Social Movements and Social-Change Litigation: Synergy in the Montgomery Bus Protest

Two competing schools of thought have emerged to explain how the Montgomery bus protest of 1955–56 brought about changes on the city's Jim Crow buses. The dominant explanation attributes the changes to the bus boycott led by Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Montgomery Improvement Association. A second interpretation emphasizes the critical role of the Supreme Court's decision striking down the state and local bus segregation laws. This essay prooides a third explanation: that these two strategies–the boycott and the litigation–interacted, each shaping and reinforcing the other. Each strategy war a critical part of the struggle, but neither brought change by itself. This essay argues that the two strategies of the Montgomery protest created a synergy that was the key to bringing about changes on the buses.     

Protective order legislation: Trends in state statutes

Very little research has examined state legislation on protective orders. This study examined recent state statutes and compared the findings with a landmark 1988 study. Results indicated that more recent laws provided greater access to victims and expanded their eligible populations to include categories that were excluded in earlier legislation (i.e., dating partners, sexual partners, and same-sex partners). Orders increased slightly in duration and there were more access to them outside of normal working hours. Compared with earlier legislation, newer laws were more apt to authorize judges to fashion remedies that address financial matters. Penalties for violations remained relatively stable, although states were increasingly willing to use enhanced sanctions for repeat offenders. States continued to use mandatory arrest to enforce orders, although this trend was not as pronounced as one might have anticipated. Finally, legislators incorporated many aspects of new federal legislation into state statutes.