Os direitos LGBTI+ no Supremo Tribunal Federal (2011-2020)

• Ano de defesa: 2024
• Autor(a) principal: Tavares, Rodolfo Souza
• Outros Autores: [e-mail]
• Orientador(a): Meireles, Fernando
• Banca de defesa: Schaefer, Bruno Marques , Nunes, Fábio José Kerche
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Política
• Departamento: Centro de Ciências Sociais::Instituto de Estudos Sociais e Políticos
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Judicialização; Direitos fundamentais; Minorias sexuais e de gênero; Brasil; Supremo Tribunal Federal; Poder judiciário; Litigância estratégica; Judicialização da política; Direitos LGBTI+; Judicialization of politics; Strategic litigation
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Judiciary; Supreme Federal Court; LGBTI+ rights
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CIENCIAS HUMANAS::CIENCIA POLITICA::COMPORTAMENTO POLITICO
• Link de acesso: http://www.bdtd.uerj.br/handle/1/23732

This research aims to understand the enforcement of LGBTI+ rights in Brazil through the Supreme Federal Court over the last decade. The actions analyzed are the judgments on same-sex civil unions, rectification of the civil registry of transgender people, criminalization of homotransphobia, and blood donation by gay and bisexual men. The literature on the judicialization of politics and strategic litigation of social movements was reviewed, and a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods was used to understand the role of the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs, and the amici curiae as political actors in the process of this conquest of rights. The quantitative analysis of the texts of the judgments' decisions offers which arguments were mobilized by the STF ministers in their votes while the in-depth interviews with the actors involved in the judgments allow us to understand how the rights were conquered. A STF minister, lawyers for amici curiae, representatives of LGBTI+ and human rights movements and NGOs, and other relevant selected actors are among the interviewees. The multiplicity of actors is reflected in the strategies adopted for the litigation of LGBTI+ rights and in the perceptions of the court's action as a protector of fundamental rights and a legislator.