The University of Baltimore Law Forum a Publication of the University of Baltimore School of Law Feminist Legal Theory & Feminisms Conference March 2008
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE LAW FORUM A PUBLICATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW FEMINIST LEGAL THEORY & FEMINISMS CONFERENCE MARCH 2008 ARTICLES Not Our Mother’s Law School?: A Third-Wave Feminist Study of Women’s Experiences in Law School Felice Batlan, K. Hradsky, K. Jeschke, L. Meyer, J. Roberts 124 Empowerment or Estrangement?: Liberal Feminism’s Visions of the “Progress” of Muslim Women Cyra Akila Choudhury 153 Feminist Legal Theory in the Context of International Conflict Teresa Godwin Phelps 173 Creating Law and Policy with Women’s Voices: Feminism in Action Alicia C. Carra 181 Regulating Pregnancy in Taiwan: An Analysis from an Asian Legal Feminist Using Feminist Legal Theories Chih-Chieh Lin 204 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Bean v. Dep’t of Health & Mental Hygiene Megan Ellenson 227 Doe v. Montgomery County Bd. Of Elections Christian Kintigh 231 Karsenty v. Schoukroun Erin Day 235 Marcantonio v. Moen Joseph Maher 239 McGlone v. State Christopher Martini 243 Pridgeon v. Bd. Of License Comm’rs for Prince George’s County Neal Desai 247 Supervisor of Assessments v. Stellar GT David Coppersmith 250 Taylor v. State N. Tucker Meneely 254 Turner v. Kight Michael Beste 258 Walker v. State Katrine Bakhtiary 262 VOLUME THIRTY-NINE Spring 2009 NUMBER TWO UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE LAW FORUM VOLUME 39.2 Spring 2009 NUMBER TWO EDITORIAL BOARD Editor-in-Chief George A. Perry Managing Editor Dorothy Hae Eun Min Articles Editor R.D. Editor Lydia Hu Teresa Marino Assistant Articles Edi- Assistant R.D. Editor tor Shantay Clarke Craig Bannon Production Editor Business Editor Manuscripts Editor Robert Braun Kathy McGinley Matthew Hartman ASSOCIATE EDITORS Patricia Calomeris Michael Gillman Sarah Hale Sarah Jacobs David Jimenez Oyinade Koya Paul Lamari Alison Luzuriaga Mark Talty STAFF Angela Ablorh-Odjidja Megan Ellenson N. Tucker Meneely Katrine Bakhtiary Adrianne Glasgow Robert Miller Michael Beste Melissa Goldmeier George Mowell Christie Church Joseph Heckwolf Stephen Mutschall David Coppersmith Jason Heller Elizabeth Pepinsky Stephen Cornelius Andrew Hepworth Christopher Saabye Elizabeth Cowan Katlyn Hood Eric Scherr Erin Day Alison Karch Cailin Talbert Terry Decker Christian Kintigh Jamaal Thomas Neal Desai Andrew Linberg John Tramazzo Melinda Dunmire Joseph Maher Chris Tully Joshua Fisher Christopher Martini ______________ FACULTY ADVISOR Barbara Ann White Professor of Law University of Baltimore School of Law, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21201. (410) 837-4493. Opinions published herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the University of Baltimore Law Forum, its editors or staff, or the University of Baltimore School of Law. © 2009, University of Baltimore. Cite this issue as 39 U. Balt. L.F. _ (2009). LETTER FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF To the Law Forum Legal Community: The University of Baltimore Law Forum’s Volume 39 editorial board presents our second issue of the 2008-2009 academic year. Volume 39.2 represents the second half of the 2008 Feminism Legal Theory and Feminisms Conference. This volume showcases five articles presented during the Conference’s four panel discussions. One article is an empirical study of gender in law school. The other four articles discuss feminist theory through an international lens. This is an ever-relevant dialog essential to advocate a multi-national sense of gender equality while facilitating an understanding of cultural paradigms, pertinent to achieving feminism goals. The recent development pieces examine eleven of this past year’s most interesting and controversial cases decided by the Court of Appeals of Maryland. These pieces cover the legal gamut, including: factors allowing a mid-cycle property tax re-evaluation, the scope of a party’s attack on the credibility of a hearsay declarant, and the effect filing a pendent federal claim has on state statute of limitations. Publishing Volume 39 was an exhaustive task, impossible without the dedicated work of the Journal’s executive board. Hae Min, my Managing Editor, and I wish to thank our Articles Editors, Lydia Hu and Shantay Clarke, for their tireless work editing, proofing, and cite- checking the articles. We also wish to thank Teresa Marino and Craig Bannon who, as Recent Development Editors, revised the RD process to be more equitable and produce a higher quality submission through competition. Kathleen McGinley, Business Editor, and Robert Braun, Production Editor, both ensured the Journal’s smooth function and timetable throughout the production year. Finally, we wish to thank Matthew Hartman, our Manuscripts Editor, whose attention to detail (and patience in applying changes) created the final vision of this year’s volume. Their skills and knowledge made an insurmountable task truly rewarding. Sincerely, George A. Perry Editor-in-Chief Member, National Conference of Law Reviews UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE LAW FORUM VOLUME 39.2 Spring 2009 NUMBER TWO ARTICLES Not Our Mother’s Law School?: A Third-Wave Feminist Study of Women’s Experiences in Law School Felice Batlan, K. Hradsky, K. Jeschke, L. Meyer, J. Roberts 124 Empowerment or Estrangement?: Liberal Feminism’s Visions of the “Progress” of Muslim Women Cyra Akila Choudhury 153 Feminist Legal Theory in the Context of International Conflict Teresa Godwin Phelps 173 Creating Law and Policy with Women’s Voices: Feminism in Action Alicia C. Carra 181 Regulating Pregnancy in Taiwan: An Analysis from an Asian Legal Feminist Using Feminist Legal Theories Chih-Chieh Lin 204 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Bean v. Dep’t of Health & Mental Hygiene Megan Ellenson 227 Doe v. Montgomery County Bd. Of Elections Christian Kintigh 231 Karsenty v. Schoukroun Erin Day 235 Marcantonio v. Moen Joseph Maher 239 McGlone v. State Christopher Martini 243 Pridgeon v. Bd. Of License Comm’rs for Prince George’s County Neal Desai 247 Supervisor of Assessments v. Stellar GT David Coppersmith 250 Taylor v. State N. Tucker Meneely 254 Turner v. Kight Michael Beste 258 Walker v. State Katrine Bakhtiary 262 ARTICLE NOT OUR MOTHER’S LAW SCHOOL?: A THIRD-WAVE FEMINIST STUDY OF WOMEN’S EXPERIENCES IN LAW SCHOOL1 By: Felice Batlan, PhD, Kelly Hradsky, Kristen Jeschke, LaVonne Meyer, Jill Roberts2 I. INTRODUCTION his article is about a journey and a process as much as it is about a T product. In spring 2007, as part of our Gender and the Law class at Chicago-Kent College of Law, we read portions of Lani Guinier‟s Becoming Gentlemen: Women, Law School, and Institutional Change, as well as more recent studies regarding women‟s experiences in law school.3 Guinier‟s book generated strong reactions. Of the twenty- two women in the class, about three-quarters of them deeply related to the sense of alienation that the women law students at the University of Pennsylvania Law School spoke of in Guinier‟s work. Many of the Chicago-Kent students commented that they wished they had read the article earlier in their law school careers, as they had assumed their own feelings of alienation, depression, and sinking confidence were individual problems. Importantly, Guinier blamed women law students‟ problems on the law school as an institution rather than on personal pathologies. Yet, about a quarter of the class strongly felt that they had not experienced discrimination or feelings of alienation in law school and that the sentiments that dissatisfied women law students experienced were shared by all students — men and women. This prompted a number of questions: Had women‟s experiences in law school changed since Guinier and her colleagues first undertook their study in 1994? Were women‟s experiences at Chicago-Kent different than those at more prestigious schools, especially since 1 The title refers to ASTRID HENRY, NOT MY MOTHER‟S SISTER: GENERATIONAL CONFLICT AND THIRD-WAVE FEMINISM (2004). 2 The authors are a professor and, at the time the article was written, four third-year students at Chicago-Kent College of Law. We want to thank all the students who participated in our survey and provided us with comments. We also appreciate the support of Dean Harold Krent, Assistant Dean Steven Sowle, and Nicole Vilches. Special thanks to Margaret Johnson and the University of Baltimore Law School for organizing an extraordinary conference. 3 See, e.g., LANI GUINIER, MICHELLE FINE, & JANE BALIN, BECOMING GENTLEMEN: WOMEN, LAW SCHOOL, AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE (Beacon Press 1997) (1994). 124 2009] Feminist Study of Women’s Experiences 125 Chicago-Kent had admitted women since the 1890s? As we began contemplating conducting our own survey of student experiences at Chicago-Kent and its correlation to gender, a number of issues emerged. We wondered how we could employ a feminist methodology in conducting our work and how the survey might be animated by feminist theory. Conscious of our own roles and motives, we understood that we, in many ways, were both the subjects and the beneficiaries of our own experiment. By working cooperatively in a close group composed of four women students and a professor on issues concerning our own lived experiences, we were enacting many of the suggestions that a variety of gender studies had made for creating a more amiable environment for women law students. Thus, as we sought to examine other students‟ gendered experiences during law school, we were exploring and transforming our own. This Article proceeds as follows: Part II discusses how we attempted to define and use a third-wave feminist methodology in creating our gender survey. Deeply cognizant of the importance of autobiography to third-wave feminism, Part III includes our own stories about our experiences in law school. Part IV presents the results of our study and Part V sets forth a series of recommendations for improving men and women‟s experiences in law school. The Conclusion sums up what we have learned from our study and its broader implications. II. THIRD-WAVE METHODOLOGIES In the course of our work, we became intrigued by the question of whether there is a third-wave feminist methodology and how the substance of third-wave feminism might inflect our work.