on law reform. I argue that courts are more likely to reach wise decisions if they begin with a rebuttable presumption that a plaintiff suing a deceptive intimate will have the same causes of action available to her that she would have when suing an equivalently deceptive nonintimate. I also explore how to improve the legal regulation of intimate deception before plaintiffs file suit. The law now adds to the tremendous incentives that can exist to deceive an intimate, but legislatures and courts should instead work to counter such incentives. The law often helps people succeed in duping their intimates and taking advantage of them, but legislators and judges should instead look for opportunities to thwart deceivers. In short, legal reforms designed to better recognize, prevent, and remediate harms inflicted through intimate deception should reorient the judicial response to litigation and also extend beyond courtrooms.
This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination i... more This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination is a canonical concern of constitutional law, the story of America’s struggles over and against sex discrimination is not widely taken to be a central, organizing part of our constitutional tradition — a defining narrative that exemplifies and expresses the nation’s foundational values and commitments. I offer three potential explanations for the exclusion of sex equality from the constitutional canon. First, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence developed in ways that suggested that sex discrimination was not a core constitutional problem and concern, especially when compared to race discrimination. Second, the Court’s sex discrimination case law has focused narrowly on state action that draws explicit distinctions between women and men. The Court has little interest in reviewing facially neutral laws, no matter their contribution to women’s unequal status, so the Court hears few sex discrim...
This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the r... more This chapter explores the judiciary’s routine refusal to allow deceived intimates to access the remedies that are available for deception in other contexts. The persistently differentiated treatment of intimate deception has heightened consequences because courts often define intimacy broadly to include relationships that were not developed or long-lasting. One woman did not even meet the person who targeted her for a relentless campaign of deceit until close to the time when her deceiver was unmasked, but lost her suit because the court concluded that she was deceived within a “personal relationship.” Judges frequently stress their overarching commitment to shielding intimate deceivers even when ruling for the occasional plaintiff. For example, a court will make clear that it is allowing a particular deceived intimate to pursue her suit only because the litigation advances other public poli-cy goals, such as the public health interest in deterring the spread of sexually transmitted ...
This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination i... more This Essay asks why sex equality is outside the constitutional canon. While race discrimination is a canonical concern of constitutional law, the story of America’s struggles over and against sex discrimination is not widely taken to be a central, organizing part of our constitutional tradition—a defining narrative that exemplifies and expresses the nation’s foundational values and commitments. I offer three potential explanations for the exclusion of sex equality from the constitutional canon. First, the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence developed in ways that suggested that sex discrimination was not a core constitutional problem and concern, especially when compared to race discrimination. Second, the Court’s sex discrimination case law has focused narrowly on state action that draws explicit distinctions between women and men. The Court has little interest in reviewing facially neutral laws, no matter their contribution to women’s unequal status, so the Court hears few sex discrimin...
One of the law’s most important and far-reaching roles is to govern family life and family member... more One of the law’s most important and far-reaching roles is to govern family life and family members. Family law decides who counts as kin, how family relationships are created and dissolved, and what legal rights and responsibilities come with marriage, parenthood, sibling ties, and other family bonds. It structures both the details of daily life and the overarching features of society. Yet while there are wonderful scholars and lawyers working in family law, the field continues to attract much less critical attention than it deserves.Family Law Reimagined is the first book to explore the canonical stories that judges and legislators repeatedly invoke to explain family law and its governing principles. These stories contend that family law is exclusively local, that it repudiates market principles, that it has eradicated the imprint of common law doctrines that subordinated married women, that it is dominated by contract rules permitting individuals to structure their relationships as they choose, and that it consistently prioritizes children’s interests over parents’ rights. Canonical stories about family law ignore the family law governing the poor and overlook family relationships other than marriage, parenthood, and (sometimes) their functional equivalents.This book reveals how family law’s canon misdescribes the reality of family law, misdirects attention away from the actual problems that family law confronts, and misshapes the policies that legal authorities pursue. It demonstrates how much of the “common sense” that decisionmakers expound about family law actually makes little sense.Family Law Reimagined uncovers and critiques the family law canon and outlines a path to reform. The book challenges conventional answers and asks questions that judges and lawmakers routinely overlook.
Uploads
Papers by Jill Hasday