英美法學中的酷兒與性公民身分─理論初探

本篇論文對英美法學中使用酷兒理論與性公民身分理論的法學家做一梗概性的引介，並試著結合酷兒理論和性公民身分理論對2015年美國聯邦最高法院指標性判決Obergefell v. Hodges進行批判式的解讀。從Janet Halley與Katherine Franke批判二元對立與批判婚姻規範性的理論出發，結合Carl Stychin與Brenda Cossman論性公民身分的法學論述，我指出Obergefell v. Hodges判決創造了美國憲法中自由權利法理與美國政治中自由論述的奇特伴侶關係。本文亦嘗試指出美國酷兒理論移植來台後產生的倫理問題並加以批判。

關鍵字

酷兒；性公民身分；美國聯邦憲法；同性婚姻；同性戀

並列摘要

This thesis serves as a preliminary introduction to queer theory and sexual citizenship theories in Anglo-American legal scholarship. In this thesis, I combine the use of queer legal theory and sexual citizenship scholarships in my reading of the landmark decision Obergefell v. Hodges delivered by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2015. With theoretical tools from jurists Janet Halley, Katherine Franke, Carl Stychin and Brenda Cossman, I argue that the Obergefell ruling set forth an interesting coupledom between the Constitutional rights of liberty and the discourse of freedom in American politics. I also argue that the transplantation of queer theory from America to Taiwan produces some ethical wrongs which need to be addressed and critiqued.

並列關鍵字

Queer ； Sexual Citizenship ； U.S. Constitution ； Same-sex marriage ； Homosexual

參考文獻

Fineman, M. A., Jackson J. E., & Romero, A.P. (Eds.), (2009) Feminist and Queer Legal Theory: Intimate Encounters, Uncomfortable Conversations. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing.

Hunter, N. D. (2003). Living with Lawrence Symposium: Gay Rights after Lawrence v. Texas. Minnesota Law Review, 88, 1103-1139.

Brown, W., & Halley, J. E. (2002). Left Legalism/Left Critique - Introduction. In W. Brown & J. E. Halley (Eds.), Left Legalism/Left Critique (pp. 1-37). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Halley, J. E. (2002). Sexuality Harassment. In W. Brown & J. E. Halley (Eds.), Left Legalism/Left Critique (pp. 80-104). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (Supreme Court of the United States 1965).

國際替代計量

英美法學中的酷兒與性公民身分─理論初探

主題瀏覽