(When) Are Rights Wrong? Rights Discourses and Indeterminacy in Gay and Lesbian Parents’Custody Cases

This paper examines the paradoxical and problematic position of rights discourses in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) parents'custody and adoption cases. In it, I analyze the ways in which different types of rights are framed by the litigants and, alternatively, by the judges, as well as how the same constitutional rights (e.g., the right to privacy) are often deployed both in defense of and in opposition to gay /lesbian parents. An in-depth analysis of judicial decisions over a 50-year period and interviews with key family law players reveal the indeterminacy and therefore complexity of rights as a strategy and a discourse in the family law context. Consistent throughout this analysis are the problematic intersection of the collective and the individual in rights-based claims, and evidence of the distinct nature of LGBT rights claims as revolutionary in both their bases and their implications. The analysis confirms in some ways, but also contradicts and complicates many assertions of the "rights critique" of the past two decades. It also suggests a more complex and less dichotomous relationship between rights, status, and contract.     

In the Name of Equal Rights: "Special" Rights and the Politics of Resentment in Post–Civil Rights America

This article explores the character of conservative legal activism in post–civil rights America, arguing that this activism is motivated by two related factors: (1) resentment over the increased political participation of historically marginalized Americans and (2) principled allegations that these historically marginalized Americans are making illegitimate claims for "special," not equal, rights. I argue that the allegation of special rights is tied to the activists' resentment in multiple and complex ways. On the one hand, the allegation that the rights claims of the historically marginalized are illegitimate claims for special rights is itself an expression of resentment. Like arguments that oppose redistributive social change by relying upon discourses of color blindness, states' rights, evangelical Christianity, and community harmony, special rights talk channels resentment into recognizable and intelligible forms. But, on the other hand, the use of special rights talk is not simply cover for an underlying, fully formed resentment. Instead, the allegation of special rights propels and amplifies activists' resentment, transforming it from one that is based primarily upon competing self-interests into one that is concerned with values, morality, and national identity. Special rights talk thus partially constitutes resentment; it hardens the resolve of opponents of redistributive social change, encouraging them to understand themselves as defenders not only of their own self-interests but also, primarily even, as defenders of the core American values and ideals that are promoted by equal rights and assaulted by special rights. Thus convinced that their opposition is authorized by American tradition, conservative legal activists redouble their counter-mobilization efforts, leading to an exacerbation of already tense conflicts. A case study of the nationwide anti-treaty-rights movement grounds this analysis.     

Parliamentary Consociationalism in Lebanon: Equal Citizenry vs. Quotated Confessionalism

This article sheds light on the governance dilemma in a deeply divided post-conflict Lebanese sectarian society undergoing democratic transition. It assesses consociational democracy as a working model institutionalised by Lebanon in light of the country's composition of multiple religious minorities. In particular, it focuses on the political forces shaping the current Lebanese National Assembly (parliament) within the confessional structure and analyses the prospect and impasses confronting the development of a stable and representative assembly. Analysis of the Lebanese parliament is made in light of five assessment areas identified as fundamental for the emergence of a stable democratic institution: political will and domestic support, representation, lawmaking, oversight, and management and infrastructure. After revealing the deep-rooted deficiency of quota-based confessional representation, the article provides institutional transitional reform recommendations that could increase the likelihood for the legislature to better fulfil the critical functions of representation, oversight, and lawmaking vital for democratic transition. The realisation of consociational democracy in Lebanon, the article argues, would require the eventual adoption of proportional representation as a means of moving the country from a ‘confessionally quotated’ to ‘equal citizenry’ based representation.     

Framing Henry Ford's War: Representation,Speech, and the New Civil Rights History

Woeste, Victoria Saker. 2012 . Henry Ford's War on Jews and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. In this essay, I respond to three readers of my book, Henry Ford's War and the Legal Battle Against Hate Speech, by embracing the opportunity to reconsider the book's theoretical and historiographical frames. I synthesize the contributions that Clyde Spillenger, Carroll Seron, and Aviam Soifer make in their deep readings of the book and respond to their criticisms. I then place the book into a new interpretive frame that is emerging in the field of the “new civil rights history,” as it is now being conceptualized in the work of Risa Goluboff, Kenneth Mack, Tomiko Brown‐Nagin, and others writing on civil rights advocacy in the twentieth‐century United States.     

债权平等：逻辑、风险与政策

行为人对自己的行为后果承担无限责任是私法自治的应有之义。债务人的无限责任决定了其责任财产在时空上的开放性,须以现有或将来取得的一切财产清偿债务,是债权平等的直接理论基础。债权优先权之所以被认为突破了债权平等,源于债务人的无限责任被人为地切割为有限责任并在此基础上推论的结果。除破产清算程序中的债权顺位受偿突破了债权平等外,实证法上的债权优先权的规定,是建立在债权平等基础上的,或为行使债权权利,或为保值增值责任财产,或为防范债权风险所作的制度安排。风险性是债权的固有属性。作为债务人之自然人死亡或破产是将其承担的无限责任转化为有限责任,意味着债权人的债权风险实现或部分实现,债权人就剩余财产(遗产)按债权比例受偿,实现了债权平等。未获受偿或圆满受偿的债权人承受该损失是债权风险实现所致,与债权平等无关。     

On State, Identity and Rights: Putting Identity First

The paper considers the nature of the state understood as the political unity articulated on the basis of a collective identity which provides the state with its capacity to make decisions. The foremost decision of the state to protect and defend this identity is the source of its authority to enforce laws. Collective identity thus represents an object of special interest, unlike both ??political?? interests (Millian other-regarding acts) and private interests (Millian self-regarding acts). The validation of laws through this special interest is a necessary condition for both of these latter kinds of interests to materialize. Hence, unlike the Millian thesis of two different kinds of interests (self- and other-regarding), here we take that there are three types or spheres of interests. Any conception of rights, then, will cover a subset of interests found in the domains of all of those three types of interests: in the domain of political interest the issue concerns selection among competing sets of legitimate interests, within the domain of private interests the point is to discern those that will be protected by law, while the third type of interests, the object of which is a unique collective identity and its defining specificity, represents an overarching interest that is embedded in any legitimate collective concern. In this scheme, well-suited for democratic theory, the majority/minority discourse is a matter of distinguishing which particular set of legitimate interests is chosen to be dominant (e.g., which political party is in power) and which ones are waiting for the opportunity to achieve their transformation from minority (opposition) to majority (i. e. government). If, however, there is no well-defined collective identity, minorities acquire a new meaning. Rather than being possible future majorities, they form a nucleus of competing collective identities with, sometimes hopeless but still alive, aspirations to sovereignty. Thus they become sources of likely conflicts that may go well beyond political controversies.     

Displacing Marginalized Bodies: How Human Rights Discourses Function in the Law and in Communities

In this article, we examine disability and eugenics discourses and the ways they function in spaces where vulnerable persons have been historically excluded by the state and blamed for their own “immiseration.” We ask how queer theories of repudiation, abjection, and vulnerability lend insight into the ways that people with intellectual disabilities are discursively located outside normative discourses of home, care, and quality of life, and whether these discourses shifted to serve this vulnerable population when historically the very places in question repudiated them, infringed on their human rights, and questioned their sexuality. To address these questions, we focus on the recent and impending closures of Virginia’s Training Centers, residential institutions for persons with intellectual disabilities now scheduled for staggered closures before 2020.     

Assessing the Behavior and Needs of Veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury in Washington State Prisons: Establishing a Foundation for Policy,Practice, and Education

Abstract

A growing awareness of justice-involved veterans is revealing how little is known about this population, to what extent they have experienced a traumatic brain injury (TBI), and how this may relate to institutional behavior, participation in programs, and use of institutional resources. The current study identifies the prevalence of incarcerated veterans in Washington State who have experienced a TBI and how a TBI history may affect their prison experience and use of prison resources. The results of our study show that incarcerated veterans in Washington State with a moderate-to-severe TBI are more likely to use medical services, commit violent infractions, be placed in maximum custody (solitary confinement), and less likely to complete vocational and job skills programs. The importance of these findings to policy and practice is discussed.     

Bargaining in the Shadow of Social Institutions: Competing Discourses and Social Change in Workplace Mobilization of Civil Rights

The Family and Medical Leave Act requires employers to provide job-protected leave, but little is known about how these leave rights operate in practice or how they interact with other normative systems to construct the meaning of leave. Drawing on interviews with workers who negotiated contested leaves, this study examines how social institutions influence workplace mobilization of these rights. I find that leave rights remain embedded within institutionalized conceptions of work, gender, and disability that shape workers' perceptions, preferences, and choices about mobilizing their rights. I also find, however, that workers can draw on law as a culture discourse to challenge these assumptions, to build coalitions, and to renegotiate the meaning of leave.     

Framing Capital Punishment in Japan: Avoidance,Ambivalence, and Atonement

This article examines how two of Japan’s largest newspapers frame death penalty issues. Through a content analysis of 7,153 Asahi and Nikkei articles in the 66-month period from January 1, 2007 to June 30, 2012, 11 death penalty frames are identified: inevitability, atonement by dying, atonement by living, victims’ rights and emotions, human rights, miscarriage of justice, calls for discussion, life without parole, deterrence, public support, and retribution. In addition to frames, we examined who the main voices are in each article on capital punishment. We found that avoidance and ambivalence are the two main approaches taken by Asahi and Nikkei to cover death penalty issues, and the most surprising finding is the high salience of atonement as a frame for thinking about capital punishment. In Japan, atonement is used to justify (atone by dying) and oppose (atone by living) the death penalty. Although atonement by living in prison and atonement by dying at the gallows imply radically different outcomes, the flexibility of the atonement frame may suggest new possibilities for Japan’s anti-death penalty movement.     

Human Rights, Development, and the WTO: The Cases of Intellectual Property and Competition Policy

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has sometimes been portrayedas being at odds with the protection of human rights. This articletakes issue with this perception, both generally and with specificreference to WTO agreements/activities in the areas of intellectualproperty (IP) and competition policy. The rules and proceduresof the WTO are directly supportive of civil rights in the senseof freedom to participate in markets and freedom from arbitrarygovernmental procedures. In addition, the system contributesto development and to the realization of broader economic, social,and cultural rights, by stimulating economic growth and therebyhelping to generate the resources that are needed for the fulfilmentof such rights. The article examines various human rights andpublic interest rationales for the protection of intellectualproperty rights (IPRs). The recent amendment to the Agreementon Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)to facilitate access to medicines in the event of public healthemergencies is outlined. With respect to competition policy,such policy constitutes an important aspect of governance insuccessful market-based economies. There is a clear need forcooperative approaches to the implementation of national competitionpolicies. The appropriate scope and venue for such cooperationare a matter for further deliberation.