Document Type


Publication Date



Free exercise of religion, Same-sex marriage, Marriage equality, Equal protection, Establishment clause


Civil Rights and Discrimination | Family Law | Religion Law | Sexuality and the Law


To date, every state statute that has extended marriage equality to gay and lesbian couples has included accommodations for actors who oppose such marriages on religious grounds. Debate over those accommodations has occurred mostly between, on the one hand, people who urge broader religion protections and, on the other hand, those who support the types of accommodations that typically have appeared in existing statutes. This article argues that the debate should be widened to include arguments that the existing accommodations are normatively and constitutionally problematic. Even states that presumptively are most friendly to LGBT citizens, as measured by their demonstrated willingness to enact marriage equality laws, have included provisions that may well retrench on civil rights principles in ways that are significant but underappreciated. Especially at a moment when marriage equality is moving into jurisdictions that are even more concerned with preserving religious freedom, arguments against existing accommodations should be made available.


This article predates the author's affiliation with Cornell Law School.