Equality in the law is not Possible nor Desirable.edited.edited
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Notre Dame *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
2020
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
8
Uploaded by nkimanzi89
1
Equality in the law is not Possible nor Desirable
Name
Institution
Professor
Course
Date
2
Equality in the law is not Possible nor Desirable
Introduction
In the legal system, equality is a complex idea that includes justice, impartiality, and fairness. It suggests no bias or discrimination in applying the law, guaranteeing that everyone is treated equally and fairly. This paper will examine the challenges of attaining and construing legal equality, particularly emphasizing the Turner v. Canada (Attorney General) 2012 case study. Levan Turner's battle against racial and size-based discrimination is a moving illustration of the difficulties in achieving full equality under the law. Thesis: As demonstrated in Turner v. Canada (Attorney General) 2012, cultural biases, legal intricacies, and interpretive constraints all work against the implementation of equality under the law despite it being a fundamental principle.
Intersectionality and Discrimination
According to Kimberlé Crenshaw, the case Turner v. Canada (Attorney General) illustrates the complex relationship between various aspects of a person's identity and introduces the idea of intersectionality. The concept of intersectionality recognizes that a person's experiences with discrimination are not unique but rather the result of the confluence
of multiple social identities.
As quoted, "
Intersectionality's troubles with discrimination law begin with this simple but settled normative idea of discrimination based on no more than a single ground”
(
Atrey, 2019, p. 8). In Levan Turner's case, structural barriers to employment within the Canada Border Services Agency were caused by the intersection of his Black male identity and his physical appearance—more specifically, his obesity.
According to Crenshaw's intersectionality concept, discrimination combines societal biases against several facets of an individual's identity rather than just the sum of its parts. Turner's experience serves as a striking example of this: he was excluded not only because he
was obese or Black but also because of the combined prejudices that resulted from the
3
intersection of these identities
(
Vlex, 2018). Prejudices held by society regarding physical appearance combined with his race resulted in a systematic denial of fair employment opportunities. Understanding the intricacies of legal structures requires a focus on intersectional discrimination. It highlights the necessity of taking a nuanced approach to dealing with prejudice in the legal system because legislation frequently needs to sufficiently consider the complex nature of discrimination
(
Atrey, 2019). Turner's case is a sobering reminder that legal institutions need to change to acknowledge and address the complex web of discrimination that people with intersecting identities must endure. If this is not done, systemic inequality is maintained, and societal equality is not achieved.
Turner's experience thus emphasizes the difficulties in addressing intersectional discrimination within legal frameworks, highlighting the need for a more nuanced understanding of how many aspects of identity cross to reinforce institutional obstacles and compound biases.
Legal Challenges in Equality
The legal framework designed to promote equality frequently runs into problems when dealing with subtle types of discrimination. These difficulties are illustrated by Turner v. Canada (Attorney General), which shows the flaws in interpreting and implementing legislation to advance equality
(
Vlex, 2018). Turner's first tribunal defeat eloquently highlights the gaps in legal understanding and how equality rules are applied. Even with its best efforts to be impartial, the legal system is susceptible to prejudices and personal interpretations. These biases in the judicial system cause differences in the identification and correction of discriminatory incidents.
This situation aligns with the core tenets of critical legal studies, which maintain that cultural biases and societal power structures shape the law. Legal systems unintentionally support the disparities that marginalized groups experience because they frequently mirror
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
prevailing social norms and viewpoints
(
Kleinberg et al., 2018). In Turner's case, prejudices in society towards people who have intersecting identities—being Black and obese—may have had an impact on the tribunal's initial decision. Implicit or explicit, these prejudices permeate court decisions and prevent complicated forms of discrimination from being sufficiently addressed.
Furthermore, legal interpretations may need help to capture the complex nature of prejudice fully. Laws intended to advance equality may only partially capture the complex interplay between different types of discrimination (Kleinberg et al., 2018). This lack of knowledge about the law makes it more difficult to resolve cases like Turner's, in which racial
and physical appearance discrimination coexist to create impediments to equitable treatment. Turner's legal odyssey emphasizes the urgent need to reevaluate and improve legal structures to handle complex discrimination more thoroughly. Achieving Substantive Equality
Turner v. Canada (Attorney General) sheds light on the important distinction made in the legal debate between nominal and substantive equality. Formal equality, based on the notion that every person should be treated equally, sometimes ignores the particular circumstances and structural obstacles that excluded groups must overcome. Substantial equality, on the other hand, seeks to address the underlying structural problems that support inequality to address these differences
(
Bernstein et al., 2020). The Federal Court of Appeals' decision favoring Levan Turner significantly advances substantive equality. His triumph recognizes that addressing prejudice based on the overlapping identities of race and physical appearance requires more than a formal equality strategy. The Court recognized Turner's claim and ordered a new hearing, indicating that discrimination requires a more complex definition than equal treatment.
5
This legal milestone emphasizes how important it is for legal structures to change so they can consider the complex difficulties faced by people with many identities. Turner's case
is a shining example for those who support equitable legal interpretations and applications that aim for equity rather than merely outward equality by addressing the structural obstacles that prevent underprivileged groups from taking advantage of possibilitie
s (
Vlex, 2018). It highlights the need for substantive equality, in which legal measures actively seek to eliminate deeply rooted structural inequities rather than merely being neutral.
Intersectionality and Substantive Equality
Turner's case highlights the complexity resulting from the confluence of physical and racial discrimination. Crenshaw's idea of intersectionality effectively demonstrates how Turner's race and body size came together to create a distinct and complex kind of discrimination. This convergence necessitated a careful legal analysis considering these identities' complex interactions
(
Bailey et al., 2019). Williams' critical legal studies highlight the limitations that legal systems have to handle this difficult discrimination successfully. Turner's final win before the Federal Court of Appeals acts as a lighthouse, indicating that nominal equality alone is not enough. His victory pushes for substantive equality and asks that laws consider the complex nature of discrimination. It calls for a change to a more inclusive strategy that recognizes and addresses the variety of intersecting identities people possess to ensure that everyone is treated fairly under the law.
Conclusion
Turner v. Canada (Attorney General) is a seminal case illustrating the complex obstacles of pursuing legal equality. Turner's experience vividly illustrates intersectionality, highlighting the complex ways discrimination takes many forms and how different facets of identity interact to reinforce systemic biases. This case shows how legal interpretations, shaped by societal biases, frequently fail to address these intricate forms of discrimination
6
adequately. However, Turner's victory in the Federal Court of Appeals represents a significant
advancement in acknowledging the requirement for substantive equality. It emphasizes how crucial it is to change legal frameworks to consider the complex difficulties people encounter due to their overlapping identities. Societies can get closer to creating an environment that is more inclusive, just, and equitable for everyone by accepting this complexity and working for
meaningful equality.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
7
References
Atrey, S. (2019). Intersectional discrimination. Oxford University Press, USA.
https://books.google.com/books?
hl=en&lr=&id=kZOwDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Atrey,+S.+(2019).
+Intersectional+discrimination.+Oxford+University+Press,
+USA.&ots=933gJaBFnG&sig=JYIAMWZnXyupLTforonT1BsOERo
Bailey, J., Steeves, V., Burkell, J., Shade, L. R., Ruparelia, R., & Regan, P. (2019). Getting at equality: Research methods informed by the lessons of intersectionality. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, p. 18, 1609406919846753.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1609406919846753
Bernstein, R. S., Bulger, M., Salipante, P., & Weisinger, J. Y. (2020). From diversity to inclusion to equity: A theory of generative interactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 167, 395-410.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-019-04180-1
Kleinberg, J., Ludwig, J., Mullainathan, S., & Sunstein, C. R. (2018). Discrimination in the Age of Algorithms. Journal of Legal Analysis, pp. 10, 113–174.
https://academic.oup.com/jla/article/doi/10.1093/jla/laz001/5476086?ref=akusion-ci-
shi-dai-bizinesumedeia
VLex. (2018). Turner v. Canada (Attorney General), (2012) 431 N.R. 327 (FCA). VLex. https://ca.vlex.com/vid/turner-v-can-g-679773329
8