Being considered constitutional because of the Brazilian Supreme Court thinking about the thinking the Supreme Court found in its 2011 partnership ruling that is domestic.
The aim of the paper is certainly not to criticize the arguments employed by the Supreme Court through the viewpoint of appropriate concept or constitutional doctrine, 10 but to ascertain how long the court has-or has not-argumentatively committed it self to upholding same-sex wedding in the face area of (prospective) restrictive legislation when it ruled on same-sex domestic partnerships.
Obviously, the possibility of a turn that is regressive same-sex wedding is certainly not determined exclusively by the dedication associated with Supreme Court to its previous rulings. It will be that coherence is not also perhaps one of the most factors that are relevant. 11
Nevertheless, appropriate thinking and coherence with previous choices have gained relevance because of the context that is political. The Supreme Court was during the extremely center of this ongoing crisis that is political Brazil 12 and under plenty of force regarding its regards to the Legislative and Executive branches, with accusations of erratic behavior, of surpassing its mandate, of maybe not being unbiased, and of yielding to governmental stress ( Dimoulis; Lunardi 2014, note 9, p. 4; Mendes 2018, note 10; Silva 2014, note 9; Nagamine; Barbosa 2017, note 5, p. 234; Vieira 2018, note 11, pp. 179, 210; Streck et al. 2009, p. 83). 13