Confrontation and the Re-Privatization of Domestic Violence

When the Supreme Court transformed the right of confrontation in Crawford v. Washington, the prosecution of domestic violence predictably suffered as a result. But commentators at the time did not anticipate how the Court’s subsequent Confrontation Clause cases would utterly misconceive the nature o...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Tuerkheimer, Deborah (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2014
In:Year: 2014
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1865840432
003 DE-627
005 20250121054853.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231017s2014 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1865840432 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1865840432 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Tuerkheimer, Deborah  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Tuerkheimer, Deborah 
245 1 0 |a Confrontation and the Re-Privatization of Domestic Violence 
264 1 |c 2014 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a When the Supreme Court transformed the right of confrontation in Crawford v. Washington, the prosecution of domestic violence predictably suffered as a result. But commentators at the time did not anticipate how the Court’s subsequent Confrontation Clause cases would utterly misconceive the nature of domestic violence, producing a flawed understanding of what constitutes a “testimonial” statement. Although the Court’s definition was especially problematic in the domestic violence context, its overly rigid approach finally became intolerable in Michigan v. Bryant, a 2011 case that did not involve domestic violence. In Bryant, the Court resurrected a public–private divide that relegated domestic violence to quasicriminal status, at best. By distinguishing between “domestic” and “nondomestic” disputes and minimizing the harms and dangers associated with the former, the Court revived long-standing hierarchies that were ostensibly repudiated decades ago. In assessing the significance of the Crawford revolution after ten years, I focus here on this largely unremarked jurisprudential move, which raises the distinct possibility that a privatized notion of domestic violence infected the Court’s reasoning even before Bryant 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/232698931.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4390878832 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1865840432 
LOK |0 005 20231017043716 
LOK |0 008 231017||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE71224930 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw