Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Feminism (5)
- Feminist judgments (4)
- Gender (2)
- Advocacy (1)
- Alternative judgments (1)
-
- Civil Rights (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Court opinions (1)
- Employment Law (1)
- Equal justice (1)
- Feminist judgments; judicial decision-making; legal reasoning; feminism; education; classroom; pedagogy; teaching (1)
- Feminist theory (1)
- Feminists judgments project (1)
- Intersectionality (1)
- Judges (1)
- Judicial decision-making (1)
- Judicial opinions (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- LGBTQIA+ (1)
- Language (1)
- Legal scholarship (1)
- Motherhood (1)
- Pedagogy (1)
- Race (1)
- Sexual harassment (1)
- Sexuality (1)
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Teaching With Feminist Judgments: A Global Conversation, Bridget J. Crawford, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, Gabrielle Appleby, Susan Frelich Appleton, Ross Astoria, Sharon Cowan, Rosalind Dixon, J. Troy Lavers, Andrea L. Mcardle, Elisabeth Mcdonald, Teri A. Mcmurtry-Chubb, Vanessa E. Munro, Pamela A. Wilkins
Teaching With Feminist Judgments: A Global Conversation, Bridget J. Crawford, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, Gabrielle Appleby, Susan Frelich Appleton, Ross Astoria, Sharon Cowan, Rosalind Dixon, J. Troy Lavers, Andrea L. Mcardle, Elisabeth Mcdonald, Teri A. Mcmurtry-Chubb, Vanessa E. Munro, Pamela A. Wilkins
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This conversational-style essay is an exchange among fourteen professors—representing thirteen universities across five countries—with experience teaching with feminist judgments. Feminist judgments are ‘shadow’ court decisions rewritten from a feminist perspective, using only the precedent in effect and the facts known at the time of the original decision. Scholars in Canada, England, the U.S., Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Ireland, India, and Mexico have published (or are currently producing) written collections of feminist judgments that demonstrate how feminist perspectives could have changed the legal reasoning or outcome (or both) in important legal cases. This essay begins to explore the vast pedagogical potential …
Dehumanization 'Because Of Sex': The Multiaxial Approach To The Title Vii Rights Of Sexual Minorities, Shirley Lin
Dehumanization 'Because Of Sex': The Multiaxial Approach To The Title Vii Rights Of Sexual Minorities, Shirley Lin
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
Although Title VII prohibits discrimination against any employee “because of such individual’s . . . sex,” legal commentators have not yet accurately appraised Title VII’s trait and causation requirements embodied in that phrase. Since 2015, most courts assessing the sex discrimination claims of LGBT employees began to intentionally analyze “sex” as a trait using social-construction evidence, and evaluated separately whether the discriminatory motive caused the workplace harm. Responding to what this Article terms a “doctrinal correction” to causation within this groundswell of decisions, the Supreme Court recently issued an “expansive” and “sweeping” reformulation of but-for causation in Bostock v. Clayton …
Learning From Feminist Judgments: Lessons In Language And Advocacy, Bridget J. Crawford, Linda L. Berger, Kathryn M. Stanchi
Learning From Feminist Judgments: Lessons In Language And Advocacy, Bridget J. Crawford, Linda L. Berger, Kathryn M. Stanchi
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This essay offers a perspective-shifting approach to meeting some of our pedagogical goals in law school: the study of re-imagined judicial decisions. Our thesis is that exposing students to “alternative judgments”—opinions that have been rewritten by authors who look at the law and the facts differently—will help students develop a more realistic and nuanced view of judicial decision-making: one that is aspirational and based in the real world, and one that allows them to envision their futures as successful advocates. The “alternative judgments” of the feminist judgments projects can enrich the law-school experience in multiple ways. First, seeing a written …
Feminist Judging Matters: How Feminist Theory And Methods Affect The Process Of Judgment, Bridget J. Crawford
Feminist Judging Matters: How Feminist Theory And Methods Affect The Process Of Judgment, Bridget J. Crawford
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
The word “feminism” means different things to its many supporters (and undoubtedly, to its detractors). For some, it refers to the historic struggle: first to realize the right of women to vote and then to eliminate explicit discrimination against women from the nation's laws. For others, it is a political movement, the purpose of which is to raise awareness about and to overcome past and present oppression faced by women. For still others, it is a philosophy--a system of thought--and a community of belief centering on attaining political, social, and economic equality for women, men, and people of any gender. …
How Is Sex Harassment Discriminatory?, Noa Ben-Asher
How Is Sex Harassment Discriminatory?, Noa Ben-Asher
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
What is sexual harassment, and what is its actual harm? Since the 1980s, these two questions have perplexed lawmakers, policymakers, feminists, and the public. Today, with the rise of #MeToo, and with increased national attention to Title IX claims regarding sexual violence on college campuses, these questions are once again in the spotlight. As some commentators have observed, in the last several years lawmakers and policymakers have been increasingly influenced by a feminist antisubordination approach to sexual harassment and assault. This growing influence is currently reflected in more strict standards of consent (“affirmative consent”) to sex, in higher procedural and …
Rewriting Judicial Opinions And The Feminist Scholarly Project, Bridget J. Crawford
Rewriting Judicial Opinions And The Feminist Scholarly Project, Bridget J. Crawford
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In 1995, the authors of a law review article examining “feminist judging” focused on the existing social science data concerning women judges and compared the voting records and opinions of the only female Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O'Connor. Based on this review, the authors concluded that appointing more women as judges would make little difference to judicial outcomes or processes. The authors accused those who advocated for more women on the bench of having a hidden feminist agenda and bluntly concluded that “[b]y any measure, feminist judges fit very uneasily in most …
Using Feminist Theory To Advance Equal Justice Under Law, Bridget J. Crawford
Using Feminist Theory To Advance Equal Justice Under Law, Bridget J. Crawford
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
This essay provides an overview of the purposes, themes and scholarly methodologies evidenced at the October 2016 conference, The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project: Writing the Law, Rewriting the Future, a two-day conference hosted by the Center for Constitutional Law at the University of Akron School of Law. This essay provides some of the background to the development of the path-breaking book, Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court (Cambridge University Press, 2016). It also focuses attention on the importance of diversity on the bench, with a particular need for judges who understand or experience the intersecting relationships …
Social Factoring The Numbers With Assisted Reproduction, Bridget J. Crawford
Social Factoring The Numbers With Assisted Reproduction, Bridget J. Crawford
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
In late winter 2009, the airwaves came alive with stories about Nadya Suleman, the California mother who gave birth to octuplets conceived via assisted reproductive technology. Nadya Suleman and her octuplets are the vehicles through which Americans express their anxiety about race, class and gender. Expressions of concern for the health of children, the mother’s well-being, the future of reproductive medicine or the financial drain on taxpayers barely conceal deep impulses towards racism, sexism and classism. It is true that the public has had a longstanding fascination with multiple births and with large families. This is evidenced by a long …