THE RIGHT FAMILY

The family plays a starring role in American law. Families, the law tells us, are special. They merit many state andfederal benefits, including tax deductions, testimonial privileges, untaxed inheritance, and parental presumptions. Over the course of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court expanded...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Columbia journal of gender and law 2019-01, Vol.39 (1), p.1-59
Hauptverfasser: Ben-Asher, Noa, Pollans, Margot J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 59
container_issue 1
container_start_page 1
container_title Columbia journal of gender and law
container_volume 39
creator Ben-Asher, Noa
Pollans, Margot J
description The family plays a starring role in American law. Families, the law tells us, are special. They merit many state andfederal benefits, including tax deductions, testimonial privileges, untaxed inheritance, and parental presumptions. Over the course of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court expanded individual rights stemming from familial relationships. In this Article, we argue that the concept of family in American law matters just as much when it is ignored as when it is featured. We contrast policies in which the family is the key unit of analysis with others in which it is not. Looking at four seemingly disparate areas of recent policymaking-the travel ban, family separation at the southern border, agricultural subsidies, and the religious rights of closely held corporations-we explore the interplay between the family, the individual, and the corporation in modern law. We observe that both liberals and conservatives make use of the family to humanize or empower certain people, and both reject the family when seeking to dehumanize or disempower. Where liberals and conservatives differ is which families they choose to champion. Ultimately, we conclude that the use of family as a mechanism through which to confer rights and benefits is a cover to hide policies that entrench and exacerbate existing racial and religious hierarchies. Further, in the context of family businesses, it risks becoming a steppingstone for radical expansion of rights to businesses themselves. To tell this story, we analyze the use and rhetoric of family in politics, media, and recent Supreme Court decisions such as Trump v. Hawaii (2018), Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), Kerry v. Din (2015), and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2376701498</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2376701498</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_23767014983</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYeA0NDAz0jUzMjLgYOAqLs4yMDA0MDcx5GQQCPFwVQjydPcIUXBz9PX0ieRhYE1LzClO5YXS3AzKbq4hzh66BUX5haWpxSXxWfmlRXlAqXgjY3MzcwNDE0sLY-JUAQDXSCSs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2376701498</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>THE RIGHT FAMILY</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><creator>Ben-Asher, Noa ; Pollans, Margot J</creator><creatorcontrib>Ben-Asher, Noa ; Pollans, Margot J</creatorcontrib><description>The family plays a starring role in American law. Families, the law tells us, are special. They merit many state andfederal benefits, including tax deductions, testimonial privileges, untaxed inheritance, and parental presumptions. Over the course of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court expanded individual rights stemming from familial relationships. In this Article, we argue that the concept of family in American law matters just as much when it is ignored as when it is featured. We contrast policies in which the family is the key unit of analysis with others in which it is not. Looking at four seemingly disparate areas of recent policymaking-the travel ban, family separation at the southern border, agricultural subsidies, and the religious rights of closely held corporations-we explore the interplay between the family, the individual, and the corporation in modern law. We observe that both liberals and conservatives make use of the family to humanize or empower certain people, and both reject the family when seeking to dehumanize or disempower. Where liberals and conservatives differ is which families they choose to champion. Ultimately, we conclude that the use of family as a mechanism through which to confer rights and benefits is a cover to hide policies that entrench and exacerbate existing racial and religious hierarchies. Further, in the context of family businesses, it risks becoming a steppingstone for radical expansion of rights to businesses themselves. To tell this story, we analyze the use and rhetoric of family in politics, media, and recent Supreme Court decisions such as Trump v. Hawaii (2018), Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), Kerry v. Din (2015), and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1062-6220</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Columbia University, School of Law</publisher><subject>Closely held corporations ; Constitutional law ; Crime ; Families &amp; family life ; Gays &amp; lesbians ; Law ; Public policy ; Supreme Court decisions</subject><ispartof>Columbia journal of gender and law, 2019-01, Vol.39 (1), p.1-59</ispartof><rights>Copyright Columbia University, School of Law 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ben-Asher, Noa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pollans, Margot J</creatorcontrib><title>THE RIGHT FAMILY</title><title>Columbia journal of gender and law</title><description>The family plays a starring role in American law. Families, the law tells us, are special. They merit many state andfederal benefits, including tax deductions, testimonial privileges, untaxed inheritance, and parental presumptions. Over the course of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court expanded individual rights stemming from familial relationships. In this Article, we argue that the concept of family in American law matters just as much when it is ignored as when it is featured. We contrast policies in which the family is the key unit of analysis with others in which it is not. Looking at four seemingly disparate areas of recent policymaking-the travel ban, family separation at the southern border, agricultural subsidies, and the religious rights of closely held corporations-we explore the interplay between the family, the individual, and the corporation in modern law. We observe that both liberals and conservatives make use of the family to humanize or empower certain people, and both reject the family when seeking to dehumanize or disempower. Where liberals and conservatives differ is which families they choose to champion. Ultimately, we conclude that the use of family as a mechanism through which to confer rights and benefits is a cover to hide policies that entrench and exacerbate existing racial and religious hierarchies. Further, in the context of family businesses, it risks becoming a steppingstone for radical expansion of rights to businesses themselves. To tell this story, we analyze the use and rhetoric of family in politics, media, and recent Supreme Court decisions such as Trump v. Hawaii (2018), Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), Kerry v. Din (2015), and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).</description><subject>Closely held corporations</subject><subject>Constitutional law</subject><subject>Crime</subject><subject>Families &amp; family life</subject><subject>Gays &amp; lesbians</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Public policy</subject><subject>Supreme Court decisions</subject><issn>1062-6220</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>QXPDG</sourceid><recordid>eNpjYeA0NDAz0jUzMjLgYOAqLs4yMDA0MDcx5GQQCPFwVQjydPcIUXBz9PX0ieRhYE1LzClO5YXS3AzKbq4hzh66BUX5haWpxSXxWfmlRXlAqXgjY3MzcwNDE0sLY-JUAQDXSCSs</recordid><startdate>20190101</startdate><enddate>20190101</enddate><creator>Ben-Asher, Noa</creator><creator>Pollans, Margot J</creator><general>Columbia University, School of Law</general><scope>7R6</scope><scope>888</scope><scope>PQGEN</scope><scope>QXPDG</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190101</creationdate><title>THE RIGHT FAMILY</title><author>Ben-Asher, Noa ; Pollans, Margot J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_23767014983</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Closely held corporations</topic><topic>Constitutional law</topic><topic>Crime</topic><topic>Families &amp; family life</topic><topic>Gays &amp; lesbians</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Public policy</topic><topic>Supreme Court decisions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ben-Asher, Noa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pollans, Margot J</creatorcontrib><collection>GenderWatch</collection><collection>GenderWatch (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Women's &amp; Gender Studies</collection><collection>Diversity Collection</collection><jtitle>Columbia journal of gender and law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ben-Asher, Noa</au><au>Pollans, Margot J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>THE RIGHT FAMILY</atitle><jtitle>Columbia journal of gender and law</jtitle><date>2019-01-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>59</epage><pages>1-59</pages><issn>1062-6220</issn><abstract>The family plays a starring role in American law. Families, the law tells us, are special. They merit many state andfederal benefits, including tax deductions, testimonial privileges, untaxed inheritance, and parental presumptions. Over the course of the twentieth century, the Supreme Court expanded individual rights stemming from familial relationships. In this Article, we argue that the concept of family in American law matters just as much when it is ignored as when it is featured. We contrast policies in which the family is the key unit of analysis with others in which it is not. Looking at four seemingly disparate areas of recent policymaking-the travel ban, family separation at the southern border, agricultural subsidies, and the religious rights of closely held corporations-we explore the interplay between the family, the individual, and the corporation in modern law. We observe that both liberals and conservatives make use of the family to humanize or empower certain people, and both reject the family when seeking to dehumanize or disempower. Where liberals and conservatives differ is which families they choose to champion. Ultimately, we conclude that the use of family as a mechanism through which to confer rights and benefits is a cover to hide policies that entrench and exacerbate existing racial and religious hierarchies. Further, in the context of family businesses, it risks becoming a steppingstone for radical expansion of rights to businesses themselves. To tell this story, we analyze the use and rhetoric of family in politics, media, and recent Supreme Court decisions such as Trump v. Hawaii (2018), Burwell v. Hobby Lobby (2014), Kerry v. Din (2015), and Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (2018).</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Columbia University, School of Law</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1062-6220
ispartof Columbia journal of gender and law, 2019-01, Vol.39 (1), p.1-59
issn 1062-6220
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2376701498
source HeinOnline Law Journal Library
subjects Closely held corporations
Constitutional law
Crime
Families & family life
Gays & lesbians
Law
Public policy
Supreme Court decisions
title THE RIGHT FAMILY
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T03%3A51%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=THE%20RIGHT%20FAMILY&rft.jtitle=Columbia%20journal%20of%20gender%20and%20law&rft.au=Ben-Asher,%20Noa&rft.date=2019-01-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=59&rft.pages=1-59&rft.issn=1062-6220&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2376701498%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2376701498&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true