Litigation Dilemmas: Lessons from the Marcos Human Rights Class Action

How do activist plaintiffs experience the process of human rights litigation under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS)? Answering this question is key to understanding the impact on transnational legal mobilization of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., in which the US Supreme Court sharply limited the scope of the ATS. Yet sociolegal scholars know remarkably little about the experiences of ATS litigants, before or after Kiobel. This article describes how activist litigants in a landmark ATS class action against former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos faced a series of strategic dilemmas, and how disagreements over how to resolve those dilemmas played into divisions between activists and organizations on the Philippine left. The article develops an analytical framework focused on litigation dilemmas to explain how and why activists who pursue ATS litigation as an opportunity for legal mobilization may also encounter strategic dilemmas that contribute to dissension within a social movement.     

The New Face of Legal Inequality: Noncitizens and the Long‐Term Trends in Sentencing Disparities across U.S. District Courts, 1992–2009

In the wake of mass immigration from Latin America, legal scholars have shifted focus from racial to ethnic inequality under the law. A series of studies now suggest that Hispanics may be the most disadvantaged group in U.S. courts, yet this body of work has yet to fully engage the role of citizenship status. The present research examines the punishment consequences for non‐U.S. citizens sentenced in federal courts between 1992 and 2009. Drawing from work in citizenship studies and sociolegal inequality, I hypothesize that nonstate members will be punished more severely than U.S. citizens, and any trends in Hispanic ethnicity over this period will be linked to punitive changes in the treatment of noncitizens. In line with this hypothesis, results indicate a considerable punishment gap between citizens and noncitizens—larger than minority‐white disparities. Additionally, this citizenship “penalty” has increased at the incarceration stage, explaining the majority of the increase in Hispanic‐white disparity over the past two decades. As international migration increases, these findings call for greater theoretical and empirical breadth in legal inequality research beyond traditional emphases, such as race and ethnicity.     

What makes an international institution work for labor activists? Shaping international law through strategic litigation

Studies on international legal mobilization often analyze the mobilization efforts of activists at a single international court. Yet we know little about how activists choose among multiple international institutions to advance social justice claims. Drawing on comparative case studies of Turkish and British trade union activists' legal mobilization efforts and case law analysis, I show that activists, guided by their lawyers, probe multiple avenues to identify the legal institution with the highest judicial authority and is most responsive to activists' claims. Once they identify their target institution, the iterative process between a responsive court and activists' strategic litigation can build a court's jurisprudence in a new issue area, even if the court provides limited de jure rights protections. Activists primarily use international litigation strategy to leverage structural reforms at the domestic level and to set new international norms through precedents.     

Ideals and Practices in the Rule of Law: An Essay on Legal Politics

Massoud, Mark Fathi. 2013 . Law's Fragile State: Colonial, Authoritarian, and Humanitarian Legacies in Sudan . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 277. Paper $34.99. This essay responds to the three commentators in the symposium on my book, Law's Fragile State, by describing the sociolegal study of the rule of law as an investigation into both a set of ideals (the rule of law as a normative question) and a set of practices (the rule of law as an empirical question). Studying the rule of law involves understanding the contingent nature of its ideals as well as investigating the actual work that lawyers, judges, state officials, aid workers, activists, and others have done in specific contexts to promote legal remedies to social or political ills. These overlapping layers of the study of the rule of law—ideals and practices, normative and empirical—provide a sociolegal framework for understanding the successes and failures of legal work and, ultimately, how citizens experience state power in democratic and nondemocratic societies alike.     

Legal Change and Sentencing Norms in the Wake of Booker: The Impact of Time and Place on Drug Trafficking Cases in Federal Court

The federal sentencing guidelines have lost some authoritative force since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a series of recent cases that the guidelines are advisory, rather than presumptive, in determining criminal sentences. While these court decisions represent a dramatic legal intervention, sociolegal scholarship suggests that organizational norms are likely to change slowly and less dramatically than the formal law itself. The research reported here looks specifically at the consequences of such legal transformations over time and across locale, using multilevel analysis of U.S. Sentencing Commission sentence outcome data from 1993 to 2009. Our findings suggest that districts vary considerably from each other in sentencing practices over the time period studied, and that there is relative within‐district stability of outcomes within districts over time, including in response to the Supreme Court's mandates. We also find that policy change appears to influence the mechanisms by which cases are adjudicated in order to reach normative outcomes. Finally, we find that the relative district‐level reliance upon mandatory minimums, which were not directly impacted by the guidelines changes, is an important factor in how drug trafficking cases are adjudicated. We conclude that local legal practices not only diverge in important ways across place, but also become entrenched over time such that top‐down legal reform is largely reappropriated and absorbed into locally established practices.     

New Legal Realism and the Ethnography of Transnational Law

The new legal realism builds on the strengths of the legal realism of the early twentieth century, viewing law as a set of social processes embedded in historical and political contexts. As it addresses sociolegal phenomena of the early twenty-first century, however, the new legal realism is more attentive to the effects of transnationalism, legal culture, and legal consciousness, and the way ideas and norms travel and are adopted around the world. Asking questions of this kind requires new, more multi-sited or deterritorialized methods of scholarship. This article explores these new perspectives and their methodologies through an examination of the use of human rights in the international movement against violence against women.     

Negotiating Social Norms and Relations in the Micromobilization of Human Rights: The Case of Burmese Lesbian Activism

This article provides the first sociolegal analysis of lesbian rights activism in Myanmar. It elucidates the processes through which a group of lesbian activists navigate sexual and gender norms that oppress lesbians as sexual minorities and as women while they use human rights discourse to carry out micromobilization work, organizing constituents and building up grassroots participation in Myanmar. It analyzes how the collective deployment of human rights encompasses resistance against social norms that pose organizing obstacles for activists and the negotiations of social relations to counter them. These micromobilization processes shape whether and how activists adopt human‐rights‐based strategies and tactics. Bringing together law and society scholarship and social movement studies, the article highlights the importance of understanding human rights mobilization by marginalized populations who face multiple, overlapping forms of oppression and contend with plural sources of power.     

Legal Options to Stop the Revival of Keystone XL Pipeline

Abstract

The construction and operation of the international pipeline well-known as Keystone XL would potentially contribute to the “game over of climate”. With a focus on combating climate change, the Obama Administration denied the permit application for the Keystone XL. After Trump took presidency, Keystone XL was revived as a result of the administration’s energy dominance policies. Indigenous activists joined by environmental groups have been resisting the revival. This article explores legal options to stop the revival of Keystone XL, consisting of legislative, regulatory and judicial actions at both federal and state levels within the U.S., and legal responses at the international level.     

Workers with Disabilities Between Legal Changes and Persisting Exclusion: How Contradictory Rights Shape Legal Mobilization

It has become commonplace within disability sociolegal scholarship to argue that, in the last 30 years, a new legal and policy approach to disability has emerged, leading to a paradigm shift from a social protection framework to an antidiscrimination model. Some authors have stressed, however, that the new model has not fully replaced the older social protection approach. Yet little is still known about how the coexistence of these different models impacts on the everyday experience of disability in the workplace and on potential legal mobilization. Based on interviews with workers with disabilities who mobilized the law to obtain reasonable accommodation in Belgium combined with an analysis of evolving Belgian legal schemes relating to disability, this article explores how interactions between social, labor, and antidiscrimination rights shape legal mobilization of persons with disabilities in the workplace. We find that individual's initial self‐identification as workers or persons with disabilities influences how they frame their claim and the kind of legal norms they refer to in a first stage but that both their identification and their rights consciousness evolve and change through the course of legal mobilization as they interact with various professionals and navigate between the different concepts and rights available in current law.     

Investigating Legal Consciousness through the Technical Work of Elite Lawyers: A Case Study on Tax Avoidance

Since the 1990s, legal consciousness has been amply used by sociolegal scholars to better understand the everyday lives of ordinary people, with a strong focus on vulnerable or impoverished people. This article argues that legal consciousness, with some methodological adjustments, could lend itself to the study of the rich and powerful by investigating both the technical work of their lawyers and how that work shapes our broader legal culture. To illustrate this point, this article takes tax avoidance as a case study. Drawing on materials revealed by a recent tax scandal, it suggests that current difficulty in tackling the problem of tax avoidance rests on uneven access to the cultural repertoires related to legal technique and legal innovation, which fosters the tax‐avoidance narrative's ambiguity.     

The Ethic of Diversity: Local Law and the Negotiation of Urban Norms

Toronto prides itself both on being diverse and on celebrating rather than merely tolerating diversity. Urban diversity has been studied by demographers, sociologists, and planners, but sociolegal analyses of the negotiation of diversity are scarce. The study described here has three elements: a study of the Toronto Licensing Tribunal, a challenge to the property standards by‐law, and a campaign to reform the rules governing street food. The key substantive finding of the research is that municipal legal processes, in a city that takes pride in its diversity, still work to effect and naturalize distinctly ethnocentric norms. The content of (some) norms is subject to revision but the normative power of law as such remains unchallenged. Methodologically, the article, inspired by Bruno Latour and Actor Network Theory, shows the usefulness of treating local legal processes as a series of networks in which nonhuman objects (such as weeds, courtroom Bibles, and hot dogs) can sometimes be protagonists of legal dramas rather than mere objects.     

Invoking Indignation: Reflections on Future Directions of Socio–legal Studies

The Research Assessment Exercise has produced some very unequal results. Lawyers are now three times more likely to be in grade 5 or 5* departments than social policy colleagues. The paper begins with a light–hearted theoretical explanation of these results to make the serious point that an old fashioned notion of power and a simple analysis of the available data can produce important insights into what is happening in the real world – a research paradigm which the RAE has discouraged. The paper then makes a number of criticisms of current theoretical endeavours in sociolegal studies: the confusion over what is meant by theory, its fixation on deconstruction and a Foucauldian notion of power, and the neglect of universal categories. The central argument is that sociolegal studies needs to focus more on the materiality of everyday life and, in particular, the growing inequalities in the world and the role that law and legal institutions play in the structuring of these inequalities. In conclusion, the paper argues that as sociolegal scholars we need to analyse the impact of our decisions on others and to take a stand against unfair and unjust distribution of resources whether at the local, national or international level. We need a vision of a just society which is informed by moral indignation.     

“We Are the Visible Proof”: Legitimizing Abortion Regret Misinformation through Activists’ Experiential Knowledge

Since 2010, many abortion policies emerging at the state level have been designed around the idea of “abortion regret,” a scientifically discredited assertion that abortion causes long‐term health problems for women. Studies have examined the legal significance of regret claims in case law as well as the role scientific misinformation and uncertainty play in the policy process. However, scholars have given less attention to the intersection between abortion regret experiences and misinformation. We address this gap in the literature by examining how antiabortion activists' experiential knowledge continues to reinforce and legitimize misinformation contained in state policies. We explore the process of substantiating abortion regret misinformation by attaching it to activists' experiential expertise. Based on twenty‐three interviews with antiabortion activists, we argue that misinformation receives validation through the certainty of experiential knowledge, which activists mobilize around and use as a source of evidence in the policy process.     

国际通信法:界域、主体及架构

国际通信法是现代国际法专业化发展的产物,其界域包括两类通信领域的国际事务:一是国际通信活动的规制,二是通信制度的国际协调;其主体具有鲜明的多元化特征,被国际通信法赋予国际人格并参加国际通信法律关系的实体,不仅有国家和政府间国际组织,还有法人和个人。国际通信法是一个庞大的法律体系,其规范具有普遍性、区域性和双边性三个不同层次,分属国际电信联盟、万国邮政联盟、世界贸易组织等众多国际体制,归于国际通信通道法、国际通信服务法和国际通信行为法三个不同板块,由此形成了国际通信法的立体网络架构。我国通信事业的发展非常迅速,但有关通信的立法相对滞后。因此,有必要熟悉通信领域的国际规则,加强国际通信法的研究。     

Studying Law by Association: Bruno Latour Goes to the Conseil d'État

This essay provides an overview of actor-network theory (ANT) and its potential interest for sociolegal scholars. It focuses on Bruno Latour's 2002 ethnography of La fabrique du droit: une ethnographie du Conseil d'État [The factory of law: an ethnography of the Conseil d'État] (2002b), which provides an analysis of the workings of the French Conseil d'État. The essay seeks to introduce non-French-reading sociolegal researchers to this work and draws out methodological and theoretical implications for research on legal institutions, legal knowledge, and bureaucracies.     

Reproducing crises: Understanding the role of law in the COVID-19 global pandemic

Governmental responses to the COVID-19 global pandemic have generated numerous constitutionals, policy, legal, and political-economic debates. Scholarly engagements with the sociolegal and policy consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have been dominated by discussion on the role of emergency powers, the suspension of individual civil liberties, the suspension of economic rules in order to guarantee economic survival, and social regulation of public spaces and of workplaces. This paper aims to explore how a critical sociolegal scholarship can contribute to a more sophisticated understanding of the role of law in creating the unequal conditions that propitiated the COVID-19 pandemic and that might enable further crises. This introduction offers a roadmap for theorizing the limits of law, the operationalization of emergency powers and the different policies implemented by global south and north countries in response to the pandemic. This introduction is structured as follow: (1) provides a general overview of the law and society tradition and its engagement with the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) engages with three key consequences of the pandemic, labor, and the lockdown; colonial implications; and the limits of law; (3) introduces the papers in this special issue; (4) sketches a proposal for the critical sociolegal scholarship of law and crises.     

The Pull of the Policy Audience

Much research in the sociology of law seeks to play a role informing policymakers about the effects of particular policy initiatives and to participate in debates about how to use law as an instrument of public policy. The paper examines the origins of policy studies in legal realism and describes the way contemporary law and society scholars selectively appropriate aspects of the realist heritage while ignoring others. Particular attention is paid to the ways in which those scholars separate policy from politics and operate as if policy focused research were not itself political. The paper traces the pull of the policy audience and the separation of policy from politics through a close examination of several widely respected examples of sociolegal scholarship. In addition, an effort is made to assess the impact that the desire to speak to the powerful has had in shaping what constitutes acceptable scientific practice and in shaping the domain of study. The paper concludes by arguing that the sociology of law would benefit from an effort to interrogate the basic premises which inform policy debate and that such an interrogation itself requires greater distance from the policy audience.     

论国际法规范的位阶

条约法公约首次在国际法上规定了强行法概念。国际法学者以强行法、对一切义务、国际罪行等的出现为根据,提出了位阶理论,主张国际法规范已经产生类似于国内法的"规范等级"。在实践中,位阶理论在确定国际法等级以及效力层次上的作用也极为有限。国际法院的判决在某种程度上仅仅是指明某些义务具有基础性,而并不能证明强行法规范具有高于一般规范的效力。尽管如此,位阶理论的提出仍使特定国际法规范的效力在某种程度上超出"同意",也在某种程度上解决了条约义务与国际社会根本义务相冲突的情形。     

The Incidence and Structure of Conflict on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

In 1982, Congress established the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a specialized court, with the objective of reducing judicial conflict and harmonizing circuit law in specific policy areas of special complexity. This article examines the incidence and determinants of judicial conflict on the U.S. courts of appeals, focusing specifically on the Federal Circuit. Using international trade and customs regulation cases decided during the 1982 to 1995 terms, the analysis reviews three possible explanations of judicial conflict: policy-oriented, sociolegal, and organizational. The analysis shows that conflict appears in 8.4 percent of the trade and customs regulation decisions rendered by the Federal Circuit during the period of study. The policy direction of Federal Circuit decisions and the court's hierarchical relationship with lower specialized courts provide the strongest explanation for the emergence of conflict on the court. Organizational factors such as panel composition evinced rather anemic explanatory capacity. The results raise an important functional similarity between the Federal Circuit and the generalist courts of appeals. Contrary to the laments of legal practitioners that conflict on the Federal Circuit is excessive relative to conflict on the generalist circuit courts, this analysis finds little support for that claim. Rather, the level of overt conflict on the court is actually low and corroborates conflict levels that have been reported for other U.S. courts of appeals.