What explains the extension of greater rights to traditionally marginalized minorities? This article compares the extension of legal equality to lebian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in Mexico and the United States with a focus on the legal recognition of same-sex relationships. A national-level comparison of gay rights in Mexico and the United States presents a theoretical puzzle: most theories predict that the United States would have more egalitarian policies than Mexico, but in fact, Mexico has provided greater legal equality for LGBT people for a longer time than the United States. A subnational analysis of equal relationship rights in the United States and Mexico provides evidence to support social movement and partisan theories of minority rights. We find that religion plays a different role in Mexico than in the United States. The different findings at the national and subnational levels suggest the importance of subnational comparative analysis in heterogeneous federal systems.
AlterioAna MicaelaNiembro OrtegaRoberto. 2017. La Suprema Corte y el Matrimonio Igualitario en México (The Supreme Court and Marriage Equality in Mexico). Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas.
2.
AminzadeRonald. 2001. Silence and Voice in the Study of Contentious Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AndersenEllen Ann. 2005. Out of the Closets and into the Courts: Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights Litigation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
BarclayScottFisherShauna. 2003. “The States and the Differing Impetus for Divergent Paths on Same-sex Marriage, 1990-2001.” Policy Studies Journal31 (3): 331–52.
6.
BeckNathanielKatzJonathan N.1998. “Taking Time Seriously: Time-series-cross-section Analysis with a Binary Dependent Variable.” American Journal of Political Science42 (4): 1260–88.
7.
BeerCaroline. C.2003. Electoral Competition and Institutional Change in Mexico. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
8.
BeerCaroline. 2016. “La Iglesia Católica y la Igualdad de Género en los Estados Mexicanos (The Catholic Church and Gender Equality in the Mexican States).” In Poderes y democracias: La política subnacional en Mexico, eds. MendéI.LozaN.Mexico: FLACSCO-Mexico and Instituto Electoral del Distrito Federal, 283–302.
9.
BeerCaroline. C.MitchellNell. J.2006. “Comparing Nations and States.” Comparative Political Studies38 (8): 996–1018.
10.
BernsteinMary. 2002. “The Contradictions of Gay Ethnicity: Forging Identity in Vermont.” In Social Movements: Identity, Culture, and the State, eds. MeyerD. S.WhittierN.RobnettB.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 85–104.
11.
BerryFrances Stokes.BerryWilliam. D.1990. “State Lottery Adoptions as Policy Innovations: An Event History Analysis.” The American Political Science Review84 (2): 395–415.
12.
BoehmkeFrederick J.PaulSkinner . “The Determinants of State Policy Innovativeness”. Paper prepared for presentation at the 2011 Midwest Political Science Association Meeting, Chicago, March 31-April 3, 2011.
13.
BryanFrank. M.1981. Politics in the Rural States: People, Parties, and Processes. Boulder: Westview Press.
14.
BryanFrank. M.2004. Real Democracy: The New England Town Meeting and How It Works. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
15.
CampRoderic. Ai. 1997. Crossing Swords: Politics and Religion in Mexico. New York: Oxford University Press.
16.
ClementsBen. 2014. “Partisan Attachments and Attitudes towards Same-sex Marriage in Britain.” Parliamentary Affairs67 (1): 232–44.
17.
de la DehesaRafael. 2010. Queering the Public Sphere in Mexico and Brazil: Sexual Rights Movements in Emerging Democracies. Durham: Duke University Press.
18.
de la DehesaRafael. 2011. “The Road to Same-sex Marriage in Mexico City.” LASA Forum42 (1): 2–4.
19.
DíezJordi. 2010. “The Importance of Policy Frames in Contentious Politics: Mexico’s National Antihomophobia Campaign.” Latin American Research Review45 (1): 33–54.
20.
DíezJordi. 2011. “La trayectoria política del movimiento Lésbico-Gay en México (The Political Trajectory of the Lesbian-Gay Movement in Mexico).” Estudios Sociológicos29 (86): 687–712.
21.
DíezJordi. 2015. The Politics of Gay Marriage in Latin America: Argentina, Chile, and Mexico. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
DorfMichael. C.TarrowS.2014. “Strange Bedfellows: How an Anticipatory Countermovement Brought Same-sex Marriage into the Public Arena.” Law & Social Inquiry39 (2): 449–73.
23.
EllisonChristopher G.AcevedoGabriel A.Ramos-WadaAida I.2011. “Religion and Attitudes toward Same-sex Marriage among U.S. Latinos.” Social Science Quarterly92 (1): 35–56.
24.
EncarnaciónOmar. G. 2011. “Latin America’s Gay Rights Revolution.” Journal of Democracy22 (2): 104–18.
25.
EncarnaciónOmar. G. 2013. “International Influence, Domestic Activism, and Gay Rights in Argentina.” Political Science Quarterly128 (4): 687–716.
26.
FaganPatricia. W.1973. Exiles and Citizens: Spanish Republicans in Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.
27.
GainesN. Susan.GarandJames. C.2010. “Morality, Equality, or Locality: Analyzing the Determinants of Support for Same-sex Marriage.” Political Research Quarterly63 (3): 553–67.
GilardiFabrizioFüglisterKatharinaLuyetStéphane. 2009. “Learning from Others: The Diffusion of Hospital Financing Reforms in OECD Countries.” Comparative Political Studies42 (4): 549–73.
30.
GrayVirginia. 1973. “Innovation in the States: A Diffusion Study.” The American Political Science Review67 (4): 1174–85.
31.
Haider-MarkelDonald. P.2001. “Policy Diffusion as a Geographic Expansion of the Scope of Political Conflict: Same-sex Marriage Bans in the 1990s.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly1 (5): 5–26.
32.
Haider-MarkelDonald. P.MeierK. J.1996. “The Politics of Gay and Lesbian Rights: Expanding the Scope of the Conflict.” The Journal of Politics58 (2): 332–49.
33.
Haider-MarkelDonald. P.MeierK. J.2003. “Legislative Victory, Electoral Uncertainty: Explaining Outcomes in the Battles over Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights.” Review of Policy Research20 (4): 671–90.
34.
HeroRodney. E.TolbertCaroline. J.1996. “A Racial/Ethnic Diversity Interpretation of Politics and Policy in the States of the U.S.” American Journal of Political Science40 (3): 851–71.
35.
HolbrookThomas. M.Van DunkEmily.1993. “Electoral Competition in the American States.” American Political Science Review87:955–62.
36.
HtunMala. 2003. Sex and the State: Abortion, Divorce, and the Family under Latin American Dictatorships and Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
INEGI. 2000. “XII Censo General De Población Y Vivienda. (XII General Census of Population and Housing.” Aguascalientes, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.
38.
INEGI. 2010. “Censo De Población Y Vivienda (Census of Population and Housing).” Aguascalientes, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática.
39.
INEGI. 2011. Panorama de Las Religiones en México 2010 (Panorama of the Religions in Mexico 2010). Aguascalientes, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática, Secretaría de Gobernación.
40.
InglehartRonald. 1997. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
41.
InglehartRonald.NorrisP.2003. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
JohnsonTyler. 2012. “Equality, Morality, and the Impact of Media Framing: Explaining Opposition to Same-sex Marriage and Civil Unions.” Politics & Policy40 (6): 1053–1080.
43.
JonesDale E.SherryDotyCliffordGrammichJames E.HorschRichardHousealMacLynnJohn P.MarcumKenneth M.SanchagrinRichard HTaylor. 2002. “Religious Congregations and Membership in the United States 2000: An Enumeration by Region, State and County Based on Data Reported for 149 Religious Bodies.” Glenmary Research Center: Nashville, TN.
44.
KeyV. O.1964. Politics, Parties, & Pressure Groups. New York: Crowell.
45.
KlatwitterMariekaHammerBrian. 1999. “Spatial and Temporal Diffusion of Local Anti-discrimination Policies for Sexual Orientation.” In Gays and Lesbians in the Democratic Process, eds. RiggleE. D. B.TadlockB. L.New York: Columbia University Press. 22-38.
46.
KollmanKelly. 2007. “Same-sex Unions: The Globalization of an Idea.” International Studies Quarterly51 (2): 329–57.
47.
KranzRachelCusickTim. 2005. Gay Rights. New York: Facts on File.
48.
LaxJeffrey R.PhillipsJustin H.2009. “Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness.” The American Political Science Review103 (3): 367–86.
49.
LockardDuane. 1959. New England State Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
50.
LodolaGermánCorralMargarita. 2010. AmericasBarometer Insights: Support for Same Sex Marriage in Latin America. Number 44. Nashville: Latin American Public Opinion Project.
51.
LozaNicolásMéndezIrma. 2014. Encuesta a expertos en política estatal en México 2001-2012 (Survey of Experts in Mexican State Politics, 2001-2012). ed. PNUD FLACSO, y CONACYT. http://podesualflacso.wordpress.com.
52.
LozanoGenaro. 2010. “Same-sex Relationship Equality in Mexico.” In Same-sex Marriage in the Americas, eds. PiercesonJ.Piatti-CrockerA.SchulenbergS.Lanham: Lexington Books. 129-160.
53.
LozanoGenaro. 2013. “The Battle for Marriage Equality in Mexico, 2001-2011.” In Same-sex Marriage in Latin America: Promise and Resistance, eds. PiercesonJ.Piatti-CrockerA.SchulenbergS.Lanham: Lexington Books, 151–66.
54.
MarsiajJuan. 2006. “Social Movements and Political Parties: Gays, Lesbians, and Travestis and the Struggle for Inclusion in Brazil.” Canadian Journal of Latin America and Caribbean Studies31 (62): 167–96.
55.
MarsiajJuan. 2012. “Federalism, Advocacy Networks, and Sexual Diversity Politics in Brazil.” In Comparative Public Policy in Latin America, eds. DíezJ.FranceschetS.Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 126–49.
56.
McAdamDougMcCarthyJohn D.ZaldMayer N.1996. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
57.
MintromMichaelVergariSandra. 1998. “Policy Networks and Innovation Diffusion: The Case of State Education Reforms.” The Journal of Politics60 (1): 126–48.
58.
MooneyChristopher Z.2000. “The Decline of Federalism and the Rise of Morality-policy Conflict in the United States.” Publius30 (1): 171–88.
59.
MooneyChristopher Z.LeeM.-H.1995. “Legislative Morality in the American States: The Case of Pre-roe Abortion Regulation Reform.” American Journal of Political Science39 (3): 599–627.
60.
Movement Advancement Project. 2017. “Marriage and Relationship Recognition.” http://www.lgbtmap.org/.
61.
MucciaroniGary. 2008. Same Sex, Different Politics: Success and Failure in the Struggles over Gay Rights. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
62.
MuñozMaría L. O.2016. Stand up and Fight: Participatory Indigenismo, Populism, and Mobilization in Mexico, 1970-1984. Tuscon: University of Arizona Press.
NegroniMirka J.2004. “From Movement Demands to Legislation: Organizing in the LGBT Community in Mexico City.” Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services16 (3/4): 207–218.
65.
OglandCurtis P.VeronaA. P.2014. “Religion and the Rainbow Struggle: Does Religion Factor into Attitudes toward Homosexuality and Same-sex Civil Unions in Brazil?”Journal of Homosexuality61 (9): 1334–49.
66.
OlsonLaura R.CadgeWendyHarrisonJames T.2006. “Religion and Public Opinion about Same-sex Marriage.” Social Science Quarterly87 (2): 340–60.
67.
PettinicchioDavid. 2012. “Current Explanations for the Variation in Same-sex Marriage Policies in Western Countries.” Comparative Sociology11 (4): 526–57.
Piatti-CrockerAdriana. 2010. “Constructing Policy Innovation in Argentina: From Gender Quotas to Same-sex Marriage.” In Same-sex Marriage in the Americas: Policy Innovations for Same-sex Relationships, eds. PiercesonJ.Piatti-CrockerA.SchulenbergS.Lanham: Lexington Books, 37–72.
70.
RaysideDavid M.2008. Queer Inclusions, Continental Divisions: Public Recognition of Sexual Diversity in Canada and the United States. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
71.
RimmermanCraig A.WaldKenneth D.WilcoxClyde. 2000. The Politics of Gay Rights. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
72.
RobinsonBeth. 2001. “The Road to Inclusion for Same Sex Couples: Lessons from Vermont.” Seton Hall Constitutional Law Journal11:237–57.
73.
RobinsonBeth. 2009. “Same-sex Marriage in Law and Society: Dartmouth College’s Law Day Program 2009: Introduction.” Vermont Law Review34(231).
74.
SchreiberRebecca Mina. 2008. Cold War Exiles in Mexico: U.S. Dissidents and the Culture of Critical Resistance. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
75.
SchulenbergShawn. 2012. “The Construction and Enactment of Same-sex Marriage in Argentina.” Journal of Human Rights11 (1): 106–25.
76.
SempolDiego. 2013. “The Creation of Civil Partnerships in Uruguay.” In Same-sex Marriage in Latin America: Promise and Resistance, eds. PiercesonJ.Piatti-CrockerA.SchulenbergS.Lanham: Lexington Books, 89–110.
77.
SherkatDarren E.de VriesKylan MattiasCreekStacia. 2010. “Race, Religion, and Opposition to Same-sex Marriage.” Social Science Quarterly91 (1): 80–98.
78.
SmithMiriam. 2007. “Framing Same-sex Marriage in Canada and the United States: Goodridge, Halpern and the National Boundaries of Political Discourse.” Social & Legal Studies16 (1): 5–26.
79.
SnyderRichard. 2001. “Scaling down: The Subnational Comparative Method.” Studies in Comparative International Development36:93–110.
80.
TarrowSidney G.1994. Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Action, and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
81.
TaylorJami K.LewisDaniel C.JacobsmeierMatthew L.DiSarroBrian. 2012. “Content and Complexity in Policy Reinvention and Diffusion: Gay and Transgender-inclusive Laws against Discrimination.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly12 (1): 75–98.
82.
ThomasSusan L.2005. “In Search of a More Perfect Heteroarchy: Vermont, Civil Unions and the Harm of ‘Separate-but-equal’.” Journal of Homosexuality50 (1): 27–51.
83.
TrejoGuillermo. 2009. “Religious Competition and Ethnic Mobilization in Latin America: Why the Catholic Church Promotes Indigenous Movements in Mexico.” American Political Science Review103 (3): 323–42.
84.
van den AkkerHannekevan der PloegRozemarijnScheepersPeer. 2013. “Disapproval of Homosexuality: Comparative Research on Individual and National Determinants of Disapproval of Homosexuality in 20 European Countries.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research25 (1): 64–86.
85.
Velasco MurilloDana. 2016. Urban Indians in a Silver City: Zacatecas, Mexico, 1546-1810. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
86.
WaldKenneth D.ButtonJames W.RienzoBarbara A.1996. “The Politics of Gay Rights in American Communities: Explaining Antidiscrimination Ordinances and Policies.” American Journal of Political Science40 (4): 1152–78.
87.
WalkerJack L.1969. “The Diffusion of Innovations among the American States.” The American Political Science Review63 (3): 880–99.
88.
WhiteheadAndrew L.2010. “Sacred Rites and Civil Rights: Religion’s Effect on Attitudes toward Same-sex Unions and the Perceived Cause of Homosexuality.” Social Science Quarterly91 (1): 63–79.
89.
WhiteheadAndrew L.PerrySamuel L.2015. “A More Perfect Union? Christian Nationalism and Support for Same-sex Unions.” Sociological Perspectives58 (3): 422–40.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
