This study employs Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as thetheoretical framework to analyze the arguments used by the Superior Court of Justice ("the Superior Court") in decisions related to the Maria da Penha Act, which had significant impact on Brazilian case law. The author's main objective is to discuss how Brazilian Justices construct legal arguments about violence against women in such an important public institution as the Superior Court, popularly known as the "Citizenship Court." The paper also aims to expose conflicting dialogues, ideologies, and power games that are inherent in these decisions.
Argumentation; Discourse; Gender-based violence; Maria da Penha Act; STJ