Advertisement

Federalizing Legal Opportunities for LGBT Movements in the Growing EU

  • Uladzislau Belavusau
  • Dimitry Kochenov
Chapter
Part of the Gender and Politics book series (GAP)

Abstract

European Union (EU) citizenship is not only a unique space for ‘overcoming’ nationality, often imagined in terms of the dominant ethnicity of member states (Kochenov 2010a). EU citizenship equally offers an activist arena for challenging sexual identities and inequalities embedded in those national citizenships, transnationalizing discourse on rights and gay emancipation in Central and Eastern Europe as a matter of EU law. European, in this context, becomes a language of rights and entitlements, which can be turned, inter alia, against their own states of nationality. On the one hand, transnational forms of citizenship facilitate the very dialogue on sexual rights among member states and problematize the construction of fixed identities (Belavusau 2015a, in press). On the other hand, EU citizenship is equally a realm of disciplining humiliation of member states (Davies 2010). The rhetoric of ‘socially unfruitful’ homosexuality and the prescription of women’s reproductive role have been particularly visible in nationalist projects with ethno-centric views on group boundaries and longevity (Yuval-Davis 1997). The Union instead offers value models for anti-discrimination developments beyond the ‘population’ narrative of—largely patriarchal and heteronormative—national citizenships. Although not always legally enforceable due to the limited possibilities for harmonization and Union action, transnational and national lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) movements can capitalize on value models as a matter of EU federalism for lobbying just causes. The recent judgment of the US Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) is an example of a federal opportunity for gays and lesbians—a legal track that sooner or later will be explored by the cause lawyers in Europe.

Keywords

European Union Member State Exit Option European Union Institution European Union Citizenship 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alter, K., & Vargas, J. (2000). Explaining variation in the use of European litigation strategies: European community law and British gender equality policy. Comparative Political Studies, 33(4), 452–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altman, D. (1982). The homosexualization of America: The Americanization of the homosexual. New York: St Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  3. Anon (2003). Inching down the aisle: Differing paths toward the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States and Europe. Harvard Law Review, 116(7), 2004–2028.Google Scholar
  4. Ayoub, P. M. (2013). Cooperative transnationalism in contemporary Europe: Europeanization and political opportunities for LGBT mobilization in the European Union. European Political Science Review, 5(2), 279–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ayoub, P. M., & Paternotte, D. (Eds.) (2014). LGBT activism and the making of Europe: A rainbow Europe? Basingstoke, England: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  6. Barnard, C. (2008). The “opt-out” for the UK and Poland from the charter of fundamental rights: Triumph of rhetoric over reading. In S. Griller & J. Ziller (Eds.), Lisbon treaty: EU constitutionalism without a constitutional treaty? (pp. 257–283). Vienna: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. BBC. (2013). EU LGBT survey: Poll on homophobia sparks concern. BBC News, [Online] 17 May. Retrieved August 24, 2015, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22563843.
  8. Beaud, O. (2007). Théorie de la federation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  9. Beger, N. J. (2000). Queer readings of Europe: Gender identity, sexual orientation and the (Im)potence of rights politics at the European court of justice. Social & Legal Studies, 9(2), 249–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Belavusau, U. (2010). Sex in the union: EU law, taxation and the adult industry. European Law Reporter, 4, 144–150.Google Scholar
  11. Belavusau, U. (2015a). Sex beyond the internal market: Towards EU sexual citizenship. EUI Law Working Paper 6. Florence, European University Institute.Google Scholar
  12. Belavusau, U. (2015b). A penalty card for homophobia from EU non-discrimination law. Columbia Journal of European Law, 21(2), 237–259.Google Scholar
  13. Belavusau, U. (in press). EU sexual citizenship: Sex beyond the internal market. In: D. Kochenov, ed. EU citizenship and federalism: The role of rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Belavusau, U., & Isailović. (2015, August 26). Gay blood: Bad blood? A brief analysis of Léger Case [2015] C-528/13, European Law Blog, www.europeanlawblog.eu.
  15. Bell, M. (2005). EU directive on free movement and same-sex families: Guidelines on the implementation process. Brussels, Belgium: ILGA-Europe.Google Scholar
  16. Bellamy, R. (2015). A duty-free Europe? What’s wrong with Kochenov’s account of EU citizenship rights. European Law Journal, 21(4), 558–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boeles, P. (2005). Europese burgers en derdelanders: wat betekent het verbod van discriminatie naar nationaliteit sinds Amsterdam? Sociaal-economische wetgeving, 53(12), 500–213.Google Scholar
  18. Borillo, D. (2011). Pluralisme conjugal ou hiérarchie des sexualiatés. La reconnaissance juridique des couples homosexuelles dans l’Union européenne. McGill Law Review, 46, 875–922.Google Scholar
  19. van den Brink, M., (in press). The origins and the potential federalising effects of the substance of rights test. In D. Kochenov, ed. EU citizenship and federalism: The role of rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cichowski, R. A. (2013). Legal mobilization, transnational activism and gender equality in the EU. Canadian Journal of Law & Society, 28(2), 209–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen, D. (2004). Law, sexuality, and society: The enforcement of morals in classical athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Cummings, S. L., & NeJaime, D. (2010). Lawyering for marriage equality. UCLA Law Review, 57(5), 1235–1331.Google Scholar
  23. Davies, G. T. (2003). Nationality discrimination in the European internal market. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  24. Davies, G. T. (2005). “Any place I hang my hat?” or: Residence is the new nationality. European Law Journal, 11(1), 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davies, G. T. (2007). Services, citizenship and the country of origin principle. Europa Institute: Mitchell Working Paper Series 2. Edinburgh: Europa Institute.Google Scholar
  26. Davies, G. T. (2008). A time to mournhow I learned to stop worrying and quite like the European Union. [Inaugural Lecture] 26 June. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Retrieved August 24, 2015, from http://dspace.ubvu.vu.nl/bitstream/handle/1871/13104/inauguraldavies.pdf?sequence=1.
  27. Davies, G. T. (2010). The humiliation of the state as a constitutional tactic. In F. Amtenbrink & P. A. J. van den Bergh (Eds.), The constitutional integrity of the European Union (pp. 147–174). The Hague, The Netherlands: T. M. C. Asser Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dawson, M., & Muir, E. (2011). Individual, institutional and collective vigilance in protecting fundamental rights in the EU: Lessons from the Roma. Common Market Law Review, 48(3), 751–775.Google Scholar
  29. De Witte, F. (2013). Sex, drugs and EU law: The recognition of moral and ethical diversity in EU law. Common Market Law Review, 50(6), 1545–1478.Google Scholar
  30. Epiney, A. (2007). The scope of Article 12 EC: Some remarks on the influence of European citizenship. European Law Journal, 13(5), 611–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) (2009). Same-sex couples, free movement of EU citizens, migration and asylum. Vienna: European Agency for Fundamental Rights.Google Scholar
  32. Fichera, M. (2009). The European arrest warrant and the sovereign state: A marriage of convenience? European Law Journal, 15(1), 70–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Foucault, M. (1979). Histoire de la sexualité. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.Google Scholar
  34. Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  35. Greenberg, D. F. (1990). The construction of homosexuality. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Grigolo, M. (2013). Sexualities and the ECHR: Introducing the universal sexual legal subject. European Journal of International Law, 14(5), 1023–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Heffer, L. R., & Voeten, E. (2014). International courts as agents of legal change: Evidence from LGBT rights in Europe. International Organization, 68(1), 77–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hilson, C. (2002). New social movements: The role of legal opportunity. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(2), 238–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Iglesias Sánchez, S. (2011). El asunto Ruiz Zambrano: una nueva aproximación del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea a la ciudadanía de la Unión. Revista General de Derecho Europeo, 24.Google Scholar
  40. Jacobs, F. G. (2007). Citizenship of the European Union—A legal analysis. European Law Journal, 13(5), 591–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johnson, P. (2014). Homosexuality and the European court of human rights. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Kahlina, K. (2015). Local histories, European LGBT designs: Sexual citizenship, nationalism, and “Europeanisation” in post-Yugoslav Croatia and Serbia. Women’s Studies International Forum, 49, 73–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Karst, K. L. (1980). The Freedom of Intimate Association. Yale Law Journal, 89(4), 624–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kochenov, D. (2006). Democracy and human rights-not for gay people: EU eastern enlargement and its impact on the protection of the rights of sexual minorities. Texas Wesleyan Law Review, 13, 459–496.Google Scholar
  45. Kochenov, D. (2007). Gay rights in the EU: A long way forward for the Union of 27. Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy, 3(3), 469–490.Google Scholar
  46. Kochenov, D. (2009a). On options of citizens and moral choices of states: Gays and European federalism. Fordham International Law Journal, 33(1), 156–205.Google Scholar
  47. Kochenov, D. (2009b). Ius Tractum of many faces: European citizenship and the difficult relationship between status and rights. Columbia Journal of European Law, 15(2), 169–237.Google Scholar
  48. Kochenov, D. (2010a). Rounding up the circle: The mutation of member states’ nationalities under pressure from EU citizenship. EUI RSCAS Paper 23. Florence, European University Institute.Google Scholar
  49. Kochenov, D. (2010b). Case C-135/08 Janko Rottmann v. Freistaat Bayern, Judgement of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 March 2010. Common Market Law Review, 47(6), 1831–1846.Google Scholar
  50. Kochenov, D. (2010c). Citizenship without respect: The EU’s troubled equality ideal. NYU Jean Monnet Working Paper 8. New York: NYU School of Law.Google Scholar
  51. Kochenov, D. (2011). A real European citizenship. Columbia Journal of European Law, 18, 56–109.Google Scholar
  52. Kochenov, D. (2013). The right to have what rights? EU citizenship in need of clarification. European Law Journal, 19(4), 502–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Kochenov, D. (2014). EU citizenship without duties. European Law Journal, 20(4), 482–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kochenov, D. (in press). The missing EU rule of law. In C Closa & D Kochenov, eds. Reinforcing the rule of law oversight in the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Kochenov, D., & van den Brink, M. (2015). Pretending there is no union: Non-derivative quasi-citizenship rights of third-country nationals in the EU. EUI Law Working Paper Law 5. Florence: European University Institute.Google Scholar
  56. Kochenov, D., & Plender, R. (2012). EU citizenship: From an incipient form to an incipient substance: The discovery of the treaty text. European Law Review, 37, 369–396.Google Scholar
  57. Koppelman, A. (2001). The miscegenation analogy in Europe, or, Lisa Grant meets Adolph Hitler. In R. Wintermute & M. Andenaes (Eds.), Legal recognition of same-sex partnerships: A study of national, European and international law (pp. 623–633). Oxford, England: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  58. Kreimer, S. F. (2001). Federalism and freedom. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 574, 66–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kulpa, R. (2014). Western leveraged pedagogy of Central and Eastern Europe: Discourses of homophobia, tolerance, and nationhood. Gender, Place Culture A Journal of Feminist Geography, 21(4), 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Kumm, M. (2010). The idea of Socratic contestation and the right to justification. Law and Ethics of Human Rights, 4(2), 142–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McCann, M. (2006). Law and social movements: Contemporary perspectives. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2, 17–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McConnell, M. (1987). Federalism: Evaluating the founders’ design. University of Chicago Law Review, 54, 1484–1512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Möschel, M. (2009). Life partnerships in Germany: Separate and unequal? Columbia Journal of European Law, 16(1), 37–65.Google Scholar
  64. Nagel, J. (2003). Race, ethnicity, and sexuality: Intimate intersections, forbidden frontiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Obergefell v. Hodges. (2015). 576_U.S.Google Scholar
  66. Oliary, & Al. v. Italy. (2015). App. nos. 18766/11 and 36030/11.Google Scholar
  67. Poiares Maduro, M. (2007). So close and yet so far: The paradoxes of mutual recognition. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(5), 814–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Posner, R. A. (1992). Sex and reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Rabinow, P. (Ed.) (1984). The Foucault reader. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  70. Rottmann v. Freistaat Bayern. (2010). C-135/08 ECJ.Google Scholar
  71. Ruiz Zambrano v. Office national de lemploi (ONEm). (2011). C-34/09 ECJ.Google Scholar
  72. Sanders, A. (2012). Marriage, same-sex partnership, and the German constitution. German Law Journal, 13(8), 911–940.Google Scholar
  73. Sarat, A., & Scheingold, S. (Eds.) (1990). Cause lawyering: Political commitments and professional responsibilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Schiek, D., (in press). Perspectives on social citizenship in the EU. In D. Kochenov, ed. EU citizenship and federalism: The role of rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Schütze, R. (2009). From dual to cooperative federalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Scott, J. (2014). The new EU “Extraterritoriality”. Common Market Law Review, 51, 1343–1380.Google Scholar
  77. Singh. (1992). C-370/90 ECJ.Google Scholar
  78. Somek, A. (2014). Europe: Political, not cosmopolitan. European Law Journal, 20(2), 142–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Stalford, H. (2012). For better, for worse: The relationship between the EU citizenship and the development of cross-border family law. In M. Dougan, N. Nic Shuibhne, & E. Spaventa (Eds.), Empowerment and disempowerment of European citizens (pp. 225–252). Oxford, England: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  80. von Toggenburg, G.N.. (2008). “LGBT” go Luxembourg: On the stance of lesbian gay bisexual and transgender rights before the European court of justice. European Law Reporter, pp. 174–185.Google Scholar
  81. Tryfonidou, A. (2009). Reverse discrimination in EU law. The Hague, The Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  82. Tryfonidou, A. (2015a). Free movement law and the cross-border legal recognition of same-sex relationships: The case for mutual recognition. Columbia Journal of European Law, 21(2), 195–248.Google Scholar
  83. Tryfonidou, A. (2015b). Same-sex marriage: The EU is lagging behind. EU Law Analysis, [Online] 29 June. Retrieved August 24, 2015, from http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.nl/2015/06/same-sex-marriage-eu-is-lagging-behind.html.
  84. Turcescu, L., & Stan, L. (2005). Religion, politics and sexuality in Romania. Europe-Asia Studies, 57(2), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Waaldijk, K., & Bonini-Baraldi, M. (2006). Sexual orientation discrimination in the European Union: National laws and the employment equality directive. The Hague, The Netherlands: T. M. C. Asser Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Yuval-Davis, N. (1997). Gender and nations. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  87. Zippel, K. (2004). Transnational advocacy networks and policy cycles in the European Union: The case of sexual harassment. Social Politics, 11(1), 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uladzislau Belavusau
    • 1
  • Dimitry Kochenov
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of European StudiesUniversiteit van AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Faculty of LawRijksuniversiteit GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations