Abstract
Threatening to withhold Jewish divorce in order to extract concessions, which I term here the "get-threat,"is widely regarded as extortionist. Yet this view is commonly associated with skepticism towards agreements stemming from unequal bargaining power, or with a progressive view of the proper divorce regime. Building on contemporary discussions of what is known as "the paradox of blackmail"this article argues that in many cases get-threats should be regarded as simple cases of extortion even by libertarians and conservatives. It then presents and analyzes the best possible statement of defense for the practice of get-threats, designed for the "reasonable reactionary,"showing that even from that point of view get-threats should be limited in scope and magnitude to a narrow range of cases of justified, reasonable demands. The article thus offers both a precise analysis of a longstanding debate and a normative argument for its proper resolution.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 849-869 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | International Journal of Constitutional Law |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Oct 2020 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2021 The Author(s).
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The morality of "get-threats": Withholding divorce as extortion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver