Constitutional doctrine and public opinion often move in tandem, particularly in the area of equal protection decisions. The Supreme Court tends to use the clause to invalidate unreasonable or oppressive discrimination, where what is unreasonable or oppressive is determined not by the values of 1868 but by those of contemporary America. This Article offers a microstudy in applied constitutional theory by juxtaposing the development of the Supreme Court's sex discrimination jurisprudence and the evolution of Disney Princesses. The analysis expands beyond confirming that prevailing cultural norms inform Supreme Court decisions; it also offers insight into the limitations of constitutional sex equality doctrine and possible paths forward outside the Court.
jurisprudence, Disney princesses, SCOTUS, equal protection
Wake Forest Law Review
Roosevelt, Kermit III and Tootell, Abigail, "Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall: Disney Princesses’ Reflections of Equal Protection" (2021). All Faculty Scholarship. 2950.