Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T07:02:50.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legal Mobilization: The Neglected Role of the Law in the Political System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Frances Kahn Zemans
Frances Kahn Zemans*
Affiliation:
American Judicature Society
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues thai the role of the law in the political system has been construed much too narrowly. A review of the political science literature demonstrates an interest in the law that is largely confined to the making of new laws, social change, and social control. That view implies an acceptance of the legal profession's distinction between public and private law as a reasonable guide for political scientists in the study of law.

A more interactive view of the law is presented, characterizing legal mobilization (invoking legal norms) as a form of political activity by which the citizenry uses public authority on its own behalf. Further, the legal system, structured to consider cases and controversies on an individual basis, provides access to government authority unencumbered by the limits of collective action. This form of public power, although contingent, is widely dispersed.

Consideration of the factors that influence legal mobilization is important not only to understanding who uses the law, but also as predictors to the implementation of public policy; with very few exceptions, the enforcement of the laws depends upon individual citizens to initiate the legal process. By virtue of this dependence, an aggregation of individual citizens acting largely in their own interests strongly influences the form and extent of the implementation of public policy and thereby the allocation of power and authority.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 77 , Issue 3 , September 1983 , pp. 690 - 703
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abel, R. L. Delegalization: A critical review of its ideology, manifestations and social consequences. Jahrbuch für Rechtssoziologie and Rechtstheorie, 1979, 6, 27–47.Google Scholar
Abraham, H. J. Justices and presidents: a political history of appointments to the Supreme Court. New York: Oxford University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Almond, G., & Verba, S. The civic culture. Boston: Little Brown, 1965.Google Scholar
Andenaes, J. The general preventive effects of punishment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1966, 114, 949–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arendt, H. The human condition. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1959.Google Scholar
Bachrach, P. The theory of democratic elitism. Boston: Little Brown, 1967.Google Scholar
Becker, T., & Feeley, M. (Ed.). The impact of Supreme Court decisions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Berger, M. Equality by statute: the revolution in civil rights. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1967.Google Scholar
Bickel, A. The Supreme Court and the idea of progress. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.Google Scholar
Black, D. The mobilization of law. Journal of Legal Studies, 1973, 2, 125–129.Google Scholar
Boswell, J. Life of Samuel Johnson. London: Oxford University Press, 1969 (Originally published, 1791.)Google Scholar
Brakel, S. J. (Review of Lawyers and the pursuit of legal rights by Handler, Hollingsworth, and Erlanger. American Bar Foundation Research Journal. 1979, No. 4, 873–883.Google Scholar
Canon, B. C, & Baum, L. Patterns of adoption of tort law innovations: An application of diffusion theory to judicial doctrines. American Political Science Review, 1981, 75, 975–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlin, J., & Howard, J. Legal representation and class justice. U.C.L.A. Law Review, 1965, 12, 381.Google Scholar
Carlin, J., Howard, J., & Messinger, S. Civil justice and the poor: issues for sociological research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966.Google Scholar
Casper, J. D. American criminal justice. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.Google Scholar
Casper, J. D. The Supreme Court and national policymaking. American Political Science Review, 1976, 70, 50–63.Google Scholar
Chase, H. W. Federal judges: the appointing process. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Cox, A. The role of the Supreme Court in American government. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Cox, E. F., et al. The Nader Report on the Federal Trade Commission. New York: Grove Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Curran, B. The legal needs of the public. Chicago: American Bar Foundation, 1977.Google Scholar
Cushman, R. E. Leading constitutional decisions. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1960.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. Decision-making in a democracy: the Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. Journal of Public Law, 1957, 6, 279–295.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. Who governs? New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1961.Google Scholar
Dürkheim, E. The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, J., & Jacob, H. Felony justice. Boston: Little Brown, 1977.Google Scholar
Engel, D. M., & Steele, E. H. Civil cases and society: process and order in the civil justice system, ABF Research Journal, 1979, 2, 295–346.Google Scholar
Fanon, F. The wretched of the earth. New York: Grove Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Feeley, M. The process is the punishment: handling cases in a lower criminal court. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1979.Google Scholar
Fein, B. E. Receding U.S. judicial influence marked by rulings in 1980–81 term. National Law Journal, 08 17, 1981, p. 23.Google Scholar
Gendlin, F. A talk with Ruck Sutherland. Sierra, 01–02, 1980, pp. 18–22.Google Scholar
Goldman, S. Politics, judges and the administration of justice: the backgrounds, recruitment, and decisional tendencies of the judges of the U.S. Ct. of Appeals, 1961–4. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1964.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. Litigation for social change: methods, limits and role in democracy. The Record of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, 1974, 29, 320.Google Scholar
Grossman, J. B. Lawyers and judges: the ABA and the politics of judicial selection. New York: John Wiley, 1965.Google Scholar
Grumet, B. R. The plaintive plaintiffs: victims of the battered child syndrome. Family Law Quarterly, 1970, 4, 296–317.Google Scholar
Hagan, J. Victims before the law: a study of victim involvement in the criminal justice process. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1982, 73, 317–330.Google Scholar
Heumann, M. Plea bargaining. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Hirschman, A. O. Shifting involvements: public interest and private action. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D. Courts and social policy. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1977.Google Scholar
Hunting, R., & Neuwirth, G. Who sues in New York City. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Ihering, R. von. The struggle for law. Chicago: Cal-laghan, 1879.Google Scholar
Jacob, H. Debtors in court: the consumption of government services. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969.Google Scholar
Kagan, R. A. Regulatory justice. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1978.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. Politics, parties and pressure groups. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas Y, Crowell, 1958.Google Scholar
Ladinsky, J., Stewart, M., & Anderson, J. The Milwaukee dispute mapping project: a preliminary report. Disputes Processing Research Program, Working Paper 1979–3, 1979.Google Scholar
Lempert, R. O. Mobilizing private law: an introductory essay. Law and Society Review, 1976, 2, 173–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levi, E. H. An introduction to legal reasoning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.Google Scholar
Lowi, T. J. The end of liberalism. New York: W. W. Norton, 1979.Google Scholar
Mayhew, L. H. Law and equal opportunity: a study of the Massachusetts commission against discrimination. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Milbrath, L. W. Political participation. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965.Google Scholar
Mileski, M. Policing slum landlords: an observation study of administrative control. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Yale University, 1971.Google Scholar
Milner, N. A. The court and local law enforcement: the impact of Miranda. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Mnookin, R. H., & Kornhauser, L. Bargaining in the shadow of the law. Yale Law Journal, 1979, 88, 950–997.Google Scholar
Muir, W. Prayer in the public schools: law and attitude change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.Google Scholar
Nader, R., & Green, M. Corporate democracy. The New York Times, 12 28, 1979, p. A27.Google Scholar
Nagel, S. Ethnic affiliations and judicial propensities. Journal of Politics, 1962, 24, 94–110.Google Scholar
Nonet, P. Administrative justice. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969.Google Scholar
PEER. Anyone's guide to filing a Title IX complaint. Washington, D.C.: Project on Equal Education Rights, NOW, no date.Google Scholar
Peltason, J. W. Federal courts in the political process. New York: Doubleday, 1955.Google Scholar
Pound, R. The limits of effective legal action. International Journal of Ethics, 1917, 27, 150–161.Google Scholar
Pound, R. Social control through law. New Haven, Conn.:Yale University Press, 1942.Google Scholar
Pritchett, C. H. The Roosevelt court: a study in judicial politics and values. New York: Macmillan, 1948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiss, A. J. Jr., & Bordua, D. J. Environment and organization: a perspective on the police. In Bordua, D. J. (Ed.). The police: six sociological essays. New York: John Wiley, pp. 25–55, 1967.Google Scholar
Rodgers, H. R. Jr., & Bullock, C. III. Law and social change, civil rights laws and their consequences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.Google Scholar
Ross, H. L. Settled out of court. Chicago: Aldine, 1980.Google Scholar
Scheingold, S. The politics of rights. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Schmidhauser, J. R. Judges and justices: the federal appellate judiciary. Boston: Little Brown, 1979.Google Scholar
Schubert, G. The judicial mind. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Schuyt, K. Groenendijk, K., & Sloot, B. De Weg Naar Het Recht (The Road to Justice) Deventer: Kluwer, 1976.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. Law, society, and industrial justice. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969.Google Scholar
Shapiro, M. From public law to public policy or the “Public” in “Public Law.” PS, 1972, 5, 410–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, E. H. Fraud, dispute, and the consumer: responding to consumer complaints. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 1975, 123, 1107–1186.Google Scholar
Stewart, R. B., & Sunstein, C. R. Public programs and private rights. Harvard Law Review, 1982, 95, 1193–1322.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. P. Whigs and hunters. New York: Pantheon, 1975.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, A. de. Democracy in America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1963.Google Scholar
Truman, D. The governmental process. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1951.Google Scholar
Users' survey. Royal Commission on Legal Services. Final Report, vol. 2, pp. 173–298, London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1979.Google Scholar
Verba, S., & Nie, N. Participation in America. New York: Harper & Row, 1972.Google Scholar
Vining, J. Legal identity. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Wasby, S. The impact of the United States Supreme Court. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
Wechsler, H. Toward neutral principles of constitutional law. Harvard Law Review, 1959, 73, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J. Q. Thinking about crime. New York: Basic Books, 1975.Google Scholar
Wright, S. Professor Bickel, the scholarly tradition, and the Supreme Court. Harvard Law Review, 1971, 84, 769–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zemans, F. K. Framework for analysis of legal mobilization. American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 1982, 4, 911–1071.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.