Poland and Latvia are both signatories to a number of treaties that are supposed to protect the rights of their gay and lesbian citizens, but as this report documents, both countries have failed to uphold their treaty obligations on a number of occasions. The report begins with a discussion of the relevant provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to which both Poland and Latvia have acceded.

This article examines the use of foreign and international law in the adjudication of U.S. constitutional claims in gay rights cases. It explores the distinction between structural provisions and individual rights provisions, and it argues that foreign law can be particularly useful in advancing individual rights claims. Both due process and equal protection claims are considered.

In the case of Boer-Sedano v. Gonzales [418 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2005)] the ninth circuit ruled that a gay asylum seeker’s HIV or AIDS status could make return to his country of origin unreasonable. This brief article examines the Boer-Sedano case and explores its significance for asylum seekers with HIV or AIDS.

This article examines whether there is any international obligation on the United States, arising from international standards or treaties, which mandates the protection of lesbians and gay men from discrimination or the decriminalization of gay sexual conduct. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) is discussed. The United States’ reluctance to adhere to international human rights norms is also explored.

New Zealand decriminalized homosexual intercourse in 1986, yet some judicial opinions in New Zealand still contain language that reinforces and repeats negative stereotypes about homosexuality. This article examines the effect this language has on rights claims made by homosexuals. It argues that such language undermines sexual rights claims made by gay New Zealanders.

Based upon the author’s Clarendon Lectures in Law delivered in October 2005, this book analyzes the swift social changes from 1967, when the problem before the UK was whether to decriminalize homosexual conduct, to 2005, when Parliament passed the Civil Partnership Act that provided for the formal legal recognition of same-sex relationships. The first of three chapters sketches the Act’s historical background, and the second analyzes its specific provisions. The third chapter seeks to place these problems into a broader sociolegal context. As illustrated by prominent cases from other English language jurisdictions included in extensive appendices (comprising three-quarters of the book’s content), heretofore change on this front in the UK has been comparatively less driven by court decisions than by legislative enactments. With the recent creation in 2005 of a UK Supreme Court, however, this may change, raising new philosophical questions concerning the proper relationship between the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive branches of government.

Leung v. Secretary for Justice [HCAL 160/2004], Hong Kong’s first gay rights case, declared the four provisions in the Crimes Ordinance involving homosexual conduct to be unconstitutional. This article calls for the affirmation of the court’s original ruling which relies on an equality analysis. It also rejects the critique that the court should have used a privacy analysis. The Court’s decision is analyzed in detail.

This article compares the U.S. Defense of Marriage Act and the Australian Marriage Amendment Act of 2004, both of which define marriage as between one man and one woman, and prohibit benefits to same-sex partners at the federal level. The author then goes on to consider the ramifications of unsuccessful court challenges to both laws. In the U.S., she finds that the consequences would not be that great because the federal government has limited ability to regulate marriage, hence the states would still be able to allow same-sex marriage. In Australia, in contrast, she believes that an unsuccessful court challenge (i.e., where the Australian Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Marriage Amendment Act) might also be held to preclude the states from allowing same-sex marriage as well because the Australian federal government has more Constitutional authority to regulate marriage than is the case in the United States.

This brief article examines the treatment of same-sex partners and their families by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). It first lists the countries that have either legalized same-sex marriage or some other form of relationship recognition. It examines the ECHR’s definition of family and its treatment of same-sex couples and argues that the ECHR should expand its definition of family to include same-sex families.

With a forward by Martin Cauchon, the Canadian lawyer, politician and former Liberal Party of Canada cabinet minister who argued before the cabinet in favor of gay marriage, this book outlines the road to achieving same-sex marriage in Canada. It recounts the development of arguments, strategies and tactics used by both sides.

Three approaches to applying international materials in judicial decision-making are identified and examined by this author. Each approach is explored in light of the decision in Lawrence v. Texas [539 U.S. 558 (2003)]. The author then considers which approach would be most useful in using comparative analysis in U.S. courts in same-sex marriage cases. Recent changes in the legal status of same-sex couples in other countries are surveyed.

Drawing on a Critical Race Theory analysis, this article examines the role that racial and sexual stereotypes play in sexual orientation asylum cases. The asylum process is outlined, and the racism and homophobia inherent in the requirement of proving one’s homosexuality are exposed. Suggestions on improving the asylum system are provided.

This article addresses the potential impact of Lawrence v. Texas [539 U.S. 558 (2003)] on asylum law. It refutes the assertion made by Professor Michael Scaperlanda, of the University of Oklahoma Law School, that the recent expansion of protections granted to gay asylum seekers will allow gay rights advocates to build a body of precedent useful in constitutional law contexts. The article asserts that lower courts’ interpretations of Lawrence have not been helpful and could slow advances in asylum law.

This report is the result of a study conducted by the Institute for Conflict Research. It was commissioned by the Northern Ireland Policing Board (NIPB) and the Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland (OPONI). Questionnaires, focus groups, small group interviews and individual in-depth interviews were used to study 233 lesbians, gay men and bisexual’s attitudes and experience with the police in Northern Ireland. The findings include statistics on contacts and perceptions of the police as well as recommendations on reporting, training, recruitment and outreach.

The author of this article compares the status of same-sex marriage in Canada vs. England and Wales. In response to court challenges, Canada passed the Civil Marriage Act in 2005, which granted same-sex couples the same right to marry as opposite-sex couples. In England and Wales, in contrast, Parliament passed the Civil Partnership Act in 2004, which gave same-sex couples most, but not all, of the same rights as opposite sex couples. The author considers the factors that gave rise to the differing results in England and Canada, and also considers a number of arguments as to why the UK legislation violates the Human Rights Act of 1998.

Zaske describes the history and current content of U.S. immigration laws which impact homosexuals. Zaske goes on to discuss the Permanent Partners Immigration Act [H.R. 3006, 109th Cong. (2005)]. A comparative analysis of immigration laws from other countries is included in Zaske’s analysis of how PPIA may be implemented.