Home Jurisprudence Feminist jurisprudence in the United States

Feminist jurisprudence in the United States

August 25, 2024

This article is written by Nishka Kamath. This article explains the concept of feminist jurisprudence in the United States, along with its definitions, history- including the first, second, third (and fourth*) waves. Further, an attempt is made to enlighten the readers on the feminist legal methods, the crucial concepts one must know when it comes to studying feminist jurisprudence, the different ideas related to feminist jurisprudence or the feminist legal theory, the six forms of modern feminism, inter alia. Moreover, the author has further mentioned some landmark case laws that have influenced the feminist jurisprudence in the United States and at the very end, there are some interesting FAQs one must definitely give a glance at, especially, when it comes to studying/reading about feminist jurisprudence.

Table of Contents

Introduction

I am certain you have heard about the terms ‘feminism’, ‘feminist’, ‘feminist activism’, ‘gender equality’, and ‘feminist movement’, but have you heard about the term ‘feminist jurisprudence’? Well, this article will talk all about the nuances of feminist jurisprudence, so let’s begin, shall we?!

What is feminist jurisprudence

Feminist jurisprudence, also known as feminist legal theory, can be regarded as a belief based on the principle that the laws have been fundamental to women’s historical subordination. It can be considered a legal philosophy that is based on the political, economic, and social concerns related to equality. Originating in the 1960s, feminist jurisprudence is of major significance in US law and legal thought. It deeply influences several debates relating to-

Sexual violence,
Domestic violence,
Workplace rights,
Disability rights,
Matters related to discrimination, inter alia.

Using several approaches, feminists across the globe have recognized gendered components and gendered implications that are present in apparently ‘neutral’ laws and practices. Further, laws influencing-

Employment,
Divorce,
Reproductive rights,
Abortion,
Rape,
Domestic violence,
Sexual harassment, etc.,

have greatly benefited from the analytical skills and insightful perspectives offered by feminist jurisprudence.

One can describe feminist jurisprudence as a general term that consists of several theories and approaches related to examining gender, sexuality and power in relation to the legal system. Beginning in the 1960s (as discussed above), feminist jurisprudence became a crucial part of the law by the 1990s, permeating several debates related to sexual and domestic violence, unequal treatment at the place of work and gender-biased discrimination at all levels in US society. The feminist political movement had its first seed sown in the 19th century (for more details on history, please check the history section in the upcoming passages) and through the approval of the Declaration of Rights and Sentiments. Several feminist leaders, including Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, raised their voices to criticize male society’s denial of providing women with equal protection and social standing. During the mid-19th century, several US states passed different property acts for married women. These acts gave women the power to have a legitimate right to retain ownership and control of property they bought into the marriage, as opposed to the previous provision of husbands having all the controls and rights towards the property, thus leading to the squandering of a wife’s estate. Further, when the 19th Amendment of the US Constitution was ratified in 1920, women finally won the right to vote in the United States.

Definitions of feminist jurisprudence

Definition by Katherine Barlett

Katherine Barlett defines feminist jurisprudence as “a family of different perspectives or frameworks used to analyze the actual, and the desirable, relationship between law and gender.”

Definition by Christine Littleton

Christine Littleton defines feminist jurisprudence as including all “attempts to explain, critique, and change law on behalf of, and from the perspective of, women.”

While this definition contains a problematic notion of essentialism, it points to feminist jurisprudence’s grounding in women’s experiences and its aim of transforming law. Indeed, feminist legal theory is practice oriented.

Definition by Carol Smart

Carol Smart sees feminist jurisprudence as Praxis (borrowing the idea from Marx), ”a combination of theory and practice, constructed through the development of a methodology which ensures that the insights of the theory are reflected in the politics of action, and that the insights of practice are reflected in theory construction”.

How did feminist jurisprudence begin and who promoted it

Feminist jurisprudence is specifically enumerated for a particular part of society, i.e., women and deals with all the matters relating to this gender, inter alia. It can be considered to be a philosophy of law related to the political, economic and social equality of the sexes. Feminist thought began during ‘The Enlightenment’ era with thinkers like Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and the Marquis de Condorcet promoting women’s education. Further, several liberals, like that of Jeremy Bentham, demanded equal rights for women in all domains. One of the early modern champions of feminist themes was a Mexican nun, Juana Ines de la Cruz (1651-1695), particularly in her essay entitled “Reply to Sor Philotea“. Furthermore, the first and foremost scientific society, specifically for women, was established in 1785 in Middleberg (which is a city in the south of the Dutch Republic). Additionally, there were several journals on matters related to science that became popular during this time.

Additionally, the feminist movement is considered to have begun in the 18th century, as individuals started to increasingly believe that women were given unjust treatment under the law. The feminist movement is rooted in the West, especially in the reform movement of the 19th century. The organised movement dates back to the first women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls, New York, in 1848.

Let us read about the history of feminism in detail.

History of feminist theory

History and theory of feminism

One can describe the term ‘feminism’ as a political, cultural, or economic movement that is aimed at instituting equal rights and legal protection for women. Feminism involves political and sociological theories and philosophies whose major areas of concern are issues related to gender bias. It can be said to be both- a movement that advocates gender equality as well as a campaign supporting women’s rights and interests. Even though the terms ‘feminist’ and ‘feminism’ were not widely used until the 1970s, they were present in public parlance quite earlier. Say, for instance, that Katherine Hepburn discusses the ‘feminist movement’ in the 1942 film titled ‘Women of the Year’.

Further, as per the views of Maggie Humm (a literary critic and a writer of history) and Rebecca Walker (an American writer, feminist, and activist), the history of feminism can be divided into three waves (discussed in detail in the upcoming passages), namely:

The First wave : This wave occurred in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
The Second wave : This wave came about in the 1960s and 1970s.
The Third wave : This wave is said to have extended from the 1990s to the present.

Please note : There is yet another wave, the fourth wave (defined by some individuals on the internet). This is simply considered to be a continuation of the third wave. For more details, kindly keep reading further.

It is from these above feminist movements that the feminist theory evolved and is quite evident in several disciplines like feminist geography, feminist history and feminist literary criticism.

Feminism has brought about several changes in the predominant views of a variety of areas within Western society, ranging from culture to law. Feminist activities have advocated for several rights of women, namely-

Legal rights- like rights of contract, property rights, voting rights, etc.,
Right to bodily integrity and autonomy, for abortion rights and reproductive rights like having access to contraception and quality prenatal care, etc.,
Protection of women and girls from domestic violence, sexual harassment, and rape,
Workplace rights like maternity leave and equal pay to both sexes,
Against misogyny and other forms of gender-specific discrimination against women.

Since time immemorial, most of the feminist movements and theories involved leaders who came from a middle-class background and most of them were white women from Western Europe and North America. However, since Sojourner Truth’s 1851 speech to American feminists, women with other racial backgrounds, too, have proposed alternative feminisms. Then, this trend gained momentum in the 1960s with the Civil Rights Movement in the US and the end of European colonialism in Africa, the Caribbean, parts of Latin America, and Southeast Asia. After these incidents, women in former European colonies and the Third World proposed ideas like ‘postcolonial feminism’ and ‘third world feminism’. Some postcolonial feminists, like Chandra Talpade Mohanty, criticize Western feminism for mainly focusing on one culture, thus being ethnocentric. Black feminists, including Angela Davis and Alice Walker, agree with this opinion.

The former times

Simone de Beauvoir (a French philosopher and writer) mentioned in one of her books that the first woman to take up her pen in defence of her sex was Christine de Pizan, who wrote Epitre au Dieu d’Amour (Epistle to the God of Love) in the 15th century. In the 16th century, Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa (a German polymath and physician) and Modesta di Pozzo di Forzi, or Moderata Fonte, also known as Zorzi, who was a Venetian writer and poet, were also involved. Further, moving to the 17th century, Marie Le Jars de Gournay (a French writer), Anne Bradstreet (a poet), and Francois Poullain de la Barre (an author) also penned their thoughts regarding the same.

As mentioned above, feminists and scholars divided the feminist movements into three waves, wherein-

The first wave primarily refers to the women’s suffrage movements of the 19th and early 20th centuries, and the main focus back then was women’s right to vote.
Then, the second wave represented the ideas and actions related to the women’s liberation movement beginning in the 1960s, and this wave advocated for legal and social rights for women.
Lastly, the third wave can be regarded as a continuation of and a reaction to the failures of the second wave, and this wave began in the 1990s and is still prevailing.

Let us now discuss the three waves in detail.

First wave (1848-1920)

The first wave of feminism is regarded to be an extended period of feminist activities in the 19th and early 20th centuries in the US and the UK. At the start, it paid significant attention to promoting equal contract and property rights for women and opposed the concept of chattel marriage, which considered women (and their children) to be the property of the husbands (and/or the child’s father). Then, in the late 19th century, activists had a significant focus on gaining political power, especially the right of women’s suffrage. However, other activists like Voltairine de Cleyre (an American writer) and Margaret Sanger (an American activist) played an active role in campaigning for women’s sexual, reproductive, and economic rights during that period. In 1854, Florence Nightingale (an English statistician) established female nurses as a crucial part of the military.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom (or Britain), the Suffragettes and probably the more effective Suffragists carried out campaigns supporting women’s right to vote. Then, in 1918, an Act titled Representation of the People Act, 1918, granted women the right to vote; however, there was a clause that only women over the age of 30 who owned houses were allowed to vote. 10 years later, in 1928, this right was extended to all women who were above the age of 21.

United States

Influenced by the thoughts and beliefs of Quakers, several leaders like-

Lucretia Mott (a feminist and a woman who advocated for ending slavery),
Lucy Stone (American orator, abolitionist and suffragist),
Elizabeth Cady Stanton (American writer and activist), and
Susan B. Anthony (an American women’s rights activist)

campaigned for women’s right to vote. These activists were initially involved in anti-slavery campaigns.

While learning about first wave, one must note that American first wave feminism encompassed of numerous types of women, like-

Frances Willard (an American educator), who belonged to conservative Christian groups such as the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union;
Matilda Joslyn Gage (an American writer), who was more radical and advocated for the National Woman Suffrage Association in groups and also at an individual level.

The conclusion of first wave feminism is marked by the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which occurred in 1919, and this amendment granted women the right to vote.

The term ‘first wave’ was coined retrospectively when the term ‘second-wave feminism’ was being used to describe a newer feminist movement that had its main focus on fighting social and cultural inequalities as well as addressing political inequalities.

Seeding of the first organized movement in the US

The first organized movement started in July 1848, in a convention formed and organized by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott at Seneca Falls, New York. The individuals who attended this convention signed the Declaration of Sentiments. This Declaration affirmed women’s equal treatment to that of men. Further, about a dozen resolutions related to several rights (like the Right to Vote) were passed through the Declaration.

First wave and women’s suffrage movement

Even though the early women’s rights movement was linked to abolitionism (meaning, the doctrine that calls for the abolition of slavery), it triggered several women’s leaders who opposed black men being granted suffrage before white women. Likewise, the women’s suffrage movement has largely marginalized or excluded several feminists, like:

Sojourner Truth, and
Even Ida B. Wells.

Further, even though the ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920 satisfied the main aim of first-wave feminism, it guaranteed the right to vote to white women. However, black women and women of other color faced numerous obstacles until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed.

The women’s suffrage movement was quite a long fight that lasted for about a decade. Ultimately, women won the Right to Vote in the United States. Activists, reformists and feminists finally achieved such a right by campaigning for numerous years (about 100 years, history says).

Second wave (1963-1980s)

Second wave feminism can be described as a period of activity in the early 1960s that lasted until the late 1980s. One of the scholars, Imelda Whelehan, is of the opinion that the second wave was a continuation of the earlier phase of feminism that involved the suffragettes in the UK and the USA. While the first wave focused mainly on women’s rights, like voting, the second wave largely concerned itself with other matters relating to equality, like putting an end to gender discrimination.

The slogan “The Personal is Political” was coined by Carol Hanisch (a feminist activist and author), which became synonymous with the second wave. This wave was based on the belief that women’s cultural and political inequalities are closely connected to one another. Feminists encouraged women to understand aspects of their personal lives as deeply politicized and reflected unfair power dynamics relating to gender.

Second wave and the Feminine Mystique

In “The Feminine Mystique”, published by Betty Friedan, an argument was made that shed light on women chafing against the confines of their roles as wives and mothers. The book was one of the best-sellers and was the first step in the second wave of feminism. Inspired by the Civil Rights Movement and all the protests against the Vietnam War, second wave feminists call for a reevaluation of traditional gender roles in society and an end to sexist discrimination.

Second wave and women’s liberation movement

In the 1970s, the concept of ‘feminism’ or ‘women’s liberation’ gained strength as a political force as the National Women’s Political Caucus came into existence by-

Friedan,
Gloria Steinem and
Bella Abzug.

Some of the major incidents that happened during the second wave included the passage of the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the landmark judgment passed by the US Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut 381 U.S. 479 (1965) and Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973), related to reproductive freedom. However, when an amendment to the Equal Rights Act, titled the Equal Rights Amendment of 1972, a conservative backlash ensured it fell short of the number of states needed for ratification.

Second wave and feminist organizations

Just like the suffrage movement, second wave feminism drew criticism for centering privileged white women. Affected by this, some black women unanimously formed their own feminist organizations, including the National Black Feminist Organization (NBFO). Despite its achievements, the women’s liberation movement had begun to lose momentum by 1980, when conservative forces swept Ronald Reagan to the White House.

Key ideological details relating to feminism : insights based on ideologies of prominent thinkers and their impact on the movement during the second wave

Views of Simone de Beauvoir and the Second Sex

The very famous feminist, philosopher, and French author- Simon de Beauvoir wrote several notes; essays; monographs on matters of philosophical, political, and social concerns; biographies; and an autobiography. Currently, she is recognized for her metaphysical novels that examine women’s oppressions and stand as a cornerstone for contemporary feminism. These novels are:

She Came to Stay and The Mandarins, and
The Second Sex.

First penned in 1949 in French, the English translated version was published in 1953. In this book, the author has focused on the social construction of women as the other gender, which she identifies as a fundamental cause of women’s oppression. The author argues that if one looks from a historical point of view, women have been seen as deviant and abnormal; she further contends that even Mary Wollstonecraft (British writer and philosopher) regarded men as the ideal toward which women should aspire. De Beauvoir contends that for feminism to move forward, this mentality and belief have to be set aside.

Betty Friedan’s the Feminine Mystique

Betty Friedan (an American writer and activist) in her book ‘The Feminine Mystique’ was against the idea that women would only find fulfillment through childbearing, homemaking or doing household chores. In her obituary (death notice) in the New York Times, this book sparked the contemporary women’s movement in 1963 and subsequently transformed the social fabric of not only the United States but a lot of countries across the globe. Further, this book is said to be one of the most influential non-fiction books of the 20th century. In this book, the author has laid emphasis on the belief that women are victims of a false ideological system that requires them to find their identity and the meaning in their lives through their husbands and children and that this system causes women to completely lose their identity in the family. The author believes that the system was influenced by the post-World War II middle class communities, and during the same period, America’s post war economic boom led to progress in technology, where gadgets were supposed to make household chores easy, but this development oftentimes had the outcome of making women’s work less meaningful and low in value.

Women’s Liberation in the USA

The phrase ‘Women’s Liberation’ was first used in the United States in 1964 and it was first published in 1966 in print media. About two years later, the term ‘Women’s Liberation Front’ appeared in the magazine Ramparts and it referred to the whole women’s movement. One of the most vocal critics of this movement is Gloria Jean Watkins (who goes by the pseudonym ‘bell hooks’). She is an African American feminist and quite an intellect. She contends that this movement overlooked race and class and thus did not succeed in addressing the issues that divided women. In her book titled ‘Feminist Theory from Margin to Center (1984)’, she emphasized the lack of minority voices in the women’s movement.

Third wave (1990s-2012)

The third wave began in the early 1900s as a response to the shortcomings of the second wave and also as a backlash against all the initiatives taken during the second wave and the movements created back then. This wave aims to challenge or avoid what it deems the second wave’s essentialist definitions of femininity. This surely suggests that the second wave places excessive emphasis on the experiences of upper middle-class white women.

A post structuralist interpretation of gender and sexuality has been seen to have played a major role in shaping the ideology of the third wave. Feminists of this wave oftentimes have their major focus on ‘micro politics’ and would question the second wave’s paradigm or belief as to what is or is not good for females or women. The third wave emerged in the mid 1980s and its origins can be traced back to several feminist leaders, namely:

Audre Lorde,
Bell Hooks,
Chela Sandoval,
Cherrie Moraga,
Gloria Anzaldua,
Maxine Hong Kingston,

and other black feminists. The major goal of these feminists was to negotiate a space within feminist thought for subjective matters related to race.

Further, third wave feminism also had a conflict of opinions and thus debates between several feminists, like Carol Gilligan (a psychologist), who opined that there are several crucial differences between the sexes, and others who opined that there are no inherent differences as such between the sexes and they contended that gender roles are due to social conditioning and not otherwise.

A few things to know about third wave

Third wave feminists motivated women to express their sexuality and individuality and the same came from embracing the spirit of rebellion rather than reform. Several individuals adopted a more traditional feminine style of dressing and grooming. Some of them also rejected the term ‘feminist’ as a way of separating themselves from their second-wave predecessors. Furthermore, the brand of feminism was introduced in several art forms; one of them was pop music (which included songs that spoke about issues related to patriarchy, abuse, racism, and rape), and the same was practiced by “Riot Grrl” groups like Bikini Kill, Bratmobile and Heavens to Betsy.

This wave of feminism also sought to be more inclusive in cases of rape and gender. Additionally, the work of scholars (and theorists) like Kimberic Crenshaw on the notion of ‘intersectionality’ or how types of oppression (on the basis of race, gender, class, etc.) can overlap was very prominent. Moreover, third wave feminists also drew on the work of gender theorists, including Judith Butler; this also included support for trans rights in this type of intersectional feminism.

Please note : There is no end of third wave per se, however, some websites claim the third wave ended in 2012.

Fourth wave (2012-present)

Even though fourth feminism is quite difficult to define, some individuals opine that it is more or less a continuation of the third wave and that the introduction of the internet has most certainly paved the way for a new brand of activism that is fueled by social activism. Say, for instance, that after the introduction of the internet, a new movement called the #MeToo movement (which gained momentum in 2017) following the revelations of sexual misconduct by film producer Harvey Weinstein.

Apart from holding powerful men accountable for their actions, fourth wave feminists are focusing their attention on the process or approach that allows such misconduct to take place. Just like the previous feminists who advocated for the feminist cause, fourth wave feminists, too, continue to grapple with the concept of intersectionality regardless of sexuality, race, class, and gender.

History of feminist theory : a quick summary

Feminists are of the opinion that history was written from a Western cis-male point of view and does not necessarily reflect anyone else’s part in shaping history and society. Thus, such male written history has created a sort of bias in the concepts of-

Human nature,
Gender potential and
Other social arrangements.

Further, even the language, logic, and structure of the law are male created and reinforce Western male values and power dynamics. Furthermore, creating a binary of male and female also creates an implied hierarchy. By formally introducing male traits as a ‘norm’ and anything or anyone outside of the norm to be against the norm or a deviation from the norm, these concepts of law surely carry on the age-old tradition of patriarchal power. Many feminists question this belief in biological and social ideologies of gender binary conceptions. They further claim that sex may determine an individual’s capacity to reproduce, but it cannot ascertain one’s psychological, moral, or social traits. One must further make a note that even though feminists share common commitments to equality, feminist jurisprudence is not in any way uniform; there are numerous schools of thought within feminist jurisprudence (some of which are discussed in the upcoming passages).

Also, feminist jurisprudence may be said to have been hailed from the following materials:

Federal material

U.S. Constitution

Federal Judicial Decisions

U.S. Supreme Court

Recent Women’s Rights Decisions,
Roe v. Wade (discussed in detail below),
liibulletin Oral Argument Previews.

Feminist legal methods

Usually, there are 3 main techniques (mentioned in Volume 103 under Harvard Law Review by Katherine T. Bartlett) under feminists’ legal theory, namely:

Asking the woman question,
Feminist practical reasoning, and
Consciousness raising.

Further, Scales has provided eight main steps that form legal analysis. We will have a look at both these approaches in the upcoming passages. Let’s begin, shall we?!

Feminist legal method : three main techniques

Asking the woman question

Under this technique, an attempt is made to expose how the substance of law may silently and without just cause, submerge the perspectives of women and other excluded groups. Simply put, this process involves analyzing how the law errs in considering the experiences and values of women or how the preexisting legal standards and concepts may disadvantage women. One must note that the term ‘silently’ refers to a claim about conventional legal structures purporting to be ‘neutral and objective’. It seems apt to state that the already existing legal approaches may not be neutral in a general sense, but also, ‘male centric’ in a specific sense. In this sense, Clougherty mentions three essential features of asking women questions, namely:

To identify bias against women implicit in legal rules and practices that appear neutral and objective,
To expose how the law excludes the experiences and values of women, and
To insist upon the application of legal rules that do not perpetuate women’s subordination.

Thus, the bias of the method is the bias toward exhibiting a certain kind of bias (that is to say, disadvantage towards women). It may be contended that one of the primary goals of feminist legal theorists is to differentiate bad bias from good bias and to advocate for the latter by asking women questions.

Feminist practical reasoning

Feminist practical reasoning is the next step when it comes to feminist legal techniques or methods. It is extending conventional ideas of legal relevance with an attempt to make legal decision making more adaptable to the “features of a case” which have mostly been disregarded in legal doctrine. It puts forward the belief that women, rather than men, are more sensitive to situation and context that they disagree with universal principles and generalizations, and ultimately that “reasoning from context” enables us to respect differences and to take into consideration the perspectives of the powerless.

Just like Bartlett, Sanger, too, portrays practical reasoning as a “contextualized deliberation”. However, as opposed to these scholars, Clougherty contends that feminist legal methods, generally and in practicality, reflect the “manlessness” of age old legal methods as they are “grounded in hierarchical thinking”. In simple words, as she mentions, by replacing “objectivity and abstraction” with “contextual thinking”, feminists have elevated women’s way of thinking over men’s ways of thinking; thus, a decision maker reaches an inference not to apply feminist methods since feminist reasoning reveals them as too ‘male’.

Furthermore, another criticism of feminist practical reasoning concerns the version of Bartlett which combines a “classic Aristotle model of practical deliberation” with “a feminist focus on identifying and taking into account the perspectives of the excluded”. Nonetheless, the nature and the status of the Aristotelian element are quite unclear. Barlett believes that it is reasonable to use ‘standards’ and assumes that these are clearly different from rules, while Aristotle has a more radical approach and further rejects principles, for instance. In any case, her approach is vulnerable to various forms of objection to casuistry.

Consciousness raising

As per the views of MacKinnon, consciousness raising is the primary method of analyzing, and structuring an organization, method of practice, and theory of social change of the women’s movement. Bartlett also contends that the technique of consciousness-raising allows for “testing the validity of accepted legal principles” from the perspectives of the personal experience of women who are directly been affected by those legal principles.” She further claims that it is an interactive and joint process of expressing a woman’s experiences and sharing them with others. Consciousness-raising can even be said to be the most crucial method among all three of the methods Bartlett formulates. For instance, as Fisher points out, knowledge that has emerged from consciousness-raising aids in discerning how legal practices have been affecting women and this knowledge is also a part of the process of feminist practical reasoning. Even though consciousness-raising emphasizes the significance of women’s “personal reporting experience” and sharing it with others, arguably this technique does not criticize “objective reality” as it is itself “insufficiently objective”. From this perspective, we may consider Bartlett’s positionality approach a new insight into feminist theories of knowledge that has thus developed against ‘neutrality and objectivity’.

Scales : eight main steps that form legal analysis

These eight steps given by Scales (in Feminist Legal Method: Not So Scary) are as follows:

Don’t Get Bogged Down in Conventional Political Divisions
Eschew Neutrality,
Challenge False Necessities,
Deconstruct the Status Quo from the level of Knowledge,
Look to the Bottom,
Find the best Answer for now,
Practice Solidarity, and
Keep the Law in Proper Perspective.

For more details on each of these steps, please prefer reading this article further.

Crucial concepts in feminist jurisprudence : must know terms and notions

Addressing Liberalism : Questions of Perspective

Feminist jurisprudence, as a critical theory, responds to the present dominant understanding of legal thought that is usually identified with the Anglo-American tradition. Such a tradition is said to have been represented by authors like Hart and Dworkin. This tradition mainly contains two branches, namely:

Legal positivism, and
Natural law theory.

Feminist jurisprudence challenges both of these branches by raising questions regarding their assumptions regarding the law, including:

The law has to be objective and, hence, must have recourse to objective rules or understandings at some level.
The law has to be impartial, especially in cases where it is not to be influenced by the personal experience of any of its practitioners, most particularly judges and judicial officers.
That equality must be viewed as a more formal idea than that of a substantive one.
Justice can be understood through procedures, just as a proper following of procedures can be understood as sufficient to render justice.

All of these assumptions, even though they have been a major topic of debate, have remained to be a crucial feature of the liberal tradition of legal understanding.

Addressing the core issues of Theory and Application of Feminist Jurisprudence

While exploring the various angles of theoretical questions, feminists have their major focus on diving deep into understanding the law itself, its scope, legality and meaning. Many of these theoretical questions belong to traditional legal theory but are asked in the context of a feminist framework, say for instance:

What forms the proper moral foundation of law, especially when the answers depend on the moral principles of the dominant structure of society?
What does the ‘rule of law’ mean exactly, especially given that obedience to law has been a crucial part in the history of subjugation?
What does the term ‘equality’ mean, especially in a world where there is so much diversity?
What does the term ‘harm’ mean, especially in a world wherein women and not men undergo several types of violence?
How can adjudication of conflict be achieved on a proper and fair level, especially when not all individuals are able to come to the adjudication process on a “level playing field”?
What does ‘property’ actually mean and how can women avoid being regarded as the property of someone else?
Is law the best and most apt channel for resolving any issues or conflicts, especially when its history stems from patriarchal norms and objectives?

Even though feminists have addressed all these aforementioned questions and more, perhaps there is one issue that is of utmost importance and that is equality and rights, which is considered to be one of the most critical concerns by several feminists. The other two issues that can be regarded as major problems would be problems of harm and the process of adjudication. Let us take a look at three of these aspects:

Equality and rights,
Understanding harm, and
Process of adjudication.

Equality and rights

Feminists examine carefully how the law defines equality and rights for women. They are of the opinion that equality should be more than just a rhetorical concept and must bring about real change in the power dynamics of society. One of the major concerns is the connection of ‘equality’ to the lives of women. Say, for instance, at the workplace- how should a pregnant woman be treated and what sort of rights and benefits (say, maternity leave, Work from Home opportunity, etc.) should she get?

Further, one must also know about the sameness perspective. Say, if a gender, let us assume women, based on their needs and wants, need additional rights that men do not need (like menstrual leave), then such rights must be granted to them. Such a perspective ensures equal rights, whereas such a difference sheds light on needs that are gender specific.

Additionally, reformists advocate for women to be treated like men, whereas radicals focus on remodeling the legal system to address inherent biases. Also, feminist scholars have criticized how women have been excluded from having their needs met (say, the Right to Vote). They have further emphasized the significance of rights that empower women based on their personal experiences.

Understanding harm

Feminist jurisprudence has struggled with defining harm and who defines and identifies it. Further, considering that laws have been traditionally enacted from a patriarchal point of view, there are several challenges and societal norms wherein changes have been brought since the beginning of the feminist movement. Furthermore, there are three types of harm causing actions, namely:

Rape,
Sexual harassment, and
Battering

were not even considered to be an offense in accordance with the legal norms; however, the situation changed after feminist jurisprudence challenged such norms.

Also, factors like force, intent, and consent are quite important in ascertaining harm, and yet they are often considered to be different by women and the patriarchal legal system. For example, patriarchal concepts do not pay heed to psychological coercion and set unrealistic expectations for women’s resistance, especially when it comes to cases of rape. The burden of proof related to consent is heavily placed on the harmed individual, disregarding their expressions of non-consent.

Some feminists argue that bringing about changes in the existing legal system and laws will be a better move, whereas other feminists contend that these laws are fundamentally flawed and radical changes need to be brought about in order to make them better.

Process of adjudication

Several feminists question the processes of adjudication by challenging the neutrality or impartiality that these processes are assumed to embody. Further, neutrality in the field of law is supposed to safeguard against ideological biases and a number of other ills as well. It protects against personal bias by insisting that attorneys, judges, law enforcement officers, etc., treat individuals not as people with specific characteristics but as interchangeable subjects. Officials and other such authorities must not bring about personal opinions and biases while giving a judgment; say, for instance, if a judge is of the opinion that women are pathological liars, the judge cannot let his/her opinion affect the judgment he is about to give. Likewise, an individual’s race must not influence any judicial officer’s understanding of the case. Feminist jurisprudence challenges such claims to neutrality.

Further, feminist jurisprudence holds that everyone has a different understanding and perspective and even the law is influenced by people and their understanding and the same is reflected in the provisions stated in the law. They claim that when one becomes aware of the biases through self reflection, they may change their perspective and move toward greater objectivity. Thus, the law is not very neutral if we study this perception.

Another way the law is not neutral is in its content. As it was enacted by people, many of them had not scrutinized their standpoints, and the content of the law may be unfair, biased, or discriminatory.

Moreover, neutrality is also said to be built into several processes of the law, especially when it comes to judicial reasoning. The traditional method of using case laws as a precedent to provide evidence, justification, and interpretation of statutes in previous cases helps the court or judicial officer provide reasoning or set rules. In the case of feminist jurisprudence, using precedents allows the law to insulate itself against criticism by outsiders, including women. Heoer, using precedents to set rules has been questioned by several feminist and non-feminist critiques, including Margaret Radin (Radin, 1990) and Jerome Frank’s legal realism (Frank, 1963); however, reform and sameness feminists believe that using case laws as precedents is not a bad way to reach an inference but the court should also pay heed to the realities of women. Additionally, radical and different feminists are more likely to contend that the system of case laws in itself is heavily ingrained in the patriarchal system. Relying on past decisions and cases makes it a very cautious way of making choices, and this approach might not be very helpful for supporting feminist goals.

Addressing trajectories and feminist jurisprudence

Feminist jurisprudence and views of Patricia Williams

Even though it seems that the sameness/difference and the reform/radical debates could create an impasse for feminists some theorists are of the opinion that the combination of these two views could be more effective than relying on one each on its own. For instance, Patricia Williams (Williams, 1991), an American legal scholar and a proponent of critical race theory, states that rights can act as quite powerful liberation tools for the traditionally disadvantaged. Yet, she also believed that in a racist theory like that of modern America, recognizing the racial difference is a must for it creates disadvantage before the law. William claims that some features of the liberal tradition, say, rights, need to be preserved for the liberatory work and the potential they have. Regardless, she contends that the liberal tradition of formal equality is harmful to historically marginalized groups and this element of law needs to be entirely transformed.

William, being a woman of black origin herself, then talks about the history of American slavery where Black Americans were literally owned by whites, thus complicating the ability of both black and white Americans to consider blacks as being empowered by rights in the same manner that the whites are. This instance surely portrays how the scholar weaves together important aspects of both positions- reform and radical while also including the element of empowerment that is seen in dominating positions. She further claims that rights play a crucial role in empowering black Americans and for any of the disadvantaged groups. She also claims that for rights to be efficient for the disadvantaged groups or historically marginalized individuals, one must ensure that they are not functioning in a uniform manner for all people, especially for those for whom they were created.

Feminist jurisprudence and views of Judith A. Bear

Judith A. Bear (a specialist in public law and feminist jurisprudence) stated that another approach to drawing two sides of the debate when it comes to feminists together is that feminist jurisprudence, even now, has not succeeded in bringing about reformation or transformation in the field of law as feminists have erred severely in their approaches.

The foremost error is that feminist jurisprudence has misunderstood the liberal tradition it censures. Even the feminist jurists know that the liberal tradition has failed to secure rights for women and has done so only for men; they have not been successful in explicitly highlighting the responsibility one should be held accountable for. Women are expected to cater for themselves as well as men, whereas, men are not. For instance, a woman is expected to be responsible and is, in fact, held responsible for the lives of the children in a manner a man is not, and this has implications in areas like workplace law.

Baer then points out that another issue in addressing feminist jurisprudence is that, along with most feminism, it has tended to concentrate explicitly on women. This action has diverted feminist attention away from men and institutions that feminism must study, criticize, challenge and transform. This has also spiked up debates within the field of feminism that have been divisive and draining feminist energy. Here, the remedy is to recognize when reform (sameness) and radical (difference) approaches are efficient and to use each as and when it is apt. She says when both approaches (reform and radical feminist jurisprudence) are used as and when needed, there will be a better balanced, nuanced approach, as monotone is sufficient enough to function on an individual scale. Further, she has suggested three tasks for feminist jurisprudence to function more efficiently:

Firstly, it must divert from the age-old practices followed by conventional theory and feminist critiques and assert rights and question responsibilities.
Secondly, analysis has to be formed wherein the experiences of individuals experiencing such situations are not involved, so that the subject of women’s victimization is addressed without labeling them as victims.
Thirdly, the focus must be expanded from just women to men and institutions as well.

Further, the theorist does not ultimately suggest that feminism or feminist jurisprudence should completely give up on the study of women and their situations per se, but that this study is not sufficient enough to bring about reformation and/or transformation as “women neither create nor sustain their position in society”, feminists must scrutinize those who do. Additionally, Baer lays emphasis on the importance of focusing on “what it means to be a human being, a man, or a woman, which makes equality possible.” She also says that, the blunders made by feminist jurisprudence have posed to be a hindrance in its development and that this could be the foundation of what she refers to as a feminist postliberalism which is sufficient for feminist jurisprudence.

Different ideas related to feminist jurisprudence or feminist legal methods

Even though feminists share common commitments to equality between men and women, feminist jurisprudence is not uniform. Mentioned below are some of the major legal theories within feminist jurisprudence.

Traditional or liberal feminism

Primary idea

Traditional or liberal feminism strives for gender equality within the already existing legal framework.

Major focus

The major focus of liberal feminism is on making sure that women and men have equal legal rights and opportunities.

Equality feminism

Primary idea

Equality feminism is a subset of the overall feminism movement, to be specific of liberal feminism, that has its major focus on the basic resemblances between men and women and its major focus is to have equal rights and opportunities for both these genders (as mentioned above). Equality feminist theory supports equal chances for both men and women when it comes to aspects like:

Desires,
Wants,
Goals and
Achievement.

Major focus

Critical feminist theory mainly encourages individuals to unveil and criticize patriarchy, and this also includes several concepts like that of misogyny, racism, classism, heteronormativity, cisnormativity, ableism, eurocentrism, and so on.

Six forms of Modern Feminism

Today, modern feminism may be classified into at least 6 separate schools of thought. Let us take a quick look at each of them.

Formal equality

The first and foremost type of feminism- formal equality, can be considered the principle of equal and just treatment, as the notion goes- “individuals who are alike should be treated alike”. Thus, formal equality believes that, both, men and women are quite alike individuals who have different biology and perhaps psychology, but there is no other substantial way ‘should have the exact same legal rights’. Further, Aristotle refers to this kind of equality, even though only in relation to men. Ann C. Scales (an American lawyer, activist, and law professor) opines that- ‘In this country, the engine of the struggle of equality has been Aristotelian : Equality means to treat like persons alike, and unlike persons unlike.” The formal equality model of feminism is quite quickly losing its popularity considering the inadequate deal with gender differences; yet, this early school of feminist reasoning has led to greater women’s suffrage, an increase in equal protection of the law, and even equal payment.

Substantive equality

Second, the substantive equality form of feminism focuses on the outcome or consequence of a rule or law. This form of feminism demands “that rules take account of these differences to avoid unfair, gender-related outcomes”. Further, the feminists advocating this form of feminism believe that the test in any challenge should be whether the policy or practice in issue is fundamentally contributing to maintaining any underclass or any deprived position because of gender status. So, substantive equality has majorly focused on these things (say, for instance, provisions related to maternity leave and childcare assistance) but has also looked into issues such as affirmative action and other gender-specific benefits to remedy past societal discrimination. As Scales mentions, “the ‘relevant’ differences have been and always will be those that keep women in their place.“

Non subordination or dominance theory

Thirdly, non subordination or dominance theory has a major focus on the variance of power between men and women. This theory fundamentally talks about the matter of “whether a rule or practice serves to subordinate women to men”. Further, the dominance theory primarily focuses on matters such as sexual harassment of women, marital rape, domestic violence, and the battered women syndrome (BWS).

Please note : Battered women syndrome, commonly known as BWS, is a form of trauma. It is a pattern of signs and symptoms exhibited by women who have undergone persistent intimate partner violence.

Autonomy theory

Fourthly, the autonomy theory of feminism contends that women should have greater personal autonomy, the liberty to make their own choices, and the power to manage and be in the driving seat of their own lives.

Non essentialism

The fifth type of feminist theory is that of non essentialism that addresses the issue of overgeneralization or that of stereotyping members of a specific group. As per Katharine T. Bartlett (a law professor by profession) the fundamental focus of this theory is on the “implied attribution to all women of the traits of those who are white, middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied, and otherwise privileged”. The proponents who advocate for this theory believe that the differences between individual women have to be more fully taken into account or consideration.

Feminine or different voice(s) theory

Last, but not the least, feminine or different voice(s) theory mainly focuses on “women’s differences … less as problems to be addressed than as potentially valuable resources that might serve as a better model of social organization and law than existing ‘male’ characteristics and values.”

Landmark case laws that influenced feminist jurisprudence in the United States

All these cases have made a major contribution to shaping laws and legal precedents related to gender equality, reproductive rights, discrimination at the workplace and other such opportunities in the United States. These landmark cases have further expanded protections for marginalized groups, too. So, let us read about these cases without further ado!

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965)

In this landmark case, the US Supreme Court reached the inference that the Right to Privacy existed within the Constitution even when there was no explicit provision stating the same. This case was about a law in the state of Connecticut wherein there was legislation that forbade the usage of any contraception for married couples and this law had been challenged several times prior to the filing of this case. The US Supreme Court, by a majority of 7-2, overruled the law, claiming that such a provision was against the Right to Privacy, especially when it comes to the marital right to privacy. This case played a pivotal role and set a precedent for the upcoming cases in the Supreme Court; thus playing a crucial role in expanding the right to privacy, including using contraception, choosing to abort a child and other LGBTQ rights.

In the majority opinion written by Justice William Douglas, a statement was present that stated that many inexplicit rights exist with the Constitution that flow from the “emanations” of other explicitly granted protections. The majority, by broadly interpreting the First, Third, Fourth and Fifth Amendments, reached the inference that contraception is an explicitly protected Right of Privacy which is similar to the protected rights of parents on how they want to raise their child (or children), as mentioned in the case of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923). Yet, it is crucial to note that the majority restricted this discussion to the Right of Privacy within marriage and ascertained that privacy within parts of marriage is an understood right and has existed long before the Constitution was enacted.

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)

This is one of the landmark cases in US history that led to the US Supreme Court overruling previous laws that declared abortion illegal. Here, Jane Roe, an unmarried pregnant woman, filed a suit on behalf of herself and other such women, thus challenging the abortion laws of Texas. A doctor based in Texas further joined her lawsuit, claiming that the abortion laws in Texas are too vague for doctors to follow. During the filing of this lawsuit, abortion in Texas was only allowed if it was necessary to save the life of the expectant women; otherwise, it was a crime to get an abortion or to attempt one.

The US Supreme Court held that an individual, based on the Right to Privacy as stated in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, may choose to have an abortion until the fetus has become viable (here, the word ‘viable’ can be described as the ability to live and survive outside of the woman’s womb, which usually happens between 24 and 28 weeks after conception). Furthermore, the Supreme Court decided two important things, namely:

Firstly, the United States Constitution guarantees the Right to Privacy that safeguards an individual’s right to choose whether to terminate the pregnancy or not, i.e., seek abortion or not.
Secondly, the abortion right is not absolute. It has to be balanced against the government’s interests in safeguarding health and parental life.

Sadly, this judgment was overturned by a 6:3 majority in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, 597 U.S. (2022). Since this judgment, several states in the US have placed stringent restrictions on abortion laws to the extent that the residents cannot have access abortion services.

Frontiero v. Richardson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973)

In this case, Sharron Frontiero, an Air Force officer, who was also a married woman (and the appellant in this case), questioned gender based discrimination because she sought increased benefits for her husband as he came under the category of ‘dependant’ under 37 U.S.C. §§ 401, 403, and 10 U.S.C. §§ 1072, 1076. Under these statutes, the spouses of male members (meaning the wives) of the uniformed service officers are dependents for the purpose of obtaining benefits like quarters allowances and medical and dental benefits, inter alia; however, there was no explicit mention of female officers or the provision for their spouses. The provision stated that the spouses of female officials are not dependent unless they are, in fact, dependent on over one half of the support. The case went from court to court and finally, the US Supreme Court ruled that providing different treatment to male and female service members was against the Equal Protection Clause stated in the Fifth Amendment and that this gender biased discrimination is erroneous. This case has set a precedent against gender discrimination.

Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986)

In this famous case, Mechelle Vinson, a former employee of a bank named Meritor Savings Bank, sued the Bank and Sidney Taylor, the Vice President of the Bank, for alleged sexual harassment during her 4 years of employement period. Vinson claimed that this was a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She further contended that Taylor’s actions created a ‘hostile work environment’ and that the same is covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. She sought injunctive relief and punitive damages against the respondent and the bank.

During the trial, the parties provided evidence and testimonies that there was a consensual sexual relationship between Mechelle Vinson and Sidney Taylor. The case went on from the District Court to the Appeal Court and when it finally reached the US Supreme Court, the Court reached the inference that any activity of sexual harassment that created a hostile work environment was a violation of Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964. This landmark judgment sets out a precedent for all the upcoming cases related to the liability of employers for sexual harassment and further set standards for addressing such conduct at the place of work.

Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)

In this case, at a school assembly with about 600 schools studying in high school, Mathew Fraser gave a speech regarding the nomination of a student for an elective office. In that speech, Fraser allegedly used some graphic sexual metaphors to promote the candidacy of his friend. The main issue in this case was whether the First Amendment forbids a school from disciplining a student studying in high school because he gave a lewd speech at a high school assembly. The US Supreme Court held that the school had the right to restrict students from using vulgar and lewd speech, as such an act is against the “fundamental values of public school education”.

Well, even though this case mainly focused on the authority of the school to forbid a student from using vulgar and foul language, it indirectly highlights the broader issue of gender discrimination in a school setting and the regulation of speech that allows the continuation of such discrimination.

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994)

In this case, on behalf of T.B. (the mother), she sought paternity and child support from J.E.B. (the putative father). In forming the jury, it was found that peremptory strikes eliminated nine out of ten men who were in the jury pool; J.E.B. used a peremptory challenge to strike a tenth man in the pool. The main question in this case was whether the use of the preemptive challenge to exclude jurors mainly because of their gender was against the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or not.

The US Supreme Court held that the Right to Equal Protection enshrined under the Fourteenth Amendment stated in the US Constitution forbids the exclusion of potential jurors on the grounds of sex just as it forbids exclusion on the basis of race.

This case played a major role in shedding light on and challenging discrimination and gender equality within the legal system while selecting the jurors.

United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996)

In this case, the US Supreme Court reached an inference that the male-only policy at the state-run Virginia Military Institute (VMI) was a violation of women’s constitutional Right to Equal Protection. The Court further ordered that the school must admit women or forfeit the government funding they receive. In this landmark case, the United States sued Virginia and VMI, claiming that VMI’s policy of admitting only male candidates was against the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. The case went through the District Court then the Circuit Court and then ultimately the US Supreme Court. After this case, women were allowed to seek admission in institutions where only men were allowed previously.

Olmstead v. L. C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999)

In this landmark case, the right of people with developmental disabilities and mental illness to live in a community-based program was reinforced. This case discussed the rights of individuals with disabilities, especially women. Here, the US Supreme Court reached an inference that unjustified segregation of individuals with disabilities will be regarded as discrimination and is against the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This case further emphasized the right to community-based care.

Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Ed., 526 U.S. 629 (1999)

In this case, Aurelia Davis, the petitioner, filed a suit against the Monroe County Board of Education (the Board) and school officials, the respondents to the case, seeking damages for sexual harassment of her daughter- LaShonda Davis, who was a fifth grader studying at a public elementary school. Aurelia claimed that school officials were not successful in preventing Lashonda’s sexual harassment by another student. Davis further stated that the school’s negligence towards her cry for help was against Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX). The negligence created an abusive environment that deprived her daughter of educational benefits. The main issue in this case was whether or not the school board could be held responsible under Title IX of the Education Amendments, which is meant to provide equal access to students when it comes to educational benefits and opportunities.

The US Supreme Court came to the conclusion that a school can be held responsible for neglecting a student’s sexual harassment encounter in cases where the school administration was made aware of the incident but did not take up any action against it. This judgment played a major role in establishing directions and recommendations for the responsibilities of schools in preventing and addressing sexual harassment.

Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (2015)

In this case, emphasis was laid on discrimination related to pregnancy at the workplace. As per the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Title VII prohibits sex discrimination that is applicable to discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth or medical conditions related to pregnancy. The US Supreme Court reached a decision that employers have to offer the same accommodations to expecting women as they do to employees with such limitations. This case played a major role in preventing pregnancy based discrimination at the workplace.

Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson, 642 S.W.3d 569 (Tex. 2022)

In this case, the Supreme Court of Texas reviewed the law based in Texas that placed a restriction on abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. This case acted as one of the potential cases to reconsider the precedent set in the overruled judgment of Roe v. Wade.

Conclusion

More or less, the whole article is all about securing equal rights for women at the workplace, in the eyes of the law, and in other such places and to resolve issues related to women on economic, social, and political matters. This is where feminist jurisprudence (also known as the feminist legal theory) comes into play.

Thus, ending this article with a question for you to ponder upon- “If men should be free, why not women too?“

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the ideology behind feminism?

Basically, feminism is giving equal rights and equal opportunities to all genders is about respecting the distinct experiences, identities, knowledge and strengths of women and string to empower all women to realize their full rights.

When did the feminist movement start in the USA?

As discussed in the history section, there are four (or three*) waves of feminist movements. The first wave of feminism took place in the late 19th century and early 20th centuries. It became prominent out of an environment of urban industrialism and liberal, social politics. The main goal of the first wave was to open up new avenues for women with its major focus on suffrage. This wave formally started at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 when about 300 men and women gathered to provide equal rights to women. The Seneca Falls Declaration was drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and this draft outlined the new movements, ideologies, notions and political strategies.

What is the birthplace of American feminism?

Many regard the Seneca Falls Convention as the birthplace of American feminism. Considered as the first woman’s rights convention in the United States, it took place at the Wesleyan Chapel in Seneca Falls, New York, on July 19 and 20, 1848.

Who was the first feminist in America?

One of the most influential public figures of the 19th century in the history of America was Elizabeth Cady Stanton. She was one of the nation’s first feminist theorists. She, most certainly was one of the most productive activists.

Who is regarded as the father of feminism?

Charles Fourier (a Utopian socialist and French philosopher) is honored with the title of ‘Father of Feminism’. He is known to have been credited with having coined the word “féminisme” in 1837. The words “féminisme” (“feminism”) and “féministe” (“feminist“) first appeared in the following years in the following countries:

In 1872 in France and Netherlands,
In 1890s in Great Britain, and
In 1910 in the United States.

What is the opposite of feminist ideology?

The term for the opposite of feminist ideology is ‘antifeminism’. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, antifeminists objected to policies and proposals that advocated for women’s rights, like the Right to Vote, right to have equal opportunities in the field of education, property rights and access to birth control.

How does feminist jurisprudence address issues related to inequality in the US legal system?

Generally, the major goal of feminist jurisprudence is to recognize and question the laws and provisions that are related to gender discrimination, and also support and/or promote legal reforms that advocate for gender equality. It is against the traditional legal frameworks and gender stereotypes. In the US, feminist jurisprudence works towards creating a more inclusive and equitable legal system.

What are the major legal issues feminist jurisprudence talks about in the United States?

In the United States, there are several legal issues that feminist jurisprudence mentions; some of them are as follows:

Sexual violence,
Domestic violence,
Sexual harassment,
Unequal treatment at the workplace,
Disability rights, and
Issues of discrimination.

How many stages/waves of feminism are there in the United States?

In the United States, feminism is often branched chronologically into-

First wave,
Second wave,
Third wave, and
Fourth wave.

What is the future of feminism?

The next wave of feminism will be a vital part of the movements related to economic opportunity, political power, and representation. It will be all about safeguarding the vulnerable individuals, holding those who make individuals feel unsafe and also imagining and creating a democracy and economy that for all individuals.

Who led the American Feminist movement? How did it begin?

Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a young housewife and mother, was invited over tea with four other women friends. Eventually, the conversation went on to the situation of women, Stanton addressed all her feelings and discontent with the constraints placed on her situation under America’s new democracy. Just within two days of the afternoon get together, this small group made all the plans, picked out a date, found a proper location for the Convention, and made a small announcement in the Seneca County Courier. They address this Convention as “a convention to discuss the social, civil, and religious condition and rights of woman”.the gathering, as we now know, took place at the Wesleyan Chapel in Seneca Falls on July 19 and 20, 1848.

Interesting fact : In the history of Western civilization, no such public meeting has ever been called.

Furthermore, even Betty Friedan (an activist, journalist and co-founder of the National Organization for Women) was one of the early proponents of the women’s rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s.

Is the USA a feminist country?

Well, there is no straightjacket answer to this question; however, the US comes on the list of the most self-identifying feminists, just like Australia, Denmark, Germany, Turkey, and Mexico, inter alia.

What are the major issues that feminist jurisprudence addresses in the USA?

Feminist jurisprudence is a philosophy of law based on several aspects like that of political, economic and social equality of the sexes. It is known to have influenced many contentions on sexual violence, domestic violence, unequal treatment at the workplace and discrimination on the grounds of gender.

What are the effects of the feminist movement in the United States?

The feminist movement in the United States have caused a major change in Western society, including-

Women’s suffrage;
Greater access to education for women;
Impartial pay for women just like men;
The right to initiate a divorce proceeding and seek divorce;
The right of women to make decisions on their own, especially, in cases of pregnancy (this includes the right to have access to contraceptives and abortion), and
The right to own property.

Has feminist jurisprudence influenced the legal decision making process in the United States? If yes, how?

Yes, feminist jurisprudence has influenced the legal decision making process in the United States by shedding light on gender based discrimination and advocating for changes in how a particular law is interpreted and applied. There are several landmark judgments to support this claim and some of them are discussed in detail in the above passages.

Are there any critics when it comes to feminist jurisprudence?

Yes, feminist jurisprudence, just like any other theory based concept, has been criticized by several individuals. The critics contend that feminist jurisprudence pays more attention to women’s issues and tends to forsake other intersecting forms of discrimination. Other critics opine that this theory is highly theoretical and barely has any practical value when it comes to addressing broader legal matters.

Does feminist jurisprudence primarily focus on rights related to women or on broader issues of gender equality?

Well, initially, feminist jurisprudence focused on rights for women; however, the concept has evolved over time (as we can see in the third and fourth waves in the USA). Now, feminist jurisprudence does recognize the interconnection of gender with other forms of discrimination.

In general, we can say that feminist movements under feminist jurisprudence were started with the aim of putting an end to sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression and to achieve full gender equality in law and in practice.

Has feminist jurisprudence influenced family law, especially in cases of divorce, child custody, and domestic violence?

Yes, feminist jurisprudence has left an impact on family law by questioning all the stereotypes, especially in cases of divorce, child custody, and domestic violence, and advocating for just and fair treatment for both genders.

Which are the top landmark cases related to feminist jurisprudence?

Well, there is no straightjacket answer to this, as there are several landmark cases related to feminist jurisprudence (some of which are discussed in the above passages). The top two cases in the United States on the same will be:

Roe v. Wade 410 U.S. 113 (1973)– The case that made abortion legal (overturned later);
Reed v. Reed 404 U.S. 71 (1971)– The first case wherein the US Supreme Court applied the Equal Protection Clause to discrimination based on one’s gender.

What can be regarded as the key movements in the progress and development of feminist jurisprudence?

The top two key movements that impacted feminist jurisprudence in US history are;

The publication of Simone de Beauvoir’s book titled“The Second Sex” and
The Women’s Rights Project by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in the 1970s.

References

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity