Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court. By Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, and Bridget J. Crawford (Eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

• Published date: 01 December 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12303
• Date: 01 December 2017

305

In Olivia Road, the Court stated that the parties (the municipal-

306

ity and the occupiers of buildings) were required to “engage with

307

each other meaningfully and as soon as it is possible to resolve their

308

differences and difficulties” (Liebenberg 2012: 14). The outcome of

309

the engagement was a detailed agreement on how to improve the

310

safety and health conditions in the buildings involved in the dis-

311

pute. “Meaningful engagement” has subsequently been used

312

mainly in eviction cases. This can be seen as a successful example of

313

a mediating strategic role played by the Courts.

314

Although stimulating, such solutions need to be examined care-

315

fully by constitutional thinkers. There is a fine balance between

316

localized settlement negotiations and normative guidelines pro-

317

moted in a transparent way by Courts. Despite these shortcomings,

318

there is still a gap in the refinement of such dialogic engagement

319

initiatives. Constitutional Courts as Mediators takes major steps in pro-

320

viding a creative approach to judicial behavior, and represents an

321

impressive contribution and an essential resource for any scholar,

322

judge, or politician interested in capturing the nuances of the juris-

323

prudence of Constitutional Courts in a powerful perspective.

324

References

325

Liebenberg, S. (2012) “Engaging the Paradoxes of the Universal and Particular in

326

Human Rights Adjudication. The Possibilities and Pitfalls of ‘Meaningful

327

Engagement,’” 12 African Human Rights Law Journal J. 1–29.

328

P

erez-Li~

n

an, An

ıbal (2007) Presidential Impeachment and the New Political Instability in Latin

329

America. New York:Cambridge Univ. Press.

330*** 331

332

Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Opinions of the United States Supreme Court.

333

By Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger, and Bridget J. Crawford

334

(Eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

335

Reviewed by Trish Luker, Faculty of Law, University of Technology

336

Sydney

337

This collection of feminist rewritings of U.S. Supreme Court deci-

338

sions is the most recent contribution to the burgeoning field of femi-

339

nist judgments projects that have already emerged in a number of

340

common law jurisdictions, including Canada, England/Wales,

341

Northern/Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. While feminist

1008 Book Reviews