Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Tressoldi, Irenice
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Tramontina, Robison
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344
Resumo: The participation of society in public forums is studied to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543, which assesses the unconstitutionality of norms that prohibit the donation of blood by men who have sexual relations with other men and their partners. The objective is to answer the problem: the public debate promoted by the amici curiae's performance in the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543 conferred social legitimacy and represented democratic support to the public reason of the Court? This is a bibliographic and documentary research. The arguments used in the votes of the Ministers are critically analyzed in the light of Rawlsian public reason, in order to identify the contribution of society to build the reason for deciding. It is concluded that the role of amici curiae were significant and positive to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the case analyzed.
id UNOESC-1_0c0c916618b659585318c5452c14f9be
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.unoesc.edu.br:article/32344
network_acronym_str UNOESC-1
network_name_str Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
repository_id_str
spelling Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543Razão pública e amicus curiae no Supremo Tribunal Federal: análise dos argumentos utilizados na Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade n. 5.543 Public ReasonJohn RawlsAmicus curiaeFederal Supreme Court (STF)Judicial ReviewRazão PúblicaJohn RawlsAmicus curiaeSupremo Tribunal FederalControle de ConstitucionalidadeThe participation of society in public forums is studied to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543, which assesses the unconstitutionality of norms that prohibit the donation of blood by men who have sexual relations with other men and their partners. The objective is to answer the problem: the public debate promoted by the amici curiae's performance in the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543 conferred social legitimacy and represented democratic support to the public reason of the Court? This is a bibliographic and documentary research. The arguments used in the votes of the Ministers are critically analyzed in the light of Rawlsian public reason, in order to identify the contribution of society to build the reason for deciding. It is concluded that the role of amici curiae were significant and positive to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the case analyzed.Aborda-se a participação da sociedade em fóruns públicos para formar a razão pública do Supremo Tribunal Federal na Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade n. 5.543, que avalia a inconstitucionalidade de atos normativos que vedam a doação de sangue por homens que se relacionem sexualmente com outros homens e suas parceiras. Busca-se responder o problema: o debate público promovido pela atuação de amici curiae perante o Supremo Tribunal Federal na Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade n. 5.543 conferiu legitimação e representou um suporte democrático à razão pública do Tribunal?  Trata-se de pesquisa bibliográfica e documental. Analisa-se criticamente os argumentos utilizados nos votos dos Ministros e Ministras à luz da razão pública rawlsiana, a fim de identificar a contribuição da sociedade para construir a razão de decidir. Conclui-se que a atuação de amici curiae foi significativa e positiva para formar a razão pública do Supremo Tribunal Federal no caso analisado.Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina, UNOESC2022-12-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado por Paresapplication/pdftext/htmlhttps://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/3234410.18593/ejjl.32344Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Bd. 23 Nr. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 No. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 Núm. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 No. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; v. 23 n. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-3922179-79431519-5899reponame:Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Lawinstname:Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (UNOESC)instacron:UNOESCporhttps://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344/18310https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344/18311Copyright (c) 2022 Irenice Tressoldi, Robison Tramontinahttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessTressoldi, IreniceTramontina, Robison2023-02-06T11:41:47Zoai:ojs.periodicos.unoesc.edu.br:article/32344Revistahttps://portalperiodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/indexhttp://editora.unoesc.edu.br/index.php/espacojuridico/oaieditora@unoesc.edu.br||ejjl@unoesc.edu.br2179-79431519-5899opendoar:2023-02-06T11:41:47Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law - Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (UNOESC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
Razão pública e amicus curiae no Supremo Tribunal Federal: análise dos argumentos utilizados na Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade n. 5.543
title Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
spellingShingle Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
Tressoldi, Irenice
Public Reason
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Federal Supreme Court (STF)
Judicial Review
Razão Pública
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Controle de Constitucionalidade
title_short Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
title_full Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
title_fullStr Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
title_full_unstemmed Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
title_sort Public reason and amicus curiae in the Supreme Federal Court: analysis of the arguments used in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543
author Tressoldi, Irenice
author_facet Tressoldi, Irenice
Tramontina, Robison
author_role author
author2 Tramontina, Robison
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Tressoldi, Irenice
Tramontina, Robison
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Public Reason
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Federal Supreme Court (STF)
Judicial Review
Razão Pública
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Controle de Constitucionalidade
topic Public Reason
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Federal Supreme Court (STF)
Judicial Review
Razão Pública
John Rawls
Amicus curiae
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Controle de Constitucionalidade
description The participation of society in public forums is studied to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543, which assesses the unconstitutionality of norms that prohibit the donation of blood by men who have sexual relations with other men and their partners. The objective is to answer the problem: the public debate promoted by the amici curiae's performance in the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality n. 5.543 conferred social legitimacy and represented democratic support to the public reason of the Court? This is a bibliographic and documentary research. The arguments used in the votes of the Ministers are critically analyzed in the light of Rawlsian public reason, in order to identify the contribution of society to build the reason for deciding. It is concluded that the role of amici curiae were significant and positive to form the public reason of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in the case analyzed.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-12-12
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Avaliado por Pares
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344
10.18593/ejjl.32344
url https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344
identifier_str_mv 10.18593/ejjl.32344
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344/18310
https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/32344/18311
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Irenice Tressoldi, Robison Tramontina
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Irenice Tressoldi, Robison Tramontina
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina, UNOESC
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina, UNOESC
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Bd. 23 Nr. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392
Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 No. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392
Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 Núm. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392
Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; Vol. 23 No. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392
Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law [EJJL]; v. 23 n. 2 (2022): Espaço Juridico Journal of Law [EJJL]; 365-392
2179-7943
1519-5899
reponame:Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
instname:Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (UNOESC)
instacron:UNOESC
instname_str Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (UNOESC)
instacron_str UNOESC
institution UNOESC
reponame_str Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
collection Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law - Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina (UNOESC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv editora@unoesc.edu.br||ejjl@unoesc.edu.br
_version_ 1814256230976192512

Registros relacionados