Over the past two decades, liberal constitutionalism has been in decline. Yet some courts - including the U.S. Supreme Court, the Supreme Court of India, and the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal - have continued to progressively realize the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons. How can the seeming paradox of LGBTQ+ rights advancement amid liberal constitutional regression be understood? And what, in turn, does that tell us about the state of liberal constitutionalism and rights adjudication?

Courts and LGBTQ+ Rights in an Age of Judicial Retrenchment addresses these questions by exploring rights adjudication within the broader context of declining liberal constitutionalism within the U.S., India, and Hong Kong. By analysing landmark LGBTQ+ rights judgments and topical case studies in increasingly challenging political and institutional contexts, this book provides detailed, qualitative accounts of constitutionalism in these jurisdictions over the past two decades.

Progressive and original, this book explores how courts often use LGBTQ+ rights to demonstrate their rhetorical commitment to liberal and global constitutionalism, even as their judgments may fall short of, or even undermine, those ideals.