Feminist judging and judicial avoidance in Czechia

The paper will argue that rather than taking a non-feminist approach to a substantive issue, the lack of feminist judgments can be due to the strategy of a court to avoid hard decisions on merit. Two examples from Czechia will be analysed in depth. First, in a case concerning the lack of access of foreign pregnant women and their newborns to the system of public health insurance (Judgment of 3 May 2017, Pl. ÚS 2/15), the issue was a subsumption of the issue under a non-justiciable right (rather than an equally valid and appropriate justiciable right), which allowed the court majority to leave the decision to the legislator. Second, in a case on recognition of foreign adoption by (same-sex) registered partners (Judgment of 15 December 2020, Pl. ÚS 6/20), the majority avoided the human rights dimension and focused on conflict of laws aspects only.