Law & Philosophy

    According to Taylor, he states that the politics of equal rights can be defined in two ways wherein one of the definitions it means that the equal recognition is guaranteed by an identical basket of both the rights and immunities for everybody. This is determined by the universal conduct and the blindness to the variations which has been used as the source of discrimination. While on the other view he states that politics of equal recognition needs special rights and entitlements for groups of people who have been deemed and whose values are at stake (Gutmann & Taylor 1992). Therefore, the political difference and the variation in blindness is equivalent to the neglect and the ridicule of different people which according to Taylor have their cause in equal dignity.

    According to Nitya Iyer, Symes case is a clear demonstration of the insufficiency of a grounds or the categorical approach in the case as it cannot address the differences among the members of a certain group of people who share a common manifestation of one social conduct. The court is in a dilemma since its decisions will either help in shaping the society and in responding to the inequalities that are faced by women and other groups which oppress or it will destroy the shaping of the society. This is genuine as it is the role of the Supreme Court to ensure that they have a ground and a categorical approach in any case that will enable them to respond to inequality cases among the oppressed groups with similar conduct. The court should, therefore, build equality jurisprudence that will enable them to solve the cases of inequality by the women and oppressed groups.

 

 

References

IYER N (1993–4). “Categorical Denials: Equality Rights and the Shaping of Social Identity”

 TAYLOR C. (1992). Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition