布伦南法官的性别法学

R. Korzec
{"title":"布伦南法官的性别法学","authors":"R. Korzec","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1420159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During his thirty-four year tenure on the Supreme Court, Justice William Joseph Brennan, Jr. demonstrated unparalleled sensitivity to the protection of individual rights. Justice Brennan's landmark opinions included Baker v. Carr, Goldberg v. Kelly, and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. before Brennan, Supreme Court jurisprudence exalted judicial passivity by employing techniques for avoiding constitutional issues, such as abstention, comity, exhaustion of remedies and the political question doctrine.Against this background, Brennan became an active judicial voice in a series of innovative landmark cases, including decisions requiring federal officials to pay damages for violation of citizens' constitutional rights; authorizing federal courts to issue injunctions forbidding state court prosecutions under laws violating the First Amendment; and permitting congressional employees to sue members of Congress for discriminatory treatment.However, less attention has been focused on Justice Brennan's dramatic impact on the Supreme Court's gender jurisprudence. More than any other member of the Court, Justice Brennan recognized the complexity and pervasiveness of sex discrimination and its costs to society as a whole. Brennan's opinions recognized that sex differentiation is largely cultural in origin, rather than based on \"real\" gender differences. As a result, Justice Brennan created a truly independent gender jurisprudence, eventually emerging as the architect of the Supreme Court's contemporary test for evaluating claims of sex-based discrimination.","PeriodicalId":80399,"journal":{"name":"Akron law review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Justice Brennan's Gender Jurisprudence\",\"authors\":\"R. Korzec\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1420159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During his thirty-four year tenure on the Supreme Court, Justice William Joseph Brennan, Jr. demonstrated unparalleled sensitivity to the protection of individual rights. Justice Brennan's landmark opinions included Baker v. Carr, Goldberg v. Kelly, and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. before Brennan, Supreme Court jurisprudence exalted judicial passivity by employing techniques for avoiding constitutional issues, such as abstention, comity, exhaustion of remedies and the political question doctrine.Against this background, Brennan became an active judicial voice in a series of innovative landmark cases, including decisions requiring federal officials to pay damages for violation of citizens' constitutional rights; authorizing federal courts to issue injunctions forbidding state court prosecutions under laws violating the First Amendment; and permitting congressional employees to sue members of Congress for discriminatory treatment.However, less attention has been focused on Justice Brennan's dramatic impact on the Supreme Court's gender jurisprudence. More than any other member of the Court, Justice Brennan recognized the complexity and pervasiveness of sex discrimination and its costs to society as a whole. Brennan's opinions recognized that sex differentiation is largely cultural in origin, rather than based on \\\"real\\\" gender differences. As a result, Justice Brennan created a truly independent gender jurisprudence, eventually emerging as the architect of the Supreme Court's contemporary test for evaluating claims of sex-based discrimination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":80399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Akron law review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1991-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Akron law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1420159\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Akron law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1420159","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

小威廉·约瑟夫·布伦南法官在最高法院的34年任期内,对保护个人权利表现出了无与伦比的敏感。布伦南大法官具有里程碑意义的意见包括贝克诉卡尔案、戈德堡诉凯利案和纽约时报公司诉沙利文案。在布伦南之前,最高法院的法理学通过使用回避宪法问题的技巧,如弃权、礼让、用尽救济和政治问题原则,来提升司法的被动性。在这种背景下,布伦南在一系列具有创新意义的案件中成为积极的司法声音,包括要求联邦官员为侵犯公民宪法权利支付损害赔偿金的判决;授权联邦法院发布禁令,禁止州法院根据违反第一修正案的法律提起诉讼;并允许国会雇员起诉国会议员的歧视待遇。然而,很少有人关注布伦南大法官对最高法院性别判例的巨大影响。布伦南法官比最高法院的任何其他法官都更清楚地认识到性别歧视的复杂性和普遍性,以及它给整个社会带来的代价。布伦南的观点承认,性别差异在很大程度上源于文化,而不是基于“真正的”性别差异。结果,布伦南大法官创造了一个真正独立的性别法理学,最终成为最高法院当代评估性别歧视主张的测试的设计师。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Justice Brennan's Gender Jurisprudence
During his thirty-four year tenure on the Supreme Court, Justice William Joseph Brennan, Jr. demonstrated unparalleled sensitivity to the protection of individual rights. Justice Brennan's landmark opinions included Baker v. Carr, Goldberg v. Kelly, and New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. before Brennan, Supreme Court jurisprudence exalted judicial passivity by employing techniques for avoiding constitutional issues, such as abstention, comity, exhaustion of remedies and the political question doctrine.Against this background, Brennan became an active judicial voice in a series of innovative landmark cases, including decisions requiring federal officials to pay damages for violation of citizens' constitutional rights; authorizing federal courts to issue injunctions forbidding state court prosecutions under laws violating the First Amendment; and permitting congressional employees to sue members of Congress for discriminatory treatment.However, less attention has been focused on Justice Brennan's dramatic impact on the Supreme Court's gender jurisprudence. More than any other member of the Court, Justice Brennan recognized the complexity and pervasiveness of sex discrimination and its costs to society as a whole. Brennan's opinions recognized that sex differentiation is largely cultural in origin, rather than based on "real" gender differences. As a result, Justice Brennan created a truly independent gender jurisprudence, eventually emerging as the architect of the Supreme Court's contemporary test for evaluating claims of sex-based discrimination.
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
期刊最新文献
Risk Taking and Rights Balancing in Intellectual Property Law On Individual Participation within Mass Litigation: The Case of the Fairness Hearing Dissecting the ABA Texas Capital Punishment Assessment Report of 2013: Death and Texas, a Surprising Improvement The (Re)newed Barrier to Access to Medication: Data Exclusivity Physical Attractiveness and Femininity: Helpful or Hurtful for Female Attorneys
×
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