000			04807cam a22004818i 4500
001			21226796
003			OSt
005			20260717112653.0
006			m |o d |
007			cr |||||||||||
008			190920s2020 nyu ob 001 0 eng
010			_a 2019042608
020			_a9781108556989 _q(epub)
020			_z9781108471701 _q(hardback)
020			_z9781108458337 _q(paperback)
035			_a21226796
040			_aDLC _beng _cDLC _erda
042			_apcc
043			_an-us---
050	0	0	_aKF505 _b..F46 2020
082	0	0	_a346.7301/5 _223
130	0		_aFeminist judgments (Family law)
245	1	0	_aFeminist judgments : _bfamily law opinions rewritten / _cedited by Rachel Rebouché, Temple University, Philadelphia.
263			_a2003
264		1	_aCambridge, United Kingdom ; _aNew York, NY, USA : _bCambridge University Press, _c2020.
300			_a1 online resource
336			_atext _btxt _2rdacontent
337			_acomputer _bc _2rdamedia
338			_aonline resource _bcr _2rdacarrier
490	0		_aFeminist judgment series
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references and index.
505	0		_aIntroduction / Rachel Rebouché, -- Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879) / Commentary: Marie Failinger; Judgment: Laura Kessler -- McGuire v. McGuire, 59 N.W.2d 336 (Neb. 1953) / Commentary: Mary Anne Case; Judgment: Martha Ertman, Zvi Triger -- Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 (1970) / Commentary: Maya Manian; Judgment: Susan Frelich Appleton -- Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) / Commentary: Lisa Fishbayn Joffe; Judgment: Kristen Murray -- Marvin v. Marvin, 557 P.2d 106 (Cal. 1976) / Commentary: Aníbal Rosario Lebrón ; ,Judgment: Kate Sablosky Elengold -- Kulko v. Superior Court, 436 U.S. 84 (1978) / Commentary: Mary-Beth Moylan; Judgment: Katherine Macfarlane -- Daly v. Daly, 715 P.2d 56 (Nev. 1986) / Commentary: Raff Donelson; Judgment: Nancy Polikoff -- Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989) / Commentary: Suzanne Kim; Judgment: Albertina Antognini -- DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) / Commentary: Macarena Saez; Judgment: Jessica Dixon Weaver -- Simeone v. Simeone, 581 A.2d 162 (Pa. 1990) / Commentary: Jamie Abrams; Judgment: Alicia Kelly, John Culhane -- Borelli v. Brusseau, 12 Cal. App. 4th 647 (1993) / Commentary: June Carbone; Judgment: Jo Carrillo -- Turner v. Rogers, 564 U.S. 431 (2011) / Commentary: Warren Binford; Judgment: Elizabeth L. MacDowell -- In re T.J.S., 54 A.3d 263 (N.J. 2012) / Commentary: June Carbone; Judgment: Seema Mohapatra -- Matter of A-B-, Respondent, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018) / Commentary: Natalie Nanasi; Judgment: Suzan M. Pritchett -- Sessions v. Morales-Santana, 2017 WL 2507339 (U.S. 2017) / Commentary: Cynthia Godsoe; Judgment: Tracy Thomas.
520			_a"Could a feminist perspective change the shape of the tax law? Most people understand that feminist reasoning has tremendous potential to affect, for example, the law of employment discrimination, sexual harassment, and reproductive rights. Few people may be aware, however, that feminist analysis can likewise transform tax law (as well as other statutory or code-based areas of the law). By highlighting the importance of perspective, background, and preconceptions on the reading and interpretation of statutes, Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Tax Opinions shows what a difference feminist analysis can make to statutory interpretation. This volume, part of the Feminist Judgments Series, brings together a group of scholars and lawyers to rewrite tax decisions in which a feminist emphasis would have changed the outcome or the court's reasoning. The volume includes cases that implicate gender on their face (such as medical expense deductions for fertility treatment or gender confirmation surgery and special tax benefits for married individuals) as well as cases without an obvious connection to gender (such as the tax treatment of tribal lands and the business expense deduction). This book thus opens the way for a discussion of how viewpoint is a key factor in all statutory interpretation cases"-- _cProvided by publisher.
583			_aCataloguing: _c20260717 _kgtanuigtanui
588			_aDescription based on print version record and CIP data provided by publisher; resource not viewed.
650		0	_aDomestic relations _zUnited States _xCases.
650		0	_aFeminist jurisprudence _zUnited States.
700	1		_aRebouché, Rachel, _eeditor.
776	0	8	_iPrint version: _aFeminist judgments (Family law) _tFeminist judgments _dCambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY, USA : Cambridge University Press, 2020. _z9781108471701 _w(DLC) 2019042607
906			_a7 _bcbc _corignew _d1 _eecip _f20 _gy-gencatlg
942			_2lcc _cBK
999			_c21886 _d21885