From the medical field to the housing market to the criminal justice system, poor people must navigate labyrinthian organizations that often perpetuate social and economic inequality. Arguably it is through these social institutions, and through multiple processes embedded within each of these institutions, that the governance of urban poverty is effectively maintained. This essay revolves around one such process, examining how Matthew Desmondʼs Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City (2016) points to the eviction process as an important producer of urban poverty in and of itself. After delving into housing law and Desmondʼs ethnographic and quantitative research methodologies, the essay examines four sites where the law is at work in eviction: the eviction court; the “law-on-the-books” versus the “law-in-action”; practices in the shadow of the law; and the relationship between the criminal justice system and the housing market. One goal of the essay is to place eviction within the law, punishment, and social inequality literatures.

Capitalist society seems particularly disorderly of late, a disorder contributing to the beginnings of what we hope will be a renewal of Marxist legal scholarship. This essay reviews some key developments in Marxist analysis of law from the 1970s to the present. Over all, our essay traces a back and forth between Marxists’ emphasis on theoretical inquiry on the one hand and empirical and historical work inquiry on the other. We argue that Christopher Tomlins’s 1993 book, Law, Labor, and Ideology in the Early American Republic, remains salient for thinking about ways to combine Marxist theoretic and historical work to understand the role of law in capitalist social formations and that Nancy Fraser and Rahel Jaeggi’s recent book Capitalism: A Conversation in Critical Theory offers complementary resources for a renewal in Marxist legal thought. We conclude that further development of Marxist legal thought will require a mix of both empirical and theoretical innovations, and we identify political questions that Marxists will need to address.

Robert A. Kagan’s influential book, first published at the beginning of the twenty-first century, is now brought up to date with a second edition. “Adversarial legalism,” in Kagan’s view, distinguishes law in the United States from the law of other developed countries in many ways, for example, heavy use of policymaking through litigation and punitive regulation, as opposed to bureaucratic and conciliatory techniques. He suggests that this situation is likely to continue. This essay, however, looks at the same phenomena from the standpoint of similarities rather than differences. It suggests that powerful economic and cultural forces, common to the modern world of developed countries, tend to push the legal systems of these countries in parallel directions. Convergence, rather than divergence, is therefore the trend in the legal systems of the Western world; and this trend is likely to continue in the future.