<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">378872400</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180305123412.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">161128e20030529xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.2202/1539-8323.1015</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.2202/1539-8323.1015</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Sturm</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Susan</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">1Columbia University Law School</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Owen Fiss, Equality Theory, and Judicial Role</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Susan Sturm]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">This essay uses Owen Fiss' treatment of equality doctrine in &quot;Groups and the Equal Protection Clause&quot; to demonstrate the influence of judicial role conceptions on equality jurisprudence. Fiss' conception of the judiciary's role in elaborating and enforcing public norms profoundly shapes his articulation of the anti-subordination principle. More specifically, Fiss looks to the federal judiciary unilaterally to declare public law truths and to impose those truths on noncompliant bureaucrats. This static, almost imperial role places great pressure on the judiciary to adopt unitary equality norms that can be implemented, at least in theory, through top-down imposition. Fiss' commitment to a top-down view of norm elaboration, with the judiciary at the top, prevents him from taking advantage of the potential suppleness of the anti-subordination principle. This essay shows how Fiss' top-down-ness ultimately infects his elaboration of the anti-subordination principle itself, making it vulnerable to Fiss' own criticisms of the anti-discrimination principle. It then suggests the promise of developing equality theory in light of a more dynamic, less jurocentric conception of the judiciary.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH &amp; Co. KG, Berlin/Boston</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">The Origins and Fate of Antisubordination Theory</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Issues in Legal Scholarship</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">De Gruyter</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">2/1(2003-05-29)</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">2:1</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2003</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">2</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">ils</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2202/1539-8323.1015</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2202/1539-8323.1015</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">100</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Sturm</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Susan</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">1Columbia University Law School</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Issues in Legal Scholarship</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">De Gruyter</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">2/1(2003-05-29)</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">2:1</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2003</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">2</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">ils</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="b">CC0</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-gruyter</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
