Shachar, Ayelet

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","394"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Philosophy & social criticism : PSC"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","411"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","36"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-09-07T11:49:40Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-09-07T11:49:40Z"],["dc.date.issued","2010"],["dc.identifier.gro","3145766"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/3495"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","religion"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.notes.submitter","oschaef1"],["dc.relation.eissn","1461-734X"],["dc.relation.issn","0191-4537"],["dc.title","Faith in Law? Diffusing Tensions between Equality and Diversity"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","64"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Political Theory"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","89"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","28"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-10-16T10:55:43Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-10-16T10:55:43Z"],["dc.date.issued","2000"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1177/0090591700028001004"],["dc.identifier.gro","3147105"],["dc.identifier.gro","3145768"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/9770"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","religion"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.notes.submitter","oschaef1"],["dc.relation.eissn","1552-7476"],["dc.relation.issn","0090-5917"],["dc.title","On Citizenship and Multicultural Vulnerability"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","114"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Citizenship Studies"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","124"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","18"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.contributor.editor","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.contributor.editor","Levey, Geoffrey Brahm"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1080/13621025.2014.886389"],["dc.identifier.gro","3147089"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/9752"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.issn","1362-1025"],["dc.title","Introduction: Citizenship and the ‘Right to Have Rights’"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","253"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Cardozo Law Review"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","297"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","23"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-03-06T11:02:46Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-03-06T11:02:46Z"],["dc.date.issued","2001"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/12814"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.title","Two Critiques of Multiculturalism"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","199"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","223"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.contributor.editor","Kymlicka, Will"],["dc.contributor.editor","Norman, Wayne"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.issued","2000"],["dc.description.abstract","The first section of this chapter (Women and family law) demonstrates why women living in minority groups are more vulnerable than men to maltreatment in the family‐law context. In the second section, two extant approaches to family‐law accommodation (the ‘secular absolutist’ model, and the ‘religious particularist’ model) are discussed that exemplify the family‐law arrangements adopted in numerous legal democracies. In the last section, a new alternative multicultural approach is developed to family‐law accommodation. This is called the ‘joint‐governance’ model, and while it respects the crucial identity‐preserving function of family law, it also seeks to provide women living in close‐knit religious or cultural groups with the legal protection guaranteed to them as state citizenship."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1093/019829770x.003.0008"],["dc.identifier.gro","3147090"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/9753"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.publisher","Oxford University Press"],["dc.publisher.place","Oxford"],["dc.relation.doi","10.1093/019829770X.001.0001"],["dc.relation.isbn","978-0-19-829644-7"],["dc.relation.ispartof","Citizenship in Diverse Societies"],["dc.title","Should Church and State Be Joined at the Altar? Women's Rights and the Multicultural Dilemma"],["dc.type","book_chapter"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","83"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Windsor Review of Legal and Social Issues"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","111"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","8"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-03-06T11:17:33Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-03-06T11:17:33Z"],["dc.date.issued","1998"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/12818"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.title","Reshaping the Multicultural Model: Group Accommodation and Individual Rights"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","429"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","International Journal of Constitutional Law"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","448"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","10"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-10-16T10:55:43Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-10-16T10:55:43Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.abstract","All over the world, the challenges of defining the scope and boundaries of the degree of public recognition and accommodation that ought to be given to religious faiths and practices have come to occupy a place at the forefront of public debate. The claims of culture have been thoroughly explored in both the constitutional context and the criminal law area. But what about the civil side of the justice system? What are the core challenges raised by the “migration” of claims of culture from the constitutional law arena of the public accommodation of religious diversity to the realm of civil adversarial disputes between private parties in family matters, where the state and its agencies do not act as immediate stakeholders or interveners? Legal scholars and political philosophers have paid surprisingly little attention to this question. This paper begins to amend this lacuna. The discussion is informed by a quantitative and qualitative study of Canadian private family law litigation that involved a cultural element, covering the period 1980-2005. Drawing insights from this comprehensive study, I will articulate and defend the characteristics of what we might call the culture-demystifying approach. On this account, the claims of culture can operate as a legitimate consideration by a trial or appellate judge, where relevant—but crucially as only one among many other factors and considerations—rather than the absolute trump card that one of the parties can raise to end a dispute. The culture-demystifying approach will be distinguished from two “absolutist” alternatives: the culture-neutralizing and the culture-override approaches. By ensuring that identity-based factors are neither excluded nor privileged, the culture-demystifying approach comes closer to fulfilling the promise of equal citizenship for women and other historically vulnerable members, as well as meeting the goals of fairness and justice for the individual litigants."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1093/icon/mor066"],["dc.identifier.gro","3147104"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/9769"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.issn","1474-2640"],["dc.title","Demystifying culture"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Perspectives on Politics"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","2"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-03-06T12:17:38Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-03-06T12:17:38Z"],["dc.date.issued","2004"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/12830"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.relation.reviewof","Lubavitchers as Citizens: A Paradox of Liberal Democracy, by Jan Feldman"],["dc.title","Review of Jan Feldman, “Lubavitchers as Citizens: A Paradox of Liberal Democracy\""],["dc.type","review"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","45"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","International Journal of Constitutional Law"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","50"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","18"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.contributor.author","Hirschl, Ran"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:27:32Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:27:32Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1093/icon/moaa013"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/82321"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relation.eissn","1474-2659"],["dc.relation.issn","1474-2640"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Politikwissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Vergleichende Verfassungsforschung"],["dc.title","Spatial statism: A rejoinder"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","85"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","104"],["dc.contributor.author","Shachar, Ayelet"],["dc.contributor.editor","Triadafilopoulos, Phil"],["dc.date.accessioned","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.available","2017-10-16T10:55:41Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","Immigration-destination countries are proactively engaged in efforts to reshape and fine-tune their various admission streams, especially those designed to attract the highly skilled. The global race for talent entails a competitive, multiplayer, and multilevel scramble among jurisdictions, and, once the race for talent has begun, the pressure to engage in targeted recruitment increases, as no country wants to be left behind."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/978-1-4614-0082-0_5"],["dc.identifier.gro","3147085"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/9748"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.status","final"],["dc.publisher","Springer"],["dc.publisher.place","New York, NY"],["dc.relation.doi","10.1007/978-1-4614-0082-0"],["dc.relation.isbn","978-1-46140-081-3"],["dc.relation.ispartof","Wanted and Welcome?"],["dc.title","Talent Matters: Immigration Policy-Setting as a Competitive Scramble Among Jurisdictions"],["dc.type","book_chapter"],["dc.type.internalPublication","unknown"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","no"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]