5 CASE TWO: Reversals of Negatiave Body-Law in the United Statesглава из книги
Аннотация: IntroductionIf the events in Indiana in 1907 and in Norway in 1934 represent one set of social norm inclusion into legal norms, can we find an antithetical set of events in order to compare them with Case One, in order to test my theories in that case?In other words can we find the "worst" and the "best" examples of body-law -or at least two very different examples -that the United States and Norway have to offer?Can we find a moment when the intersubjective categories in Case One changed configurations and/or gained in strength so that the "strong we" and the "weak we" occupied significantly different societal positions?Or, as Bourdieu might have asked, can we find a time when the "double naturalization" of bodies changed, when the "silent and invisible agreement between social structures and mental structures" changed so that the "law of the social body" was not converted into the "law of the physical body"?686In the United States, the legal discourse that was ultimately linked with the idea that, within the realm of married life, heterosexual couples could legally use birth control was the discourse of "privacy" articulated in the Supreme Court case of Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).Griswold stood on a socio-legal foundation consisting of a number of failed legal cases as well as various political strategies by activists, and strategic framings that stretched back to the turn of the century.But after Griswold was decided, it would take only eight years before the right to reproductive privacy for married couples would develop into the right to an abortion for any woman, pregnant less than 12 weeks, as outlined in Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113 (1973).However, during the eight years between Griswold and Roe the concept of privacy would itself undergo a metamorphosis, developing into the framing discourse of "choice."687The idea of "choice" would thereafter blossom, despite the fact that legal precedents undergirding Roe would undergo a persistent battering, and reduction, that not only contorted the common law tradition of stare decisis688 but also brought 686 Ibid.687 Most recently, the "right to choose" has been used quite effectively by advertising agencies to encourage consumerist activity.Money, power and privilege equate to "choice"; the U.S.S.C. has even equated "money" as a form of "speech."Please see Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).This development -among others -has called into question the use of this strategy among women's groups as well as in legal and political philosophy circles.688 The Latin phrase stare decisi means, literally, "the decision."It means the holding in a case.In practice, it means that holdings in different cases, each based on a different set of facts, should be
Год издания: 2014
Авторы: Christine M. Hassenstab
Ключевые слова: Law in Society and Culture, Critical Theory and Philosophy, German Social Sciences and History
Открытый доступ: bronze
Страницы: 150–201