A prerogative regarding the National Congress (Congresso Nacional), in breach associated with the separation of Powers associated with the State. Also, based on the plaintiff, the Council expanded the results associated with ruling associated with the Supreme Court beyond its scope, since same-sex marriage had not been the item for the court’s ruling. 31
The best to same-sex wedding in Brazil will be based upon a ruling on same-sex domestic partnerships, which will not in reality handles the problem of wedding. This led to soft spots that play a role in the possibility of it being extinguished or limited.
Firstly, considering that the directly to marriage that is same-sex universalized by administrative legislation, it is also de-universalized by the exact same means, by legislation or with a Supreme Court ruling. This will maybe maybe not suggest the termination of same-sex marriage, but partners will have to return to independently requesting a court permit, rendering it significantly more hard.
Moreover, if same-sex wedding is banned or restricted to statute, issue will most definitely be submitted towards the Supreme Court. If so, even though the court upholds its own ruling on same-sex domestic partnerships, that doesn’t imply that it will probably always uphold same-sex marriage. As shown above, both lines of thinking that support the recognition of same-sex domestic partnerships as families underneath the legislation never always pose an argumentative constraint. The court might interpret its precedent that is own as restricted to same-sex domestic partnerships.
The Supreme Court has been an important agent of progress in the protection of minority rights in Brazil (in rulings about abortion, name changing for transgender people, adoption by same-sex couples, etc. ) in recent years. It offers done this even under president Bolsonaro, into the decision that is recent that the court respected homophobia being a criminal activity, even yet in the absence of statutory supply to that particular impact. 32 Still, the analysis regarding the reasoning within the ruling on same-sex domestic partnerships reveals that the Supreme Court left the path that is argumentative to adaptation to a big change in governmental weather.
Justices who adopted the space into the constitutional text line of thinking failed to commit by themselves to deciding on same-sex domestic partnerships all the principles that apply to opposite-sex domestic partnerships. To the contrary, as stated above, they suggested that this should not be so.
Besides that, they suggested that the ruling by the Supreme Court from the matter is highly recommended a solution that is temporary since there is no statutory regulation by the Legislature (Supremo Tribunal Federal, note 24, pp. 111-2, 182).
Perhaps the justices who adopted the systematic interpretation line of thinking have actually maybe not expressly admitted the right to same-sex wedding, as seen above. In reality, the main focus regarding the straight to form a household could have introduced an argumentative solution of this logical implications regarding the systematic interpretation thinking.
Taking into consideration the stress involving the court as well as the Legislature, and since some space for legislation must certanly be accommodated to legitimize the Supreme Court it self, a less radical conservative place such as admitting same-sex families (through domestic partnerships) while excluding same-sex wedding might be the court’s way to avoid it of its constitutional and conundrum that is political.
Finally, it must be considered that president Bolsonaro will appoint at the very least two Supreme Court justices through to the end of their term, which might impact the stability associated with court, leading it in an even more direction that is morally conservative. 33
In view of the, we should conclude that the ability to marriage that is same-sex Brazilian legislation nevertheless appears on shaky ground. Although the litigation that is incremental employed by homosexual wedding advocates ended up being effective in attaining equal appropriate therapy, it might probably have led to making the ability to marry susceptible to backlash by separating litigation over domestic partnerships and marriage, and also by concentrating on the best to form a family group.
Arguelhes, Diego Werneck; Ribeiro, Leandro Molhano. “Ministrocracia. O Supremo Tribunal pagerson e o processo democratico brasileiro”. Novos Estudos Cebrap 37 (2018), pp. 13-32. Hyper Links
Barroso, Luis Roberto. “Diferentes, mas iguais. O reconhecimento juridico das relacoes homoafetivas no Brasil”. Revista Brasileira de Direito Constitucional – RBDC 17 (2011), pp. 105-38. Hyper Hyper Links
Buzolin, Livia Goncalves. Direito homoafetivo. Criacao ag ag e discussao nos Poderes Judiciario ag e Legislativo. Sao Paulo: Thomson Reuters, 2019. Hyper Links
Dimoulis, Dimitri; Lunardi, Soraya. Curso de processo constitucional: controle de constitucionalidade ag ag e remedios constitucionais. Sao Paulo: Atlas, 2011. Hyper Hyper Links