Commentary—Liberty’s Forgotten Refugees? Engendering Assembly
Washington University Law Review
This paper addresses three specific issues: Professor Inazu‘s treatment of the always-contested divide between public and private, his overly narrow reading of the Supreme Court‘s intimate association doctrine, and his failure to distinguish exclusion from subordination. Although asking the woman question illuminates some of what is absent from Professor Inazu‘s analysis, the paper offers these comments with both collegial enthusiasm for his scholarship and commitment to ―engaging with the ideas that Liberty’s Refuge sets forth.
Susan Frelich Appleton,
Commentary—Liberty’s Forgotten Refugees? Engendering Assembly,
89 Wash. U. L. Rev. 1423
Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol89/iss6/7