Research Paper on:
Massachusetts 209A and the Case of Anna Fogerty

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
court applying a strict standard of scrutiny." (CWID, 1995, 28). In contrast, cases based on gender are viewed with a much lower level of scrutiny. Additionally, domestic violence cases involving  women of color are viewed with a higher scrutiny than those of white women who have been abused by their white professional husbands.  Naming the cases of DeShaney, Scott and Canton, the Contemporary Womens Issues Database (CWID, 1995) explores the effects this variable scrutiny has on providing relevant domestic violence protections for  women. As these cases have shown, suits and countersuits brought by the government based on domestic violence claims are easiest for the government to win because all the government must  show is that the "rationally" of the case is "related to a valid governmental purpose." (CWID, 1995, 28). If the problem is not related to valid government purpose, the court  rules in favor of the governmental entity. This falls under the concepts of neoinstituionalism, the basis of modern criminology and justice. Under the  theory of neoinstitutionalism, any decisions made anywhere within the criminal justice and court system will have an effect on individual institutions, which in turn, will have an effect on individual  rights. This qualitative study of the issues applies the concept of government and neoinstitutionalism to one application of the Massachusetts 209A statute  covering the issuing of restraining orders. The case studied will be that of Anne Fogerty, a Massachusetts resident and will address the reasons behind the courts refusal to issue a  209A protective order, particularly on the aspects of law in action, how it is tied to the local environment and determined by gender and race. At issue is how the