Katie L Gibson
Biographic Data
| ID | 4418627 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Katie L Gibson |
| GIVEN NAMES | Katie L |
| FAMILY NAME | Gibson |
| SIGNATURE | GIBSON K L |
| AFFILIATIONS | Colorado State University |
| VERIFIED | No |
| TOTAL WORKS | 7 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 7 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 7 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2006 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 2 |
Rewriting the Script
This study examines Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s distinctive voice of judicial resistance. An examination of key touchpoints over her first year on the US Supreme Court—her confirmation hearings, her questioning at oral argument in Merrill v. Milligan, and her dissenting opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, reveal how a rhetoric of progressive originalism animates her voice on the court. I argue that Justice…
A rhetorical praxis of rebellious knowledge production
In 2016, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a stunning legal opinion that challenged the Supreme Court's ruling in Utah v. Strieff and marked a watershed moment for her voice of dissent. In this essay, I argue that Justice Sotomayor's Strieff dissent was animated by a praxis of rebellious knowledge production – disruptive moves of legal opinion writing that rework interpretive traditions of context, authority, and lived experience to center an epistem…
A plea for democratic resistance
A Rupture in the Courtroom
In 2018, 156 survivors took over a small courtroom in Lansing, Michigan, to deliver victim impact statements at the sentencing hearing of Larry Nassar. This article argues that the survivors collectivized their voices and mobilized the subversive potential of the victim impact statement (VIS) to disrupt courtroom norms, hegemonic scripts, and generic expectations that contain and diminish testimony of sexual violence. This article also argues tha…
The Women Take Over
Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt was the most important abortion case to come before the United States Supreme Court in 25 years. It was also the first time that three women were seated on the high court to hear a case that challenged the fundamental right to choose abortion. I investigate the questioning by Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan at oral argument for Whole Women’s Health as a rhetorical enactment of feminist judging and argue…
In Defense of Women's Rights
This article examines Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart to argue that her feminist jurisprudence challenges the rhetorical genre of judicial opinion. Ginsburg's dissent undermines the rhetorical commitments to neutrality, abstraction, and universality that overwhelmingly shape the voice of the law. Instead, Ginsburg's rhetoric advances a more promising field of argument for advocates of reproductive choice an…
United States v. Virginia
This paper examines the rhetoric of the Court's opinions in United States v. Virginia. The majority opinion is shaped by a framework of progress that acts as a conservative warrant for a politically liberal conceptualization of women. A competing framework of preservation shapes the dissent and reasserts the legitimacy of the traditional sameness/difference approach to gender equality. This analysis demonstrates that different methods of Constitu…
A Rupture in the Courtroom
In 2018, 156 survivors took over a small courtroom in Lansing, Michigan, to deliver victim impact statements at the sentencing hearing of Larry Nassar. This article argues that the survivors collectivized their voices and mobilized the subversive potential of the victim impact statement (VIS) to disrupt courtroom norms, hegemonic scripts, and generic expectations that contain and diminish testimony of sexual violence. This article also argues tha…
In Defense of Women's Rights
This article examines Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart to argue that her feminist jurisprudence challenges the rhetorical genre of judicial opinion. Ginsburg's dissent undermines the rhetorical commitments to neutrality, abstraction, and universality that overwhelmingly shape the voice of the law. Instead, Ginsburg's rhetoric advances a more promising field of argument for advocates of reproductive choice an…
United States v. Virginia
This paper examines the rhetoric of the Court's opinions in United States v. Virginia. The majority opinion is shaped by a framework of progress that acts as a conservative warrant for a politically liberal conceptualization of women. A competing framework of preservation shapes the dissent and reasserts the legitimacy of the traditional sameness/difference approach to gender equality. This analysis demonstrates that different methods of Constitu…
United States v. Virginia
This paper examines the rhetoric of the Court's opinions in United States v. Virginia. The majority opinion is shaped by a framework of progress that acts as a conservative warrant for a politically liberal conceptualization of women. A competing framework of preservation shapes the dissent and reasserts the legitimacy of the traditional sameness/difference approach to gender equality. This analysis demonstrates that different methods of Constitu…
In Defense of Women's Rights
This article examines Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion in Gonzales v. Carhart to argue that her feminist jurisprudence challenges the rhetorical genre of judicial opinion. Ginsburg's dissent undermines the rhetorical commitments to neutrality, abstraction, and universality that overwhelmingly shape the voice of the law. Instead, Ginsburg's rhetoric advances a more promising field of argument for advocates of reproductive choice an…
The Women Take Over
Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt was the most important abortion case to come before the United States Supreme Court in 25 years. It was also the first time that three women were seated on the high court to hear a case that challenged the fundamental right to choose abortion. I investigate the questioning by Justices Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan at oral argument for Whole Women’s Health as a rhetorical enactment of feminist judging and argue…
A Rupture in the Courtroom
In 2018, 156 survivors took over a small courtroom in Lansing, Michigan, to deliver victim impact statements at the sentencing hearing of Larry Nassar. This article argues that the survivors collectivized their voices and mobilized the subversive potential of the victim impact statement (VIS) to disrupt courtroom norms, hegemonic scripts, and generic expectations that contain and diminish testimony of sexual violence. This article also argues tha…
A rhetorical praxis of rebellious knowledge production
In 2016, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a stunning legal opinion that challenged the Supreme Court's ruling in Utah v. Strieff and marked a watershed moment for her voice of dissent. In this essay, I argue that Justice Sotomayor's Strieff dissent was animated by a praxis of rebellious knowledge production – disruptive moves of legal opinion writing that rework interpretive traditions of context, authority, and lived experience to center an epistem…
A plea for democratic resistance
Rewriting the Script
This study examines Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s distinctive voice of judicial resistance. An examination of key touchpoints over her first year on the US Supreme Court—her confirmation hearings, her questioning at oral argument in Merrill v. Milligan, and her dissenting opinion in Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, reveal how a rhetoric of progressive originalism animates her voice on the court. I argue that Justice…
Law (6 works) · Law in Society and Culture (6 works) · Political science (6 works) · Rhetorical question (6 works) · Sociology (6 works) · Law (5 works) · Philosophy (5 works) · Rhetoric (5 works) · Law, Rights, and Freedoms (4 works) · Philosophy (4 works)