Kimberle Crenshaw Intersectionality Summary

1657 Words4 Pages

The criminal justice system is a complex system riddled with injustice and inequality that specifically and systematically attacks black people. Intersectionality, as coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw, is an exceedingly important concept that is vital to take into account when applying it to the criminal justice system. Intersectionality allows us to get to the root of each case and assess in depth what the case is truly driving at. Intersectionality draws a complete picture and letting us truly understand all that comes in to play in each case. Humans, similar to the criminal justice system, are complex beings. Generalizing them in certain groups, not allowing for their individuality to be taken into account is a problem the criminal justice system …show more content…

Crenshaw explains the concept of intersectionality as a description of the way different types of oppression can be experienced by one person all at once. She uses the analogy of traffic at an intersection to explain intersectionality. Consider a situation where there is traffic in a four-way intersection where the traffic is coming from all four directions. Discrimination is each flow of traffic. If an accident happens in that intersection, it could be caused by cars traveling from any one of those directions or from all directions. Crenshaw’s central argument is that Black women in particular are discriminated against in ways that often do not fit neatly within the legal categories they are often put in and because of this legal and institutionalized framework, Black women are often rendered legally “invisible”. Crenshaw describes several discrimination-based lawsuits to illustrate how Black women’s complaints often fall between the cracks precisely because they are discriminated against both as women and as black persons. The ruling in one such case, DeGraffenreid v. General Motors, filed by five Black women in 1976, demonstrates this point …show more content…

All of the Black women hired after 1970 lost their jobs fairly quickly, however, in mass layoffs during the 1973–75 recession. Such a sweeping loss of jobs among Black women led the plaintiffs to argue that seniority-based layoffs, guided by the principle “last hired-first fired,” discriminated against Black women workers at General Motors, extending past discriminatory practices by the company. Yet the court refused to allow the plaintiffs to combine sex-based and race-based discrimination into a single category of discrimination: The plaintiffs allege that they are suing on behalf of black women and that therefore this lawsuit attempts to combine two causes of action into a new special sub-category, namely, a combination of racial and sex-based discrimination…. The plaintiffs are clearly entitled to a remedy if they have been discriminated against. However, they should not be allowed to combine statutory remedies to create a new “super-remedy” which would give them relief beyond what the drafters of the relevant statutes intended. Thus, this lawsuit must be examined to see if it states a cause of action for race discrimination, sex discrimination, or alternatively either, but not a combination of

Open Document