Borrowing from the Women's Movement "for Reasons of Public Security": A Study of Social Movement Outcomes and Judicial Activism in the European Union

Abstract

Can an elite-sponsored outcome be a social movement outcome? In Kreil v. Germany, the European Court of Justice issued a judgment hailed as a feminist victory, censuring Germany's exclusion of women from the military. But the women's movement did not sponsor the case; it was an organizational achievement for the nascent court that extended its jurisdiction to public security while preserving its legitimacy among potentially non-cooperative member states. With this case, I reassess movement-elite relations in the context of past protests that forged discursive resources. The women's movement did play an important role in this case: the court relied on discursive resources from past feminist activism to legitimize its decision and frame it as a matter of women's rights, drawing attention away from its uncertain jurisdiction. I present a model of "borrowing" from movements, a relationship distinct from alliances and cooptation, to show how elite-sponsored outcomes can still be movement outcomes.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.