Law and Social Movements

Obama's Civil Rights Appointment

2009-03-25T18:41:00.000-07:00

It's hard to be upset at Obama given what he's up against and what he's done so far to restore the rule of law to this beleaguered country, but this was a bit disappointing.

The LA Times reports -- and the NY Times editorial page rues -- the fact that Obama bypassed Thomas Saenz, a prominent civil rights lawyer and the counsel to the Mayor of Los Angeles, for an appointment to the Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice.

Saenz has been an important voice in the effort to make the rights of immigrants an important civil rights issue -- a frame for immigration policy that is sorely in need of development. In our policy debates, it is frustrating that immigration policy is so often discussed in terms of "homeland security" or law enforcement or border control or lots of other things that seem to involve weaponry. What's lost in all that discussion is the fact that immigrants, especially those who are undocumented, have basic human needs that don't always get met -- that is, immigration is a longstanding and pressing civil rights issue.

And framing really is everything here -- it shapes the way that we think about "The Problem," and it affects our view of the solutions. I remember feeling this most keenly when the INS got moved to the Department of Homeland Security in the aftermath of 9/11. My grandfather was an immigrant who worked in unsafe American coal mines and died of black lung. He and my grandmother were attacked by state troopers at the behest of mine owners when he tried to organize unions in those mines. They were happy to be in the US, grateful even. But in the aftermath of 9/11, they became national security threats!! My grandparents have both been dead for years, but it was an insult to their memory.

Saenz was their lawyer. He spent his career trying to address those problems. He has led the effort to protect immigrants from unwarranted police raids, and he's worked on trying to secure rights to social services for immigrant populations. But because of these efforts, he's been labeled as an extremist. Google his name and see all the hysterical right wing propaganda that bubbles up.

Obviously, we don't know for sure, but that right wing hysteria is probably what kept Obama from naming Saenz to this post. But Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) noted the irony for us: “In what other position do you find that your life experience, your educational knowledge and commitment to an issue actually hurts you?”

Don't get me wrong -- it's all an improvement over the past 8 nightmarish years. Still, I sense that there will be more disappointments like this along the way.

Using Your Head: Racism and the World Cup

2006-07-15T11:54:00.000-07:00

Those of you who follow sports are most likely already familiar with the story: in the final game of this year’s World Cup, French footballer Zinedine Zidane delivered a staggering headbutt to Italian player Marco Materazzi following a brief spat of conversation between the two on the field. Zinedine was red-carded, and without their star player France lost to Italy. Naturally, people began to wonder – what did Materazzi say to Zidane? What was the incendiary comment that led the Frenchman to sacrifice his team’s star player at the very end of the most important match in soccer?

Speculation following the match fixated on the potentially racist nature of Materazzi’s comment. Zidane, born and raised in France, comes from an Algerian parentage – Kabyle, to be exact. But Zidane himself has said recently that while Materazzi had insulted his mother and sister, the Italian’s comments were in fact not of a racist nature. So why leap to the assumption that the comment had been racist? Racism is never very far from the topic of football in Europe. The FIFA (International Federation of Football Association) website expresses a clear concern for how racism manifests itself in the game throughout Europe; Sepp Blatter (the head of FIFA) has even said in the past that if crowds of fans continue to disturb players by chanting racist taunts from the sidelines, games could be called off.

While race and ethnicity has often become a contested subject in sports, both in the US and Europe, there may be something telling in how each conflict reflects a particular context – a specific web of privilege, power, cultural hegemony and politico-economic reality. The racial tension that manifests itself in European football today may embody the larger picture of racism in Europe. And I suggest that this particular manifestation, on the football field, may be worth studying. Why? I’m not entirely sure we, as social scientists, have thoroughly explored the concept of racism in Europe. As an American who researches Muslim legal mobilization in France, I’ve often used the term “racism” in describing certain activities of the far-right; but should I export my American understanding of racism to France? There’s a certain danger here, one that I’ve tried to be sensitive of, but do not have the tools to speak of accurately yet. So I have been asking myself:

1) Does racism come in different varieties? In other words, do different understandings of race and race relations vary from one national context to the next? It may all be the same monster in the end, but does it present itself differently?

2) What kind of analytical purchase would an understanding of racism that is more particular to, say, France, or Germany, give me in answering other questions about social movements? Or in doing comparative work in general? Does it matter that racism looks different, or is understood differently, in different parts of the world?

3) How would I seek to classify or understand “ideal types” of racism, or is that even the approach I would want to use? Might studying one specific area where racism manifests itself – like around football – help me to gain a richer understanding of racism within a particular context?

What are your thoughts on this subject? We’re so careful as scholars to specify the differences between, say, the “political left” in Italy and the US; between “secularism” in France and the US; might “racism” require a more thorough contextualization? Has this already been done, and/or there references out there to help us in doing this or starting such a project?

Activist Administrators and Public Sociologies

2005-08-28T10:51:00.000-07:00

There are at least two stories in this morning’s NYT that readers of this blog might find interesting. On the cover is a piece entitled, “Drugs, Politics and the F.D.A.” (which is, interestingly enough, not the title of the online story) that continues on p. 13. The focus is on the recent announcement by Lester M. Crawford, the food and drug commissioner, that “he would indefinitely postpone a ruling on Plan B, the morning-after pill …” The journalist, Gardiner Harris, goes on to state that by law, Crawford and the FDA must make a decision. Debate about abortion politics’, and other politically sensitive areas’, influence upon administrative decision-making in the FDA make up the balance of the article. In this state of political-issue-in-a-box period (that is, just add water, money, and marketing and, poof, an issue is there – important or not), I find it interesting how much media surrounds the performances and critiques of activist judges without acknowledging the partisan-influenced activism of the executive branch administrators. I realize that in some circles, ‘activist administrators’ could be seen as an oxymoron. Still …

The second article is on page 10 and is entitled, “How Photos Became Icon of Civil Rights Movement.” Some readers may not feel that this belongs under the “law” side of this blog, but I would argue that it most certainly does. The focus is the Jet’s use of the photographs of Emmett Till during the funeral ceremony. For those who have seen Eyes on the Prize, you should know exactly what is being referred. For those who have not seen these photographs, I urge you to do so. In any case, the article, authored by Shaila Dewan, correctly emphasizes the impact of Jet’s courage to publish the photographs and its impact upon the Civil Rights Movements. In our current cry for public sociologies, Jet’s endeavors, the activism that occurred afterward, and the ability to question justice then and more recently definitely exemplifies the want and necessity of public sociologies. And, in relation to law and social movements, it could be argued that the seeds of understanding and questioning justice were watered by Emmett’s Mother’s demands for an open-casket funeral, the thousands who attended, Jet’s photographs, and the tears they produced. Today is the fiftieth anniversary of Emmett’s death.

"The Revolution Will Not Be Copyrighted"

2005-07-01T06:27:00.000-07:00

This is the title of a presentation by FreeCulture.org at the upcoming DefCon, roughly seen as a conference for hackers. What's the big deal? FreeCulture is becoming more than just website. It is a self-identified student movement found on over ten universities and colleges across the country.

The Free Culture Movement's manifesto highlights their case against the homogenization of culture through extensions of copyright and intellectual property rights. Sound familiar? I wonder if they have a spine-broken Marcuse in their back pocket? Maybe not, but try Lawrence Lessig's "Free Culture", the text after which the group named themselves. Lessig has been the voice for a few years now, even assisting in the Creative Commons distribution system, an alternative to protectionist system currently used by corporations. I use the term distribution specifically, given Free Culture's reference to the landlord-tenant relationship that our culture has produced within consumerism.

Outside the apparent connections between law and social movements, there two other notions worth exploring. First, recall James Scott's discussion on hidden transcripts as acts of resistance. Under strict limitations of normative structures (including those reflecting legislative structures), individuals who are oppressed will develop individual and group acts of resistance that the oppressor may or may not recognized. The importance is the self-empowerment of the oppressed individual and resistance as the communicative act of empathy and sympathy with others who are oppressed. If I recall correctly, Scott provided a range of examples, from spitting on the sidewalk to African slaves mocking white owners voting. Consider downloading a Metallica song through a napster knockoff, such as a Grokster-type software. Remix it and share it and the original, for free, to thousands of others. Is this an act of resistance? For those protesting Metallica, it probably is. Is a rejection of purchasing music at the high prices on an industry gone awry an act of protest? To some. Are people downloading ("stealing") just to be downloading? Probably. What ever forms of protest or acts, these actions are revolutionizing thoughts toward copyrights and distribution because of their impact in both technology and pocket-books.

The second notion to be considered (and I take caution with sharing this given that it is my dissertation topic ... but isn't sharing the new ethic in the deliberative turn?) is the buying and selling of social movements. What are the proprietary rights of movement organizations? Just go ask the Truth campaign what they think about the public relations firms they hire. The twenty-first century will be marked by remixing new social movements into copyrighted brands of identity funneled through mediated filters of consumption. Rank and file of organizations will have to be granted permission to use brand identities in their marches or otherwise be sued or denied legitimacy (the latter is the negative option). From now on there will be a limited number of growth models for movement organizations in post-fordist societies: co-opted by the culture industry or remixed in hopes of escaping homogenization. Is this some fictionalized account of dsytopian movement stories? My dissertation has yet to be finished, so the suspense will have to go on; however, consider the links between tobacco industry, tobacco control, government agencies, and public relations firms. In these links are the buying and selling of social movements and the hiring of "movement engineers" to create what is not there. No, I'm not kidding.

The grazing of neoliberalism

2005-06-28T08:17:00.000-07:00

One of the characteristics of neoliberalism is the shifting of government roles, from regulating to de-regulating. In a LA Times article last week (found here), scientists speak out against a Bureau of Land Management Report on grazing's impact on public land, which led to President Bush "relaxing" regulations on the length of time in which animals may graze.

According to the National Wilflife Federation, grazing on federal lands by livestock uses more public land than any other commercial endeavor. Whereas President Clinton established policies within the BLM to safeguard the lands and repair damage done by over-grazing ("polluted watershed, ruined, despoiled riverbanks, damaged wildlife habitat, and destroyed archaeological sites"), the new regulations will "gut these reforms," reward livestock owners, and limit the public's role in decision-making.

The livestock industry is directly impacted by the efforts of various environmental justice groups. Lobbying efforts or campaign contributions by livestock groups, such as the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, attempt to push back reforms, allowing them to maximize profits while ignoring a stewardship role. PACs for livestock groups provided a little under $700,000 in the 2004 election cycle, 79% went to the Republican party. Still, some argue that ranchers with herds that graze not only financially contribute to the maintenance of public land but also contribute labor toward upkeep. Today's Farmer reported on Jim Chilton v. Center for Biological Diversity, highlighting the benefits that ranchers contribute to the environment. These views are typically found in the Wise Use Movement, a counter-movement to the environmental movement that focuses on states' rights and industry firms (descriptions are found here, here, and here). In contrast, the Center for Biological Diversity presents a different picture on grazing. Here is the press release from the Center.

NAACP's Legal Defense Fund on University of Michigan ruling

2005-06-23T16:03:00.000-07:00

The NAACP Legal Defense Fund has recently issued a report arguing that more needs to be done to help "close the gap" in racial opportunities to education. This report indicates that a group of anti-affirmative action challengers have been undermining the University of Michigan ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court (allowing race-conscious admissions). Much like the widespread resistance to the Brown decision 50 years ago, universities are facing increased opposition. A mixed message exists: universities are legally allowed to use race-conscious admissions policies, yet the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (OCR) is engaged (willingly or not) in the opposition group's strategies to circumvent the law. Read more here.

According to an article in today's Chronicle of Higher Education, the OCR is being staffed by members of these opposition groups, and that oppositions groups are asking the OCR to investigate universities about policies and programs for minority students. So, even when universities are engaged in legal admissions practices, the strategy of filing complaints with the OCR and the OCR investigation serves to intimidate.

ACLU v. Citizens Flag Alliance

2005-06-22T07:55:00.000-07:00

The Jurist reported this morning that the US House of Representatives will be voting on a flag desecration amendment today. In fact, they are debating this topic as I write. Though this isn't the first vote for the restriction/protection, the report notes that some are concerned this time around because of the conservative leanings in the Senate. Two organizations have been highlighted as the main voices in this exhaustive battle. On the one side, Citizens Flag Alliance is supporting the amendment while ACLU is calling for efforts to vote against the amenment. The CFA could be seen as the Kevin Bacon of right-side-of-the-aisle interest groups. The list of member organizations range from conservative family organizations to marketing and financial agencies. It would be interesting to compare campaign contributions on this vote with the CFA organizations.

Same-Sex Marriage in Massachusetts

2005-06-17T08:19:00.000-07:00

I know most of you probably saw this: Mitt Romney throwing his support behind a state constitutional amendment that would reverse the right for same-sex partners to marry.

I thought it was kind of interesting that Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute supporting the amendment, said his group did not want the amendment to invalidate the marriages that had already occurred. He said: "The homosexual marriages that occurred happened because of a flawed decision" made by judges, and "it's unfair to penalize those people for a bad decision made by the courts."

Anyway, Massachusetts same-sex marriage activists think that the amendment will fail because of a general lack of public outrage. It seems 6000 same-sex couples have gotten married in MA, and it isn't changing much of anything. One activist quoted in the article suggested that Romney was just playing to a national GOP audience by supporting the amendment. (Hmmm . . . the Massachusetts governor sucking up to the GOP . . . .)

This post comes to you from Urbana, IL -- a purple part of the Bluest of Blue states, home of Barack Obama and Dick Durbin, Mayor-for-Life Daley, and Governor Rod "I'm-a-Bit-of-a-Butthead-but-I'm-a-Democrat" Blagojevich.

Iranian Elections

2005-06-17T08:03:00.000-07:00

A bit afield from "law and social movements," but here's an interesting "photo essay" about the elections in Iran. The web page author argues, interestingly, that the news media is sexualizing democracy in Arab states.

It is true that when we're being pitched on how great it is that the US is bringing democracy to the Arab world, we are reminded of how horribly women are treated in their autocratic regimes. For example, in Bush's bash-fest of the Iranian election, he complained about how women are being excluded as candidates. So real democracy in the Middle East, we're being led to believe, will lead to a glorious day of women's liberation . . . I guess.

The role of women and Islamic feminists in Middle Eastern politics is so incredibly complicated, I'd never expect Bush and his neo-cons to have a clue (not to mention the gross hypocrisy of bashing Iran for excluding women from its political processes but condoning Saudi Arabia, which doesn't even bother with elections, except at the local level). But that doesn't stop them from using women to peddle their foreign policy.

Oh, and isn't it fun listening to George Bush lecturing other countries about the problems in *their* election systems. My sister calls it Irony Deficiency Syndrome.

Tobacco Litigation Update

2005-06-17T07:57:00.000-07:00

Something smelled fishy about the Justice Department's cave-in on the tobacco litigation, and yesterday, we found out why.

Apparently, the trial team didn't want to reduce the amount of damages DOJ was seeking. That decision came down from on high -- specifically, an Associate Attorney General, Robert D. McCallum, who has the distinction of being both a buddy of Bush's from Skull and Bones AND being a former partner in a law firm that represented R.J. Reynolds.

So the trial team wrote a memo documenting their objections to what they perceived as political interference, and then someone leaked that memo to the NY Times.

Nice . . . .

Hopefully, the Times won't lose interest -- as they so often do.

Money, Sound Science, and the Need for HSMs

2005-06-15T04:09:00.000-07:00

This past Sunday, the NYTs Business section's cover story was on Rick Berman's libertarian group, Center for Consumer Freedom. This article raises many many questions for law and social movements. It reminds scholars that movement organizations have transformed into various forms in the past two decades. NSM research highlights ideas about the individual belonging to movement orgs without ever being physically connected to them. That is, ten years ago, I can send NOW some money (becoming a constituent), be placed on their roster or mailing list, receive items in the mail, develop a sense of belonging and identity, and be ready to mobilize as soon as they called upon me. Today, one could guestimate that the internet is quickly taking over this role. The ease, of which, increases the emergence of many different organizations to take advantage of internet users, packaging themselves as movements, however faux that may be. Why this is important is because, invetibly, movements will arise as front groups, organizing for the interests of those beyond the roster (perhaps we should ask if there is any other way).

The Center for Consumer Freedom is such an organization. Started through financial assistance from Philip Morris, it has become an advocacy group for the food and restaurant industry, and, indirectly, those politicians that reap the support from this matrix. On their website, it states:

" The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit coalition of restaurants, food companies, and consumers working together to promote personal responsibility and protect consumer choices. The growing cabal of "food cops," health care enforcers, militant activists, meddling bureaucrats, and violent radicals who think they know "what's best for you" are pushing against our basic freedoms. We're here to push back."

Why are such groups important as subject for law and social movement scholars? First, they directly impact legislation through lobbying efforts, media campaigns, and mobilizing individuals. The Center for Consumer Freedom began as an organization to fight smoking bans. Second, and related to the first, such organizations belong to countermovements within health social movements, and are taken up by the current administration by pressuring the health institutes, CDC, and DHHS to emphasize policy rhetoric and sound science in contrast to peer-reviewed studies based on validity and reliability. The result from such organizational efforts and policy rhetoric finds its way into Clear Skies and Healthy Forests, for example.

Not enough evidence? Today's NYTs points to new studies on teenagers, sex, and virginity pledges that refute an earlier study. According to the new study, virginity pledges are relatively successful. The source of the studies? The Heritage Foundation. Published in peer-reviewed journals? No. Appropriate significance levels for statistical analysis? No. Any attacks on the other article that contradicts the Bush administration's policy on sex education and the push for virginity pledges? Yes: the authors state that the previous study "deliberately misled the press and the public". On top of activist judges, we now have activist scientists. Health social movements emerge to counter efforts by such groups as the Heritage Foundation. Most organizations under health social movements reinforce health over profit. This is in direct conflict with the efforts of the Center for Consumer Freedom and the Heritage Foundation. Each, however, find themselves battling for legislation.

Swimming against the Current?

2005-06-13T05:41:00.000-07:00

Last week, a 'rogue' lawsuit was filed in Michigan federal courts mimicking the ACLU and Lambda Legal suit filed in Nebraska that led to the May 12th decision that the Nebraska amendment was unconstitutional. According to PlanetOut's report (I found no other reports on the event), the suit was filed by Jessie Olson, a lawyer who copied the legal arguments made in Nebraska while also paraphasing passages to the extent that they were out of context.

A spokesperson from Lambda emphasized concern of competitive suits, especially in federal courts.

This brings up a couple of interesting points/questions: First, can this be an example of cause-lawyering from the point of view of some (re: the lawyer filing suit) or another obstacle by others (re: Lambda Legal)? When discretionary resources and legitimacy are scarce, can movements and movement organizations afford risks associated with competition between legal strategies? One could look at the mobilization drives of SNCC and SCLC and argue that they were competing while at the same time arguing that they supplemented each other. Can the same be said for legal mobilization? Second, are future resources jeopardized when individuals at the micro level are ostracized from the larger movement because they acted in what they believed to be the best avenue? Though the validity of Lambda's critique of Olson's efforts may be obvious, could there also be a concern for institutional legitimacy on the part of Lambda? Yes, there were mistakes in the Michigan suit. Still, is the only acceptable legal mobilization going to occur through ACLU, Lambda, or other large-scale firms and organizations that already possess legitimacy, while individual suits become "rogue"?

McLibel

2005-06-12T09:55:00.000-07:00

I just read this review of a documentary, McLibel, that sounds great. It's about the libel suit McDonald's brought against two English activists, Helen Steel and Dave Morris -- the mother of all SLAPPs.

Steel and Morris had been handing out leaflets (in 1984), complaining about the health risks of McDonald's food, as well as their manipulative advertising, the employment practices, and the impact McDonald's has on the environment. McDonald's sued them for libel, and the trial lasted 314 days -- the longest trial in English history. McDonald's finally won, a verdict that was upheld on appeal.

But Steel and Morris filed a suit against the English government in the European Court of Human Rights, complaining that English libel law violated their right to freedom of expression, and THEY WON! The ECHR ordered the British government to give them a new trial and to pay them damages. You can read about it here and here.

I know that SLAPPs are a constant threat against small, grassroots activist organizations, but this surely exposes the danger of such actions. Sure, McDonald's "won," but it's been an international public relations nightmare for them. People were talking about this before Fast Food Nation and Supersize Me ever came along. And now, there's a documentary regurgitating it -- you'll pardon the pun.

Also, it would be worth seeing the movie to see the kind of grassroots support Steel and Morris were getting. And who were their lawyers?

Protests in Egypt

2005-06-10T06:33:00.000-07:00

Protestor at Egyptian demonstration

At a political demonstration in Cairo calling for a more open democracy, a group of men chanting its support for Mubarak's ruling party harassed the protestors. In particular, this mob -- thought to have been sent by the government -- groped and beat up the women among the protestors.

Rather than intimidating anyone, the images of the beatings has apparently mobilized the opposition. In fact, the events have brought together fundamentalist Islamic groups and socialists. Kamal Khalil, director of the Center for Socialist Studies, told the New York Times, "At least now there is dialogue and meetings between us as Communists and the Muslim Brotherhood. We share our visions and there is a kind of coordination - of course, the event, assaults of Wednesday the 25th helped; we can't deny this." The event has also sparked the budding Islamic feminist movement in Egypt, fueling their organizational efforts.

The good kind of backlash.

Lawsuit Against Arrests for Panhandling

2005-06-10T06:00:00.000-07:00

So the NYC police have been arresting people using a statute against panhandling that had been declared unconstitutional a decade ago. A class-action lawsuit was filed yesterday, and NYC prosecutors have already said they will take steps to stop the practice.

It's a nice topic for illustrating conflict theory in criminology courses. (But my favorite illustration of this was when Rudy Giuliani had the police arresting homeless people because they administrative sanitation regulations on proper disposal of trash. He instituted this program of sweeps because a mentally ill, "homeless" man attacked a woman leaving work, and Giuliani told the city that he was going to get these miscreants off the streets. Except the guy wasn't homeless. This was a little hard to teach in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 -- you know, when "everything changed" and Giuliani was a God. It's easier now.)

Anyway, this story is on the blog because of the lawsuit. The suit was brought by Matthew D. Brinckerhoff, a private attorney who filed the case with the Bronx Defenders. Indeed, the lawyers are not acting on behalf of a social movement organization (although I have a friend, Margareth Etienne at the U of I Law School who has a paper on public defenders as cause lawyers). The public defenders are also in a unique position to identify injustices like these -- they see lots of the same kinds of cases brought against individuals, and the lawyers can "collectivize" them.

Also, Brinckerhoff is a private attorney -- he's doing well by doing good. The core practice areas of the firm are civil rights and commercial law, which is an interesting combination. He's a cause lawyer, right? I mean, just because his offices are on Madison Avenue, and he makes some money doesn't mean he can't be a cause lawyer.

Let's Study Countermovements

2005-06-09T06:44:00.000-07:00

And finally, a chilling article about how religious right organizations are challenging the advances the LGBT movement has made in education.

These conservative Christian groups are pursuing a litigation strategy, challenging the inclusion of homosexuality in the curriculum of health education courses. One such group got a restraining order in federal court (huh?!?), and the County board later rescinded its approval of the use of the teaching materials. (Anyone know what the grounds of the restraining order were?).

Activists are also turning to state legislatures. "Alabama lawmakers are considering a bill that would bar state spending on books or other materials that "promote homosexual lifestyle." Oklahoma passed a resolution last month calling on public libraries to restrict children's access to books with a gay theme. Louisiana is considering a similar measure. "

Those of us who fall in love with our social movements really need to be thinking all the time about countermovements. Social movements don't operate in a vacuum, and these right-wing Christian movements -- and the successes they enjoy -- really shape the terrain of the public debate, not to mention policy, political opportunities, etc. I know those of you who study the LGBT movement never get very far away from these opponents, but it's a lesson to the rest of us to be thinking about who opposes the movements we study.

Saudi Reformers

2005-06-09T06:20:00.000-07:00

The article about Saudi reformers on the front page of the Times today was pretty interesting, mostly because of the absence of law and even the absence of social movements.

The article profiled several reformers in Saudi society who have been critical about the absence of civil liberties and civil rights, the treatment of women, and the prevalence of Wahhabism. One of those profiled, Turki al-Hamad, has had his novels banned. Another, Fawaziah al-Bakr, has been pushed out of teaching jobs because she has questioned the limited role for women in Saudi universities.

First, the article suggests that such reformers are isolated in Saudi society. They do not belong to organizations or mass movements militating for change. Their books get banned; they lose their teaching jobs. Both the state and civil society make it difficult for them to circulate their ideas, so that they never even reach a wider audience. And public debate about social change is frowned upon in general.

Law is largely a tool of repression. The article describes three activists who were arrested for circulating a petition seeking a constitutional monarchy. The activists and their lawyer were given jail terms ranging from 6 to 9 years.

Of course, law is not the most important source of meaning or form of social control. Religion has that honor, so the article contains the familiar account of the religious police harassing men and women who step outside the relatively strict codes of behavior prescribed by the Saudi form of Islam. (I wish the newspaper devoted as much critical coverage to US police harassing gays and lesbians or engaging in racial profiling as they do to the religious police in Saudi Arabia, but maybe that's just me.)

The article got me thinking -- we're all Rosenbergians now; we're pretty critical of litigation as a tool of social change, but it's obviously a matter of perspective. After all, a lawsuit does at least allow opponents of a regime to articulate a grievance and demand redress, all in relative safety. Think about the tobacco litigation -- it may not put the tobacco companies out of business, but it has exposed shady tobacco company practices and the case has been a subject of public debate about corporate greed. But maybe Mr. Hamad wishes he could sue the Saudi state to force it to lift the ban on his book and have a public discussion about censorship.

Tobacco Litigation Sell-Out

2005-06-09T06:08:00.000-07:00

So the Bush Administration has decided to reduce the amount that it's seeking in the tobacco litigation. Experts thought that the stop-smoking program sought in the case needed about $130 billion, but the Bushies are asking for only $10 billion.

This is really no surprise -- they've been trying to de-rail the litigation since taking office in 2001. And apparently, Associate Attorney General Robert McCallum, Jr. has been taking an interest in the case -- which wouldn't be a big deal except that McCallum was a partner in a law firm in Atlanta that represented one of the big defendants, R.J. Reynolds. Justice department officials assure us that McCallum wasn't participating in the lawsuit; he just showed up in court during closing arguments. I guess he was just saying Hi to old friends. Yeah, that's it.

My favorite quotation in the Times article comes from some unnamed Justice department official who justifies the $10 billion figure by saying:

"This is not politics. This is exactly the contrary. This is trying
to stay within the law and trying to stay within a decision with which we
disagreed."

Trying to stay within a decision with which we disagreed? I'm sorry -- isn't that politics?

Indigenous and Labor Movements Toppling Government in Bolivia

2005-06-08T06:30:00.000-07:00

There have been days of protests in Bolivia, lead by miners and indigenous groups who are protesting the free market policies of President Carlos Mesa. Even as the police have tried to disperse the protesters -- with tear gas and rubber bullets -- Mesa has offered his resignation, and the Bolivian Congress is expected to accept it.

One of the opposition leaders calling for new elections, Evo Morales, is a congressman in the party of Movement Toward Socialism. An Aymara Indian, Morales got his start in politics leading coca farmers protesting coca-eradication in the US War on Drugs. He and other opposition leaders are seeking nationalization of Bolivia's expanding energy industries.

Mesa is expected to be replaced by the President of the Supreme Court, Eduardo Rodríguez, who is politically popular and who has said he will only take the office as long as is necessary to hold elections.

"Lactivists"

2005-06-07T12:32:00.000-07:00

I told myself I wasn't going to start up a Law and Social Movements blog unless there was an interesting and relevant story in the New York Times the morning I got back. So what's on the opening web page of the on-line version of the NYT? A story about the Lactivists who mounted a protest at ABC because Barbara Walters apparently complained about seeing women who breast feed in public.

Lactivism has been storming the country. A group of women have targeted Starbucks, for example, where women are asked to nurse in the bathroom, and they've created a web site encouraging women to mobilize against the Coffee Behemoth. They have sponsored letter-writing campaigns, internet communities, and a great new form of protest -- the Nurse-In.

According to the article, six states have passed legislation permitting women to breast feed wherever they are. Here's the link to the article (registration required, only posted for 7 days).

For my purposes, I love this because it shows that people can be mobilized into activism from the frustrations they find in the most basic aspects of their daily lives. Lorig Charkoudian of NurseAtStarbucks.Com said: "We're all told that breast-feeding is the best, healthiest thing you can do for your child. And then we're made to feel ashamed to do it without being locked in our homes."

A paper topic for someone at the Baltimore meeting?

Welcome to the Law and Social Movements Blog!

2005-06-07T12:09:00.000-07:00

This is the Blog for the Collaborative Research Network on Law and Social Movements for the Law and Society Association (which will hopefully be approved some time soon).

While stuck in the Dallas airport for 6 hours on the way home from the LSA meeting, I made a vow -- before starting a blog on this topic, I would need a "sign." If there was a story about law and social movements on the home page of the New York Times on Tuesday, I would start the blog.

The very first thing I saw on Tuesday was the story about the Lactivists, posted above. So here we are.

Hopefully, this will mostly be for fun -- let's post ideas, newspaper articles, web sites, and resources of mutual interest. If you are at all interested in posting, let me know, and I'll make you a "Team Member" -- in the community-speak of this web service. Otherwise, feel free to comment on things posted here. Commentary should be open to everyone!