CJ 521 mod 5
Yvonne I. Sandoval
CJ 521; Professor Mentor
December 9, 2003
Reading Content
I feel that law is very much indeed an object for social change. Although the changes may be gradual and may take quite a long time to become widespread, law has shaped our society in many ways. As stated by Friedmann in the Vago reading, “the law--through legislative or administrative responses to new social conditions and ideas, as well as through judicial re-interpretations of constitutions, statutes or precedents--increasingly not only articulates, but sets the course for major social changes.” An excellent example of this would be the laws that ended discrimination and did away with the racial caste system in America. Law is also said to have an indirect role in social change by influencing social institutions, which in turn create social change. A given example of this in the Vago reading is where one racially oppressed group is given the opportunity to attend any school of his/her choice when previously excluded.
Some interesting perspectives are given by Friedmann in the Vago reading for law creating social change. The first is referred to as “planning” where there is a new architectural construction of new forms of social interactions and social order. The second in called “disruption.” This is where there is a blocking or an amelioration of existing social forms and relations. Both “disruption” and “planning” are interrelated in the legal system and may or may not bring about negative or positive social change.
In the reading by Stoddard, we can see that most of the nation’s lawmaking, whether it is legislative, judicial, or administrative, usually takes place very quietly, and only influences a small number of people who keep up with new policies. Any kind of change that takes place within policy making must be generally discerned and then accepted by all of society. Any Changes that occur through the legislature usually possess a larger amount of public awareness than judicial or administrative changes do. Public awareness is a very important affiliate of the legislative process. A legislature functions as a representative collection of public appointees that are engaged in the public's business. The legislature’s work has inherent public significance and definitely has the power to implement policies that could very well cause social change. Judicial and administrative policy makers mostly involve private actors in what we would see as private disputes. Those disputes may or may not have implications that could affect others, and are can be the subject of stare decisis. Administrative law-making is given some of the same responsibilities of the legislature, but generally get a lot less attention.
Legislative lawmaking can be in nature, open, turbulent, and prolonged. This form of law-making is considered to be much more likely than other forms of lawmaking to promote public awareness. Because of that, such lawmaking possesses a special power that surpasses the concept of mere rulemaking.
Internet Content
The internet sites I have talk mostly about civil rights and how laws were passed that tried to put an end to discrimination and caused major social change.
One site describes the critical race theory as an outgrowth of civil rights movements of the 1960s and the critical legal studies movement, which leaves law as a tool of resistance and social change. The critical race gheory enables the demystification of received notions not only of "equality," but also of "merit," "constitutional protection," and what we think of as legal "fairness" by historicizing and denaturalizing such concepts. http://bobcat.cc.oxy.edu/~maeda/crt.htm
The other website describes law as a mechanism we use to instigate social change and bring about equality. It also describes law as being the tool that has been and is still used to institutionalize, legitimize and perpetuate inequality. Past traditions of racial inferiority and savagery have resulted in legislation designed to perpetuate a group's subordinate status. Utilization of law as a tool to perpetuate racial inequality used to be overt and blatant; however, with the changing political climate and the passage of anti-discrimination laws, it's now covert, not easily recognized, and at times even unintentional. Regardless of intention, discrimination is the outcome. Laws and public policy are created within a historical and political context.
http://www.asc41.com/www/2003/abscj091.htm
So What?
It is evident that law can be a strong instigator of social change and can serve as a tool to bring it about. The clearest and most understandable example I could give was when laws were created to end discrimination. Schools became intergraded and affirmative action paved the way for minority work opportunities. While these laws served in the best interest of most Americans, there were still those who were unwilling to conform to the new laws. Just because new laws are passed or new social policy is created, it does not mean that every individual is going to be willing to abide by it, even with strict enforcement. Social change that is brought about by new laws will only take place very gradually. It is almost impossible to have the entire nation conform to new rules when they are not accustomed to them. Furthermore, even with severe sanctions placed on these limitations, people will follow their instinct as to what they feel is right or wrong.
CJ 521; Professor Mentor
December 9, 2003
Reading Content
I feel that law is very much indeed an object for social change. Although the changes may be gradual and may take quite a long time to become widespread, law has shaped our society in many ways. As stated by Friedmann in the Vago reading, “the law--through legislative or administrative responses to new social conditions and ideas, as well as through judicial re-interpretations of constitutions, statutes or precedents--increasingly not only articulates, but sets the course for major social changes.” An excellent example of this would be the laws that ended discrimination and did away with the racial caste system in America. Law is also said to have an indirect role in social change by influencing social institutions, which in turn create social change. A given example of this in the Vago reading is where one racially oppressed group is given the opportunity to attend any school of his/her choice when previously excluded.
Some interesting perspectives are given by Friedmann in the Vago reading for law creating social change. The first is referred to as “planning” where there is a new architectural construction of new forms of social interactions and social order. The second in called “disruption.” This is where there is a blocking or an amelioration of existing social forms and relations. Both “disruption” and “planning” are interrelated in the legal system and may or may not bring about negative or positive social change.
In the reading by Stoddard, we can see that most of the nation’s lawmaking, whether it is legislative, judicial, or administrative, usually takes place very quietly, and only influences a small number of people who keep up with new policies. Any kind of change that takes place within policy making must be generally discerned and then accepted by all of society. Any Changes that occur through the legislature usually possess a larger amount of public awareness than judicial or administrative changes do. Public awareness is a very important affiliate of the legislative process. A legislature functions as a representative collection of public appointees that are engaged in the public's business. The legislature’s work has inherent public significance and definitely has the power to implement policies that could very well cause social change. Judicial and administrative policy makers mostly involve private actors in what we would see as private disputes. Those disputes may or may not have implications that could affect others, and are can be the subject of stare decisis. Administrative law-making is given some of the same responsibilities of the legislature, but generally get a lot less attention.
Legislative lawmaking can be in nature, open, turbulent, and prolonged. This form of law-making is considered to be much more likely than other forms of lawmaking to promote public awareness. Because of that, such lawmaking possesses a special power that surpasses the concept of mere rulemaking.
Internet Content
The internet sites I have talk mostly about civil rights and how laws were passed that tried to put an end to discrimination and caused major social change.
One site describes the critical race theory as an outgrowth of civil rights movements of the 1960s and the critical legal studies movement, which leaves law as a tool of resistance and social change. The critical race gheory enables the demystification of received notions not only of "equality," but also of "merit," "constitutional protection," and what we think of as legal "fairness" by historicizing and denaturalizing such concepts. http://bobcat.cc.oxy.edu/~maeda/crt.htm
The other website describes law as a mechanism we use to instigate social change and bring about equality. It also describes law as being the tool that has been and is still used to institutionalize, legitimize and perpetuate inequality. Past traditions of racial inferiority and savagery have resulted in legislation designed to perpetuate a group's subordinate status. Utilization of law as a tool to perpetuate racial inequality used to be overt and blatant; however, with the changing political climate and the passage of anti-discrimination laws, it's now covert, not easily recognized, and at times even unintentional. Regardless of intention, discrimination is the outcome. Laws and public policy are created within a historical and political context.
http://www.asc41.com/www/2003/abscj091.htm
So What?
It is evident that law can be a strong instigator of social change and can serve as a tool to bring it about. The clearest and most understandable example I could give was when laws were created to end discrimination. Schools became intergraded and affirmative action paved the way for minority work opportunities. While these laws served in the best interest of most Americans, there were still those who were unwilling to conform to the new laws. Just because new laws are passed or new social policy is created, it does not mean that every individual is going to be willing to abide by it, even with strict enforcement. Social change that is brought about by new laws will only take place very gradually. It is almost impossible to have the entire nation conform to new rules when they are not accustomed to them. Furthermore, even with severe sanctions placed on these limitations, people will follow their instinct as to what they feel is right or wrong.
