Tracy's Discourse, identity, and social change in the marriage equality debates provides an understanding of the social implications of America's same-sex marriage legal decisions. The book begins with a US legal system overview, purposes of state supreme-court proceedings, and a history of same-sex couples’ legal rights.
The book then outlines state supreme-court discourse by analyzing three early American cases dealing with the issue of same-sex marriage—Hernandez v. Robles (2006), Lewis v. Harris (2006), and Andersen v. King County (2006). Tracy recaps interviews with state justices, providing analyses regarding their conflicting courtroom representation schemas, as well as an oral argument explanation. Providing in-depth breakdowns within the court room, the author outlines the purpose of oral argument. She pointedly distinguishes judges from attorneys by highlighting markers in each group's courtroom speech. She relies on these markers to highlight differences in not only identity change, but also speech variance between citizens and legal professionals; she divides these two groups further, delving into specific linguistic resources for the ‘pro’ and ‘con’ sides of the marriage debate for each.
Specifically concentrating on the American identity transformation between 2003 and 2013, Tracy investigates discourse and identify transformation in America by examining legal scenarios where same-sex couples were seeking marriage authorization. She mentions a semantic shift in the word couple, and the aspiration to remove the lexical item's heterosexuality component. Additionally, she notes that plaintiff attorneys, defense attorneys, and judges all differ in chosen reference terms for same-sex couples—some chose homosexual, others gay or lesbian, and others same-sex. Pulling from news sources that also discuss terminological modification, Tracy explains the term homosexual has become negatively connoted, and the term gay is now preferred for referring to this group (the author includes a LexisNexis analysis to illustrate language change within US newspaper and wire services). According to Tracy, an important transformation is the view of homosexuals as people with a mental illness or people whose behavior needed correcting to gay people being a protected class of American citizens of the ‘unfairly-discriminated-against’ type.
Transitioning to an analysis/discussion on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) of 1996, which stipulated that marriage was to be regarded by the federal government as legally beneficial only if between a man and a woman, the author details states’ spokespersons’ linguistic material implemented to further their arguments for being either for or against DOMA.
Tracy concludes by highlighting the vast difference in American ideals regarding gays and lesbians over ten years: a group of American citizens that was originally considered a socially deviant group has become a legitimate category of American citizen to be protected by its government—a transition highlighted by the overturning of DOMA in 2013—and the federal government's authorization of same-sex marriage in 2015.
This book, with its in-depth discourse analyses and overview of the US legal system, may prove useful to various audiences: sociolinguists interested in social justice, law students wishing to place emphasis on human rights, students in methodology coursework hoping to better understand discourse analysis, or anyone wishing to investigate American identity and how legal judgments reflect the country's identity transformations.
