No abstract

Constitutions empower people to ask judges for binding orders directing state agents to remedy rights violations, but state agents do not always comply. Scholars propose that by making it easier to observe noncompliance, courts can leverage public pressure for compliance when it exists. Yet, exposure to information about noncompliance might lead individuals to accept high levels of noncompliance and reduce support for judicial remedies. We estimate the rate of noncompliance with judges’ orders via a rigorous tracking study of the Colombian tutela. We then embed this rate in three survey experiments fielded with online national quota samples. We show that people find the noncompliance rate in the tutela highly unacceptable regardless of a variety of mitigating factors. We also show that public reactions to this information depend on prior expectations, a finding that stresses the importance of scholarship in cognitive psychology for studies of compliance in law and politics.

No abstract

No abstract

The concept of "family" plays an important role in the way national legal regimes distribute both power and resources. However, the idea of what a family is or should be is not univocal for all branches of law. In this paper we wish to contribute to feminist thinking about the law and to legal theory in general, by showing the contradictions and gaps in law's incorporation of the legal concept of the family and their distributive impact. We use the notion of conceptual fragmentation to refer to the irregular manner in which family as a legal concept lands into the realms of diverse fields of law at different moments in time and with different emphasis. We argue that conceptual fragmentation makes connections through time and subject matter invisible, and therefore makes it harder to have a critique of the role of the family, treated as a legal concept, in the oppression of women. We establish that conceptual fragmentation is not irrational or incoherent but rather patterned in ways that correspond to the losses of women in contemporary societies. We use the case of colombian law to illustrate the stakes involved in defining the family and the operations that we call fragmentation. In particular, we explain how family law exceptionalism was produced, the importance of the legal concept of the family within family law and its ambivalence as to the proper definition, and the evolution of the concept of family within social policy. We argue that even if the stakes of the family seem to be all for same sex couples, in so far as "family" is still about reproduction and distribution, we should be vigilant about how women fare in the conceptual turns that seek to bring us closer to the natural family. Abstract Resumen ResumoEl concepto de familia desempeña un rol fundamental en la forma en que los regímenes jurídicos distribuyen poder y recursos. No obstante, la definición de qué es una familia o que debería serlo, no es uniforme en las distintas ramas del derecho. En este artículo buscamos contribuir al pensamiento feminista con respecto al derecho y a la teoría jurídica en general, mostrando las contradicciones y lagunas que existen en la forma en la que el derecho incorpora el concepto jurídico de familia, así como también su impacto distributivo. Para este fin utilizamos el concepto de fragmentación conceptual, que permite abordar la forma irregular en la cual la familia, como concepto jurídico, es incorporada en distintas ramas del derecho, en distintos momentos y con distintos énfasis. Argumentamos que esta fragmentación conceptual hace que las conexiones a través del tiempo y materia sean invisibilizadas y, por ende, hace que sea más difícil criticar el rol de la familia como concepto jurídico que PALAVRAS-CHAVE:Direito de família | política social | feminismo | gênero | desigualdade | mulheres