The non-constitutionalization and avoidant constitutionalization of gender in Czechia and Slovakia

Abstract Has constitutional law provided a meaningful space for contestations of patriarchy in Czechia and Slovakia? Only to a limited extent. Both the Czech and the Slovak Constitutional Courts are not unerringly able to recognize, understand, critically reflect on, and appropriately respond to gender-based injustices, nor are they particularly willing to adjudicate on difficult and socially and politically controversial gender questions. The Courts use two techniques to avoid full decisions on merit: “non-constitutionalization”—notably through limitations on standing (in Slovakia)—and “avoidant constitutionalization”—through dismissal of cases as “manifestly unfounded,” choice of ratio, in some cases outsized deference to the legislature (in Czechia), and an institutionally pragmatic “middle-ground” decision-making (in Slovakia).