SUPPRESSION OF OMISSION UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL MEANS: THE ADO 26 AND MI 4.733
The present essay seeks to dialogue with the judicial decision of the SupremeFederal Court that declared the National Congress’s unconstitutional omissionto penalize the crime of transphobia. The delimitation of the theme addressesthe method of interpretation and the racio decidendi contained in the...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie (UPM) |
| Repositorio: | Revista Direito Mackenzie |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.editorarevistas.mackenzie.br:article/14550 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://editorarevistas.mackenzie.br/index.php/rmd/article/view/14550 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Sumario: | The present essay seeks to dialogue with the judicial decision of the SupremeFederal Court that declared the National Congress’s unconstitutional omissionto penalize the crime of transphobia. The delimitation of the theme addressesthe method of interpretation and the racio decidendi contained in the groundsof the precedent established by the top body of the Judiciary. The central problemof this text is to ascertain which is the legal-social argument that allowed thecriminal classification of transphobic conducts and which is the reasoning usedby Minister Celso de Mello. The general objective is to debate how the legal interpretationmade it possible to bridge the normative vacuum and allow the realizationof fundamental rights through the application of specific interpretative techniquesof the constitutional jurisdiction. The methodology applied to the essay wasthe hypothetical deductive, which seeks to reach the argument of legal legitimacythat authorizes the application of the racism law to acts of transphobia. |
|---|