The Mistaken Assumption of Intentionality in Equal Protection Law: Psychological Science and the Interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment
University of California, Berkeley - School of Law
Todd L. Pittinsky
Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS)
KSG Working Paper No. RWP05-011
In this article we explore the intersection of advances in the psychological science of intergroup attitudes and stereotypes and the law. Increasing recognition of the automatic and implicit nature of many attitudes, and their automatic influence on behavior, is making it clearer and clearer that the foundation on which Equal Protection analysis has been based is erroneous. While some legal scholars have attempted to apply the lessons from social psychology to employment discrimination, the same efforts have not been made with respect to Fourteenth Amendment and Equal Protection jurisprudence. Examining this disconnect leads to serious questions about the extent to which the current formulation of Equal Protection jurisprudence achieves its original and continuing aims of securing the equal protection of the laws for all citizens. In this article, we focus on the implications for Equal Protection jurisprudence of recent psychological science findings on prejudice and discrimination. We have chosen this focus because these implications could influence the protection of individual rights throughout society in fundamental ways.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 42
Keywords: intentionality, equal protection law, psychological science, Law and Legal Institutions, Leadership/Conflict Management, Welfare / Health Care/ Social Policy
Date posted: May 12, 2005
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 1.656 seconds