Feminist Legal Theory is a groundbreaking collection of feminist work proceeding from the core assumption that the differences among women are essential to feminist analysis. Rather than presenting feminist legal theory sequentially, with “African American feminism” or “critical race feminism” added on at the end, the volume thoroughly integrates key readings from non-white, non-middle class, and non-mainstream writers throughout. The volume explores the intersections of race, class, and gender in such areas as theory, family, work and economic issues, and violence against women. Each section of the book begins with an introduction providing context and insights into how the particular pieces included challenge norms and create new paradigms. This vibrant, challenging collection of work by a broad range of authors represents the cutting edge of feminist theory in concrete applications essential to gender equality. Contributors include: Patricia Hill Collins, Bonnie Thornton Dill, Angela P. Harris, Sylvia A. Law, Mari Matsuda, Martha Minow, Esther Ngan-Ling Chow, john a. powell, Jenny Rivera, and Maxine Baca Zinn.

This book examines the concept of intersectional discrimination and why it has been difficult for jurisdictions around the world to redress it in discrimination law. 'Intersectionality' was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989. Thirty years since its conception, the term has become a buzzword in sociology, anthropology, feminist studies, psychology, literature, and politics. But it remains marginal in the discourse of discrimination law, where it was first conceived. Traversing its long and rich history of development, the book explains what intersectionality is as a theory and as a category of discrimination. It then explains what it takes for discrimination law to be reimagined from the perspective of intersectionality in reference to comparative laws in the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, India, and the jurisprudence of the European Courts (CJEU and ECtHR) and international human rights treaty bodies.

This text is a general introduction to American judicial process. The authors cover the major institutions, actors, and processes that comprise the U.S. legal system, viewed from a political science perspective. Grounding their presentation in empirical social science terms, the authors identify popular myths about the structure and processes of American law and courts and then contrast those myths with what really takes place. Three unique elements of this "myth versus reality" framework are incorporated into each of the topical chapters: 1) "Myth versus Reality" boxes that lay out the topics each chapter covers, using the myths about each topic contrasted with the corresponding realities. 2) "Pop Culture" boxes that provide students with popular examples from film, television, and music that tie-in to chapter topics and engage student interest. 3) "How Do We Know?" boxes that discuss the methods of social scientific inquiry and debunk common myths about the judiciary and legal system. Unlike other textbooks, American Judicial Process emphasizes how pop culture portrays—and often distorts—the judicial process and how social science research is brought to bear to provide an accurate picture of law and courts. In addition, a rich companion website will include PowerPoint lectures, suggested topics for papers and projects, a test bank of objective questions for use by instructors, and downloadable artwork from the book. Students will have access to annotated web links and videos, flash cards of key terms, and a glossary.

The Ambiguity of Justice offers a collection of essays on Ricoeur’s thought on justice, and on the different views that influenced this thought, in particular those of Arendt, Honneth, Hénaff, Rawls, Levinas and Boltanski. Although Ricoeur’s idea of justice has undoubtedly caught much attention already, only a few monographs have been published so far that explicitly address this topic. The contributors of this book – a mix of both well-established Ricoeur scholars and young promising scholars in this field – address the difficulties in Ricoeur’s thought on justice by maintaining his spirit of dialogue, not only by showing how Ricoeur himself repeatedly searches for dialogue in his writings on justice, but also by arguing that Ricoeur’s thought allows contributions to contemporary debates about justice.

For more than fifty years, scholars have documented and critiqued the marginalizing effects of the Socratic teaching techniques that dominate law school classrooms. In spite of this, law school budgets, staffing models, and course requirements still center Socratic classrooms as the curricular core of legal education. In this clear-eyed book, law professor Jamie R. Abrams catalogs both the harms of the Socratic method and the deteriorating well-being of modern law students and lawyers, concluding that there is nothing to lose and so much to gain by reimagining Socratic teaching. Recognizing that these traditional classrooms are still necessary sites to fortify and catalyze other innovations and values in legal education, Inclusive Socratic Teaching provides concrete tips and strategies to dismantle the autocratic power and inequality that so often characterize these classrooms. A galvanizing call to action, this hands-on guide equips educators and administrators with an inclusive teaching model that reframes the Socratic classroom around teaching techniques that are student centered, skills centered, client centered, and community centered.

Written by leading experts in the area, this volume investigates the ways in which emerging masculinities theory in law could inform feminist legal theory in particular and law in general. As many of the chapters in this collection illustrate, law is constantly in a dynamic interaction with masculinities: it has both influenced existing masculinities and has been influenced by those masculinities. The contributions focus feminist and critical theoretical attention on masculinities and consider the implications of masculinities theory for law and legal theory.

Feminist and Queer Legal Theory: Intimate Encounters, Uncomfortable Conversations is a groundbreaking collection that brings together leading scholars in contemporary legal theory. The volume explores, at times contentiously, convergences and departures among a variety of feminist and queer political projects. These explorations - foregrounded by legal issues such as marriage equality, sexual harassment, workers' rights, and privacy - re-draw and re-imagine the alliances and antagonisms constituting feminist and queer theory. The essays cross a spectrum of disciplinary matrixes, including jurisprudence, political philosophy, literary theory, critical race theory, women's studies, and gay and lesbian studies. The authors occupy a variety of political positions vis-à-vis questions of identity, rights, the state, cultural normalization, and economic liberalism. The richness and vitality of feminist and queer theory, as well as their relevance to matters central to the law and politics of our time, are on full display in this volume.

Numerous books explore the “how to” of qualitative research, but few discuss what it means to actually engage in it, particularly when researchers adopt alternative methods to shed light on the experiences of marginalized populations. In Demarginalizing Voices, scholars share personal stories about their research with marginalized populations, including Aboriginal peoples, sex workers, the dead and the dying, women and men in prison, women and men released from prison, and the homeless and the hospitalized. In the process, they answer questions of relevance to anyone engaged in qualitative research: What can scholars expect when their research requires them to establish human connections and relationships with their subjects? What role do ethics review boards and institutions play when researchers explore new, often less accepted methods? How do researchers reconcile academic life and its expectations with their activism? These powerful accounts from the cutting-edge of qualitative research not only create a space in academia that centres marginalized voices, they open up the field to new debates and discussion.

Presumed Incompetent is a pathbreaking account of the intersecting roles of race, gender, and class in the working lives of women faculty of color. Through personal narratives and qualitative empirical studies, more than 40 authors expose the daunting challenges faced by academic women of color as they navigate the often hostile terrain of higher education, including hiring, promotion, tenure, and relations with students, colleagues, and administrators. The narratives are filled with wit, wisdom, and concrete recommendations, and provide a window into the struggles of professional women in a racially stratified but increasingly multicultural America.

More has been written about children, childhood and children’s rights in the last 20 years than in the rest of history. There are more university courses focusing on children now than ever before. The International Journal of Children’s Rights has been a major player in all this. Its impact is worldwide. It has established itself as the leading journal in the field. The journal is now in its 19th year, and is flourishing. This volume has been compiled not only to commemorate the journal’s work, but also the 20th anniversary of the Convention coming into operation, and of the first World Summit on Children. An anthology of the best articles published in these formative years, this volume offers a representative sample of what the journal has achieved. Some of the articles are ones which are frequently cited, whilst others are less well known; some deal with theory, others with practice. The case for children’s rights is to be found throughout this collection, as is the history of children’s rights. Some articles are devoted to the UN Convention, others cover a wide selection of issues relating to different children’s rights, ranging from children and religion, the relationship between women and children, to children and health, and how children perceive their rights.