Animus : A Short Introduction to Bias in the Law / William D. Araiza.
2017
Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Author
Title
Animus : A Short Introduction to Bias in the Law / William D. Araiza.
Imprint
New York, NY : New York University Press, [2017]
Copyright
©2017
Description
1 online resource
Formatted Contents Note
Frontmatter
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction
Part I. Laying Out the Tools
1. Class Legislation and the Prehistory of Animus
2. Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
3. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center
4. Romer and Lawrence
5. United States v. Windsor
Part II. Building the Structure
6. What's Wrong with Subjective Dislike?
7. Objectively Objectionable
8. The Doctrinal Uniqueness of Animus
9. The Elusive Search for Animus
10. How Much Animus Is Enough? And What Should We Do about It?
11. Applying What We Have Learned
12. Obergefell and Animus
Conclusion
Notes
About the Author
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction
Part I. Laying Out the Tools
1. Class Legislation and the Prehistory of Animus
2. Department of Agriculture v. Moreno
3. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center
4. Romer and Lawrence
5. United States v. Windsor
Part II. Building the Structure
6. What's Wrong with Subjective Dislike?
7. Objectively Objectionable
8. The Doctrinal Uniqueness of Animus
9. The Elusive Search for Animus
10. How Much Animus Is Enough? And What Should We Do about It?
11. Applying What We Have Learned
12. Obergefell and Animus
Conclusion
Notes
About the Author
Summary
An introduction to the legal concept of unconstitutional bias.If a town council denies a zoning permit for a group home for intellectually disabled persons because residents don't want "those kinds of people" in the neighborhood, the town's decision is motivated by the public's dislike of a particular group. Constitutional law calls this rationale "animus."Over the last two decades, the Supreme Court has increasingly turned to the concept of animus to explain why some instances of discrimination are unconstitutional. However, the Court's condemnation of animus fails to address some serious questions. How can animus on the part of people and institutions be uncovered? Does mere opposition to a particular group's equality claims constitute animus? Does the concept of animus have roots in the Constitution?Animus engages these important questions, offering an original and provocative introduction to this type of unconstitutional bias. William Araiza analyzes some of the modern Supreme Court's most important discrimination cases through the lens of animus, tracing the concept from nineteenth century legal doctrine to today's landmark cases, including Obergefell vs. Hodges and United States v. Windsor, both related to the legal rights of same-sex couples. Animus humanizes what might otherwise be an abstract legal question, illustrating what constitutes animus, and why the prohibition against it matters more today than ever in our pluralistic society.
Language Note
In English.
System Details Note
Mode of access: Internet via World Wide Web.
Source of Description
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (publisher's Web site, viewed 06. Mrz 2024)
Location
www
In
Title is part of eBook package: New York University Press Complete eBook-Package 2017 De Gruyter
Access Note
restricted access (http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_16ec) online access with authorization
Alternate Title
DeGruyter online
Language
English
ISBN
9781479840939
Record Appears in