Liberal-democratic norms under contestation: Norm relations and their decoupling in the US Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion

IF 0.8 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Global Constitutionalism Pub Date : 2024-04-22 DOI:10.1017/s2045381724000042
Janne Mende
{"title":"Liberal-democratic norms under contestation: Norm relations and their decoupling in the US Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion","authors":"Janne Mende","doi":"10.1017/s2045381724000042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article studies the contestation of liberal-democratic norms from within the liberal international order (LIO), focusing on the case of abortion rights. The US Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion, central to both domestic and global debates, provide a compelling case study of how two opposing sides may invoke the same norms, rather than presenting a case of norm collision or co-optation. In contrast to the binary pro-choice versus anti-abortionist framing, this article shows that both sides invoke liberal-democratic norms, but differ in how they relate the norms to each other and how they interrupt established norm relations. Against this background, the article introduces the concept of norm decoupling, highlighting how norm entrepreneurs isolate certain norms from hitherto related norms. This process contributes to a more subtle backsliding of the LIO, particularly by decoupling majority votes from other democratic, substantial norms, and by decoupling liberal-democratic norms from their gendered dimensions. Norm decoupling thus explains diverging interpretations of shared norms within the same context. This advances our understanding of norm contestation and interpretation, shedding light on how liberal-democratic norms subtly erode from within the LIO.","PeriodicalId":37136,"journal":{"name":"Global Constitutionalism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Constitutionalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s2045381724000042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article studies the contestation of liberal-democratic norms from within the liberal international order (LIO), focusing on the case of abortion rights. The US Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion, central to both domestic and global debates, provide a compelling case study of how two opposing sides may invoke the same norms, rather than presenting a case of norm collision or co-optation. In contrast to the binary pro-choice versus anti-abortionist framing, this article shows that both sides invoke liberal-democratic norms, but differ in how they relate the norms to each other and how they interrupt established norm relations. Against this background, the article introduces the concept of norm decoupling, highlighting how norm entrepreneurs isolate certain norms from hitherto related norms. This process contributes to a more subtle backsliding of the LIO, particularly by decoupling majority votes from other democratic, substantial norms, and by decoupling liberal-democratic norms from their gendered dimensions. Norm decoupling thus explains diverging interpretations of shared norms within the same context. This advances our understanding of norm contestation and interpretation, shedding light on how liberal-democratic norms subtly erode from within the LIO.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
受到质疑的自由民主准则:美国最高法院关于堕胎的裁决中的规范关系及其脱钩
本文以堕胎权为案例,研究了自由民主准则在自由国际秩序(LIO)中的争论。美国最高法院关于堕胎的裁决是国内和全球辩论的核心,它提供了一个令人信服的案例研究,说明对立双方如何援引相同的规范,而不是提出规范碰撞或共同采纳的案例。与支持堕胎与反对堕胎的二元对立框架不同,本文表明,双方都援引了自由民主准则,但在如何将准则相互联系以及如何中断既定准则关系方面存在差异。在此背景下,文章引入了 "规范脱钩"(norm decoupling)的概念,强调了规范制定者如何将某些规范从迄今为止相关的规范中分离出来。这一过程导致了 LIO 更微妙的倒退,特别是通过将多数票与其他民主、实质性规范脱钩,以及将自由民主规范与其性别维度脱钩。因此,规范脱钩解释了在同一背景下对共同规范的不同解释。这推进了我们对规范争论和解释的理解,揭示了自由民主规范是如何从 LIO 内部微妙地侵蚀的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Global Constitutionalism
Global Constitutionalism Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
Liberal-democratic norms under contestation: Norm relations and their decoupling in the US Supreme Court’s decisions on abortion Comparative political process theory II Constitutionalizing dissent: The universe of opposition rules in African constitutions A theory of plural constituent power for federal systems A constitutional reflector? Assessing societal and digital constitutionalism in Meta’s Oversight Board
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1