Debating Same-Sex Marriage: Lessons from <Emphasis Type="Italic">Loving</Emphasis>, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Roe</Emphasis>, and <Emphasis Type="Italic">Reynolds</Emphasis>

The United States Supreme Court, in its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, declared a constitutional right to same-sex marriage (SSM). With Republicans now controlling the Congress and presidency, and with value-traditionalists and ‘strict’ constitutionalists influencing the party’s legislative agenda and judicial nominees, Obergefell’s future and the contours of SSM rights are uncertain. Proponents assume the decision will delegitimate opponents, just as Loving v. Virginia (1967) accelerated the delegitimation of racial segregationists. SSM opponents counter with the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling and argue that, like Roe, Obergefell undermines the democratic process, which is better suited to resolve a highly-charged moral dispute. Like Roe, Obergefell will not resolve the debate but, instead, trigger a durable opposition. We add a third possible path, drawing on the evolving public discourse on polygamy since the Supreme Court upheld prohibitions in Reynolds v. United States (1878). The politics of polygamy shows that, if SSM opponents are delegitimated, they may reemerge as legitimate participants in the public sphere. These paths offer insights into uncertainties, contingencies, and predictions regarding the durability of SSM resistance and other oppositional movements. They also lead to revisionist interpretations of the effect on public discourse flowing from these three seminal court decisions. The politics of interracial marriage (after Loving) shunned the losing political faction from the public forum, while those of abortion (after Roe), and, recently, polygamy, illustrate a more vibrant, pluralist model of deliberation. Whether SSM opponents will mimic a Roe model, or follow the trajectory of Loving or Reynolds, is now the question.     

The Effects of Tulsa's Pre‐K Program on Middle School Student Performance

As states have upgraded their commitment to pre‐K education over the past two decades, questions have arisen. Critics argue that program effects are likely to fade out or disappear over time, while supporters contend that program effects are likely to persist under certain conditions. Using data from Tulsa Public Schools, three neighboring school districts, and the state of Oklahoma, and propensity score weighting, we estimate the effects of Tulsa's universal, school‐based pre‐K program on multiple measures of academic progress for middle school students. We find enduring effects on math achievement test scores, enrollment in honors courses, and grade retention for students as a whole, and similar effects for certain subgroups. We conclude that some positive effects of a high‐quality pre‐K program are discernible as late as middle school.     

Does contact with the justice system deter or promote future delinquency? Results from a longitudinal study of British adolescent twins

What impact does formal punishment have on antisocial conduct—does it deter or promote it? The findings from a long line of research on the labeling tradition indicate formal punishments have the opposite-of-intended consequence of promoting future misbehavior. In another body of work, the results show support for deterrence-based hypotheses that punishment deters future misbehavior. So, which is it? We draw on a nationally representative sample of British adolescent twins from the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study to perform a robust test of the deterrence versus labeling question. We leverage a powerful research design in which twins can serve as the counterfactual for their co-twin, thereby ruling out many sources of confounding that have likely impacted prior studies. The pattern of findings provides support for labeling theory, showing that contact with the justice system—through spending a night in jail/prison, being issued an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO), or having an official record—promotes delinquency. We conclude by discussing the impact these findings may have on criminologists’ and practitioners’ perspective on the role of the juvenile justice system in society.     

Stature Estimation from Postmortem CT Femoral Maximum Length in Contemporary Danish Population

Stature estimation methods for Danish adult population have generally relied on Trotter and Gleser’s and Boldsen’s regression equations that are based on the skeletal remains of recent war dead American Whites, Terry Skeletal Collection, and Danish archaeological medieval skeletal materials, respectively. These equations are probably not suitable for stature estimation in contemporary Danish forensic cases. Furthermore, because postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) is now routinely performed at Danish forensic departments, equations based on PMCT, rather than measurements of defleshed bones, are needed. The aim of this study was to develop new equations for adult stature estimation based on PMCT femoral measurement. Maximum femoral length was measured on the PMCT images of 78 individuals (41 males and 37 females) aged 23–45 years. The measurement accuracy was tested on dry bones, and all the measurements were included in the inter- and intra-observer analyses. Both analyses results demonstrated the reliability of the method and data. Comparison between the living stature of the individuals and the estimates based on the equations by Trotter and Gleser and Boldsen demonstrated the unreliability of the previous equations to some extent. New regression equations were then developed and validated on a different sample of 18 Danish forensic cases. Comparisons of all the equations indicated that both the sets of previous equations underestimated the stature in the new validation dataset. The new equations developed in this study provide a reliable alternative for stature estimation in modern Danish forensic cases.     

QUESTIONING THE GOAL OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

The prominent call to legalise same-sex marriage in Australia raises questions concerning whether its achievement will result in amplified societal acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and on what grounds this acceptance will take place. Same-sex marriage may not challenge heteronormative and patriarchal features typically associated with marriage, and may serve to reinforce a hierarchy that promotes traditional marriage as the ideal relationship structure. This may result in only assimilationist acceptance of LGBT people. However, the consequence of inclusion to marriage ought to reflect social acceptance of LGBTs as people worthy of equal treatment in dignity and in rights, regardless of perceived differences or similarities to a supposed majority standard. This article argues that justice would be best served by introducing and promoting a variety of State-sanctioned unions whilst simultaneously introducing same-sex marriage. This ‘pluralisation strategy’ would increase awareness and legitimacy of other relationship-recognition options, promoting respectful acceptance of LGBT and heterosexual people alike.     

Conscience in public administration: More than just a chirping cricket?

The policy and practice of public administration are caught between two seemingly incommensurate goals. Public servants are expected to be responsible to the oversight and control of democratically elected governments, yet, as the policy space becomes more complex, are forced to exercise more judgment and discretion in their responsibilities. Individual, collective, and professional conscience is motivated across this spectrum of challenges. This article explores the concepts of discretion and conscience in theory and practice in the Canadian context. It offers insights into how conscience can, and perhaps must, be both accommodated and supported more appropriately in the practice of 21^st‐century public administration and service. At root, we argue that an array of strategies and approaches may help to build relational reciprocity to a broader set of norms that are necessary for efficient and effective governance.     

Future of South Korea–Japan Relations: Decoupling or Liberal Discourse

South Korea–Japan relations are at their lowest point in decades, as colonial era disputes flare once again. Most pundits argue that the South Korean public is strongly united against Japan. We argue that South Korean elites are sharply divided over how to manage the crisis; this division is starting to impact how South Koreans understand colonial era narratives; and, long-term, bilateral relations depend on how these growing divisions play out. Despite state censorship, a rising counter-narrative in South Korea challenges the dominant, Manichaean, anti-Japanese one. For the first time, Korea and Japan have a realistic chance of reconciling based on liberal public discourse and a nuanced, empirically based understanding of history.