This study examines the legal discrimination suffered in the United States by children born out of wedlock. The authors analyze the Supreme Court's equal protection birth status decisions from 1968 to 1992 and, in a case-by-case analysis, trace the development of the Court's rulings, examine the pattern of equal protection tests utilized, and evaluate the consistency of the Court's position. In addition, the work examines the related discrimination suffered by the families of non-marital children, especially single parents and alternative family units, and concludes that it is impossible to gain full equality for children born out of wedlock unless equality is also gained for their family unit. Toward these ends, the authors suggest a feminist jurisprudence as a methodology for addressing the underlying issue at the crux of birth status distinctions.

Zingo examines the conflicts inherent in restricting hate speech--the controversial speech codes--and freedom of expression as it affects the lives and rights of gay men and lesbians. While much has been written on speech code restrictions having to do with race and gender, both in the press and academic literature, few scholars or serious writers before Zingo have focused on the necessity and/or sagacity of instituting legal sanctions on hate speech based on sexual orientation/preference.

After providing an overview of the social and legal condition of outsiders, Zingo examines how the law has evolved on the issues of free speech, equality jurisprudence, and the hate speech controversy. She then analyzes these issues in the context of sexual identity, equality, and non-discrimination and concludes with a review of the Supreme Court's rulings on hate speech regulation. Throughout she discusses the extent to which such speech codes adequately protect lesbians and gay men in American society. A major study for students and scholars of Constitutional Law and policymakers and others concerned with gay and lesbian issues and free speech.