Document Type
Working Paper
Publication Date
2008
Center/Program
Center for Gender & Sexuality Law
Center/Program
Center for Contract and Economic Organization
Abstract
This article examines the difficulties associated with identity-based arguments in litigation. In particular, the article considers the ways in which anti-essentialist and social constructionist framings of identity clash with judicial preferences for fixed identity categories. I review cases in which courts have addressed anti-essentialist and social constructionist arguments (both positively and negatively) and offer preliminary hypotheses to explain the limits on courts' willingness to accept these types of arguments
Recommended Citation
Suzanne B. Goldberg,
Social Justice Movements and LatCrit Community: On Making Social Constructionist and Anti-Essentialist Arguments in Court,
Oregon Law Review, Vol. 81, 2002
(2008).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1522
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Law and Society Commons, Sexuality and the Law Commons