英美法學中的酷兒與性公民身分─理論初探

Abstract

本篇論文對英美法學中使用酷兒理論與性公民身分理論的法學家做一梗概性的引介，並試著結合酷兒理論和性公民身分理論對2015年美國聯邦最高法院指標性判決Obergefell v. Hodges進行批判式的解讀。從Janet Halley與Katherine Franke批判二元對立與批判婚姻規範性的理論出發，結合Carl Stychin與Brenda Cossman論性公民身分的法學論述，我指出Obergefell v. Hodges判決創造了美國憲法中自由權利法理與美國政治中自由論述的奇特伴侶關係。本文亦嘗試指出美國酷兒理論移植來台後產生的倫理問題並加以批判。

This thesis serves as a preliminary introduction to queer theory and sexual citizenship theories in Anglo-American legal scholarship. In this thesis, I combine the use of queer legal theory and sexual citizenship scholarships in my reading of the landmark decision Obergefell v. Hodges delivered by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2015. With theoretical tools from jurists Janet Halley, Katherine Franke, Carl Stychin and Brenda Cossman, I argue that the Obergefell ruling set forth an interesting coupledom between the Constitutional rights of liberty and the discourse of freedom in American politics. I also argue that the transplantation of queer theory from America to Taiwan produces some ethical wrongs which need to be addressed and critiqued.