Women’s Legal and Constitutional Rights

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Science Pub Date : 2019-11-26 DOI:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0297
Kathleen Sullivan
{"title":"Women’s Legal and Constitutional Rights","authors":"Kathleen Sullivan","doi":"10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The right to vote, equal protection under the law, and the right of privacy are the primary constitutional provisions that are pertinent to women as women. Formal recognition of these rights has failed to achieve full equality for women in the United States, however. The critical social and institutional analyses provided by political scientists can explain the failure of women’s rights to be realized. Adjudication of rights can be found in Supreme Court doctrine, but political scientists routinely look beyond the courts to consider that rights are political in their making, their operation, and their reception. Formal constitutional provisions were the product of social movements and political organization. The social hierarchies that impeded coalitions likewise inflected those victories with ongoing inequality between women, as well as inequality between men and women. Once achieved, those rights were shaped by ongoing legal mobilization, either to expand or to limit their reach. Even where the legal system legitimately sought to protect women’s rights, inadvertent institutional arrangements and practices have served to reproduce conditions of inequality. State-building and policy, then, are important in understanding the lived experience of rights. Finally, rights alone are unlikely to be honored if women lack the standing to be considered as legitimate exercisers of those rights. For that reason, scholars refer to rights in terms of citizenship, in which rights are protected and the polity recognizes the rights-holder as worthy of the claim.","PeriodicalId":20275,"journal":{"name":"Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0297","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The right to vote, equal protection under the law, and the right of privacy are the primary constitutional provisions that are pertinent to women as women. Formal recognition of these rights has failed to achieve full equality for women in the United States, however. The critical social and institutional analyses provided by political scientists can explain the failure of women’s rights to be realized. Adjudication of rights can be found in Supreme Court doctrine, but political scientists routinely look beyond the courts to consider that rights are political in their making, their operation, and their reception. Formal constitutional provisions were the product of social movements and political organization. The social hierarchies that impeded coalitions likewise inflected those victories with ongoing inequality between women, as well as inequality between men and women. Once achieved, those rights were shaped by ongoing legal mobilization, either to expand or to limit their reach. Even where the legal system legitimately sought to protect women’s rights, inadvertent institutional arrangements and practices have served to reproduce conditions of inequality. State-building and policy, then, are important in understanding the lived experience of rights. Finally, rights alone are unlikely to be honored if women lack the standing to be considered as legitimate exercisers of those rights. For that reason, scholars refer to rights in terms of citizenship, in which rights are protected and the polity recognizes the rights-holder as worthy of the claim.
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
妇女的法律和宪法权利
选举权、法律平等保护和隐私权是与妇女有关的主要宪法条款。然而,对这些权利的正式承认未能在美国实现妇女的完全平等。政治学家提供的批判性社会和体制分析可以解释妇女权利未能实现的原因。对权利的裁决可以在最高法院的学说中找到,但政治学家通常会超越法院,认为权利在产生、运作和接受方面都是政治性的。正式的宪法条款是社会运动和政治组织的产物。阻碍联盟的社会等级制度同样影响了这些胜利,导致妇女之间持续存在不平等,以及男女之间的不平等。一旦实现了这些权利,就通过不断的法律动员来塑造这些权利,以扩大或限制其影响范围。即使在法律制度合法寻求保护妇女权利的地方,无意中的制度安排和做法也助长了不平等的状况。因此,国家建设和政策对于理解权利的生活经历非常重要。最后,如果妇女缺乏被视为合法行使这些权利的资格,那么这些权利本身就不太可能得到尊重。出于这个原因,学者们从公民身份的角度来看待权利,在公民身份中,权利受到保护,政体承认权利持有人值得主张。
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
Political Science
Political Science POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Political Science publishes high quality original scholarly works in the broad field of political science. Submission of articles with a regional focus on New Zealand and the Asia-Pacific is particularly encouraged, but content is not limited to this focus. Contributions are invited from across the political science discipline, including from the fields of international relations, comparative politics, political theory and public administration. Proposals for collections of articles on a common theme or debate to be published as special issues are welcome, as well as individual submissions.
期刊最新文献
Sloppy targeting of Chinese voters in the 2020 New Zealand general election: an exploration of National and Labour’s targeting strategies Leaderless Movements? Rethinking Leaders, Spontaneity, and Organisation-Ness The Realpolitik of small states: explaining New Zealand’s silence on human rights violations in Turkey (Türkiye) and China Identity and institutional thickening of Asia and the Pacific: narrating regional belonging in the foreign policy of Indonesia Referendum campaign financing by political parties: the case of the United Kingdom
×
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