COVID-19 Resources for Lawyers
Your Host
Lee Rawles

Lee Rawles joined the ABA Journal in 2010 as a web producer. She has also worked for the Winston-Salem...

Episode Notes

Before their successful partnership on Hollingsworth v. Perry, the federal case that overturned California’s anti-same-sex-marriage law, the most prominent case Ted Olson and David Boies had been involved in together was Bush v. Gore. Olson, who argued on behalf of George W. Bush, prevailed over Al Gore, who was represented by Boies. But people who expected that the two would therefore be hostile towards each other were dead wrong.

“I think that’s an unfortunate conception that some people have, that because you’re on opposite sides of a case, you must dislike or disrespect your opponent, or treat the opponent that’s against you in the courtroom with anything less than full civility and full respect,” Olson tells the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles.

In reality, though they occupied opposite ends of the political spectrum, Boies and Olson were good friends. The two attorneys had often talked about working on a case together.

So in 2008, when Olson was approached by a group of Californians looking to overturn Proposition 8, Boies was one of the first attorneys he thought to reach out to. In June 2013, their clients prevailed before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The newly released book Redeeming the Dream: The Case for Marriage Equality is the jointly written account by Boies and Olson of how that was accomplished.

“It was a story that we thought was important to tell,” Boies says. “We thought it was important for lawyers to understand how the case was developed and presented. But we also thought it was important for the general public to understand our plaintiffs; to understand what was at stake; to understand why we took the case; and ultimately, how the case was won.”

Several major LGBT advocacy organizations opposed the legal strategy Boies and Olson decided to take. Boies is quick to acknowledge that opponents of taking the case to the federal courts had their reasons. “Obviously, the people who opposed this, the people who had spent decades in many cases fighting for gay and lesbian rights, knew a lot more about some of these issues than Ted and I did. But we came at it from a different perspective.”

Boies outlines several practical reasons why they decided to go ahead with the litigation. But one reason was more emotional: “We were representing four plaintiffs who wanted to get married. And it’s very hard to tell a client that this is not your time. That there will come a time where you, or your descendants, will have equality, but you can’t enjoy the ability to marry the person that you love. And it’s very hard to tell an individual that, in the interest of a larger strategic judgment, they have got to wait for their constitutional rights to be vindicated.”

In this podcast, Olson and Boies go into more detail about the behind-the-scenes maneuvering that was required to build the case, and they share what’s next for them.

Mentioned in This Episode

Redeeming the Dream: The Case for Marriage Equality by Theodore B. Olson and David Boies

Newsletter

Notify me when there’s a new episode!

Episode Details
Published: August 28, 2014
Podcast: ABA Journal: Modern Law Library
Podcast
ABA Journal: Modern Law Library
ABA Journal: Modern Law Library

ABA Journal: Modern Law Library features top legal authors and their works.

Listen & Subscribe
Recent Episodes
09/09/20
‘Demagogue’ tells the story of Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s rise and fall

Larry Tye takes an in-depth look at Joseph McCarthy's life, in his book 'Demagogue: The Life and Long Shadow of Senator Joe McCarthy'.

08/26/20
6 key numbers that can diagnose the financial health of your law practice

Brooke Lively discusses her book and breaks down the 6 key numbers that will help you understand the financial health of your law practice.

08/12/20
Convicted of a crime that never occurred? It happens all too often, law prof says

Jessica Henry speaks about some of the strange and heart-rending stories she's uncovered and how the legal community can work towards eliminating such injustices.

07/22/20
How well-meaning social reforms created ‘Prison by Any Other Name’

Maya Schenwar and Victoria Law outline the way that well-meaning movements ended up funneling people into environments where they faced even more scrutiny and...

07/15/20
How feminism worsened mass incarceration–and how it can stop

Aya Gruber talks about unintended consequences of feminist criminal law reforms as well as her personal experience as a public defender.

06/24/20
What does police abolition look like?

Alex S. Vitale explains the troubling origins of modern policing, why commonly suggested reforms like training and increased diversity have not been successful, and...