第十四修正案的性别判例

Julie A. Nice
{"title":"第十四修正案的性别判例","authors":"Julie A. Nice","doi":"10.4337/9781786439697.00030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter synthesizes two centuries of women’s exclusion from constitutional protection and describes the judiciary’s inauguration of equal protection in the 1970s. It highlights how the US Supreme Court’s use of middle scrutiny for sex discrimination claims is unpredictable in application and porous to gender prejudice. The chapter dissects the conservative architecture underlying equal protection jurisprudence, which has contributed to its failure to achieve substantive sex equality. It then shows how liberty jurisprudence mirrors equality jurisprudence, for example, by reducing the scrutiny applied to abortion restrictions. Finally, the chapter also explores the myriad ways that equality and liberty interrelate. The author concludes that feminists have always understood constitutional law as a language and the courts as a forum for the ongoing societal dialogue about ending gender subordination.","PeriodicalId":275645,"journal":{"name":"Research Handbook on Feminist Jurisprudence","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The gendered jurisprudence of the Fourteenth Amendment\",\"authors\":\"Julie A. Nice\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/9781786439697.00030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter synthesizes two centuries of women’s exclusion from constitutional protection and describes the judiciary’s inauguration of equal protection in the 1970s. It highlights how the US Supreme Court’s use of middle scrutiny for sex discrimination claims is unpredictable in application and porous to gender prejudice. The chapter dissects the conservative architecture underlying equal protection jurisprudence, which has contributed to its failure to achieve substantive sex equality. It then shows how liberty jurisprudence mirrors equality jurisprudence, for example, by reducing the scrutiny applied to abortion restrictions. Finally, the chapter also explores the myriad ways that equality and liberty interrelate. The author concludes that feminists have always understood constitutional law as a language and the courts as a forum for the ongoing societal dialogue about ending gender subordination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":275645,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Handbook on Feminist Jurisprudence\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Handbook on Feminist Jurisprudence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439697.00030\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Handbook on Feminist Jurisprudence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439697.00030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章综合了两个世纪以来妇女被排除在宪法保护之外的情况,并描述了20世纪70年代司法部门对平等保护的开始。它凸显了美国最高法院在性别歧视诉讼中使用中间审查的做法在应用中是如何不可预测的,并且容易受到性别偏见的影响。这一章剖析了平等保护法理学背后的保守主义架构,这是其未能实现实质性性别平等的原因之一。然后,它展示了自由法理学如何反映平等法理学,例如,通过减少对堕胎限制的审查。最后,本章还探讨了平等与自由相互联系的无数方式。作者的结论是,女权主义者一直把宪法理解为一种语言,把法院理解为结束性别从属的持续社会对话的论坛。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The gendered jurisprudence of the Fourteenth Amendment
This chapter synthesizes two centuries of women’s exclusion from constitutional protection and describes the judiciary’s inauguration of equal protection in the 1970s. It highlights how the US Supreme Court’s use of middle scrutiny for sex discrimination claims is unpredictable in application and porous to gender prejudice. The chapter dissects the conservative architecture underlying equal protection jurisprudence, which has contributed to its failure to achieve substantive sex equality. It then shows how liberty jurisprudence mirrors equality jurisprudence, for example, by reducing the scrutiny applied to abortion restrictions. Finally, the chapter also explores the myriad ways that equality and liberty interrelate. The author concludes that feminists have always understood constitutional law as a language and the courts as a forum for the ongoing societal dialogue about ending gender subordination.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信