Skip to main content Accessibility help

Feminist Judgment Series: Rewritten Judicial Opinions rewrites key judicial decisions through a social justice lens. Using a broad approach to feminist methods and theories that highlights traditionally marginalized perspectives such as gender, race and class, these rewritten opinions provide an alternative history of United States law. These feminist judgments directly challenge the idea that the law is neutral and objective by suggesting how cases could have been decided differently if guided by concerns about justice for all people, even with the same facts and precedent as the original judgment. Because the rewritten judgments straddle theory and practice, they provide clear, practical illustrations of how theory can be used to change the law.

  • General Editors: Bridget J. Crawford, Pace University, New York, Kathryn M. Stanchi, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Linda L. Berger, University of Nevada, Las Vegas
  • Advisory Boards: Kathryn Abrams, University of California, Berkeley, Katharine T. Bartlett, Duke University, North Carolina, Mary Anne Case, University of Chicago, April L. Cherry, Cleveland State University, Margaret E. Johnson, University of Baltimore, Sonia Katyal, University of California, Berkeley, Nancy Leong, University of Denver, Rachel Moran, University of California, Irvine, Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Boston University, Nancy D. Polikoff, American University, Washington DC, Daniel B. Rodriguez, Northwestern University, Illinois, Susan Deller Ross, Georgetown University, Washington DC, Dean Spade, Seattle University, Robin L. West, Georgetown University, Washington DC, Verna L. Williams, Equal Justice Works