東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Fighting in Court: Women, War, and t...

Covkin, Serena,

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America /

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America // Serena Covkin.
作者:	Covkin, Serena,
面頁冊數:	1 electronic resource (356 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International85-06A.
標題:	American history. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30689937
ISBN:	9798381159684

Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America /
Covkin, Serena,

Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America /Serena Covkin. - 1 electronic resource (356 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: A.

This dissertation is a history of women, war, and the law in twentieth-century America. In particular, it focuses on four landmark decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court: United States v. Schwimmer (1929); Reid v. Covert, first adjudicated in 1956 and then adjudicated again (and reversed) in 1957; Griswold v. Connecticut (1965); and Rostker v. Goldberg (1981). These cases have never before been examined side-by-side, because they traverse multiple domains of constitutional law and multiple, overlapping domains of immigration law, military law, and criminal law as well. This dissertation, however, argues that the Court's decisions in Schwimmer, Reid, Griswold, and Goldberg all hinged on the same, basic question: namely, in what ways and by what means were women obliged-and not obliged-to serve their country in time of war? What's more, the dissertation argues that the four decisions answered this question in wildly different-and sometimes diametrically opposed-ways, necessarily complicating our understanding of how American women (and American men, for that matter) worked to lay claim to the rights and obligations of twentieth-century citizenship.The dissertation begins in the aftermath of the First World War, when the U.S. was abruptly thrust into a new position of international authority-and subsequently became entangled in an almost-endless number of military conflicts around the globe. Beginning in this same period, American women also became increasingly, more intimately involved in both the U.S. military and broader projects of state violence-and a long-assumed distinction between prototypically male citizen-soldiers, on the one hand, and quintessentially female civilians, on the other, fell steadily apart. This dissertation analyzes and interrogates these large-scale (and primarily extra-legal) developments and unearths connections-between America's military fortunes and the closer-to-home battles fought at the U.S. Supreme Court-that many other legal historians have failed to recognize and draw out. At the same time, the dissertation makes clear that constitutional doctrine followed no clear-cut, linear progression: across these four cases, the Court intervened to demarcate women's distance from war just as often as it recognized-or imagined-women's proximity to the same. There was no easy path to sex equality, charted out through armed conflict or otherwise, and sometimes no path to equality at all. Instead, in Schwimmer, Reid, Griswold, and Goldberg, the Court trafficked in contradictions, indulged in legal fictions, and gave rise to unintended consequences that we're still living with today. Chapter 1 focuses on several resident alien women who were denied naturalization-all for refusing to bear arms in defense of the United States-in the decades between the First and Second World Wars. Chapter 2 focuses on two service wives-both of whom, while stationed overseas in the early postwar period, killed their military-officer husbands-and then fought to be tried by civilian juries (rather than by military courts-martial) for their crimes. Chapter 3 examines the Cold War origins of the constitutional right to privacy. Chapter 4 examines the contested constitutionality of the all-male military draft, from the Vietnam War era through the early 1980s.

English

ISBN: 9798381159684Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122692
American history.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Conscription

Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America /
LDR:04854nmm a22004693i 4500 001 2430446
005 20250527055021.5
006 m o d
007 cr|nu||||||||
008 261011s2023 miu||||||m |||||||eng d
020 $a 9798381159684
035 $a (MiAaPQD)AAI30689937
035 $a AAI30689937
040 $a MiAaPQD $b eng $c MiAaPQD $e rda
100 1 $a Covkin, Serena, $e author. $3 3818769
245 1 0 $a Fighting in Court: Women, War, and the Law in Twentieth-Century America / $c Serena Covkin.
264 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2023
300 $a 1 electronic resource (356 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 85-06, Section: A.
500 $a Advisors: Stanley, Amy Dru; Belew, Kathleen Committee members: Green, Adam; Sparrow, James; Weinrib, Laura.
502 $b Ph.D. $c The University of Chicago $d 2023.
520 $a This dissertation is a history of women, war, and the law in twentieth-century America. In particular, it focuses on four landmark decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court: United States v. Schwimmer (1929); Reid v. Covert, first adjudicated in 1956 and then adjudicated again (and reversed) in 1957; Griswold v. Connecticut (1965); and Rostker v. Goldberg (1981). These cases have never before been examined side-by-side, because they traverse multiple domains of constitutional law and multiple, overlapping domains of immigration law, military law, and criminal law as well. This dissertation, however, argues that the Court's decisions in Schwimmer, Reid, Griswold, and Goldberg all hinged on the same, basic question: namely, in what ways and by what means were women obliged-and not obliged-to serve their country in time of war? What's more, the dissertation argues that the four decisions answered this question in wildly different-and sometimes diametrically opposed-ways, necessarily complicating our understanding of how American women (and American men, for that matter) worked to lay claim to the rights and obligations of twentieth-century citizenship.The dissertation begins in the aftermath of the First World War, when the U.S. was abruptly thrust into a new position of international authority-and subsequently became entangled in an almost-endless number of military conflicts around the globe. Beginning in this same period, American women also became increasingly, more intimately involved in both the U.S. military and broader projects of state violence-and a long-assumed distinction between prototypically male citizen-soldiers, on the one hand, and quintessentially female civilians, on the other, fell steadily apart. This dissertation analyzes and interrogates these large-scale (and primarily extra-legal) developments and unearths connections-between America's military fortunes and the closer-to-home battles fought at the U.S. Supreme Court-that many other legal historians have failed to recognize and draw out. At the same time, the dissertation makes clear that constitutional doctrine followed no clear-cut, linear progression: across these four cases, the Court intervened to demarcate women's distance from war just as often as it recognized-or imagined-women's proximity to the same. There was no easy path to sex equality, charted out through armed conflict or otherwise, and sometimes no path to equality at all. Instead, in Schwimmer, Reid, Griswold, and Goldberg, the Court trafficked in contradictions, indulged in legal fictions, and gave rise to unintended consequences that we're still living with today. Chapter 1 focuses on several resident alien women who were denied naturalization-all for refusing to bear arms in defense of the United States-in the decades between the First and Second World Wars. Chapter 2 focuses on two service wives-both of whom, while stationed overseas in the early postwar period, killed their military-officer husbands-and then fought to be tried by civilian juries (rather than by military courts-martial) for their crimes. Chapter 3 examines the Cold War origins of the constitutional right to privacy. Chapter 4 examines the contested constitutionality of the all-male military draft, from the Vietnam War era through the early 1980s.
546 $a English
590 $a School code: 0330
650 4 $a American history. $3 2122692
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Womens studies. $3 2122688
650 4 $a Military history. $3 552332
653 $a Conscription
653 $a Military justice
653 $a Naturalization
653 $a Privacy
653 $a Supreme Court
653 $a First World War
690 $a 0337
690 $a 0453
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0722
710 2 $a The University of Chicago. $b History. $e degree granting institution. $3 3818770
720 1 $a Stanley, Amy Dru $e degree supervisor.
720 1 $a Belew, Kathleen $e degree supervisor.
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 85-06A.
790 $a 0330
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2023
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30689937