Search

The toolbox for resisting illiberalism is quite diverse. It includes high-level diplomatic negotiations concerning sanctions to enforce democracy and citizens' mobilisation for local causes. This article focuses on strategic litigation as legal mobilisation, relying on the language of rights and the rule of law and addressing courts as defenders of liberal democracy. Such mobilisation leads to litigation before national and European courts concerning issues such as media freedom, judicial independence, minority rights or the rights of migrants. In order to be authoritative, however, courts need support from political institutions at national and EU levels from the transnational judicial community and from civil society. The embeddedness in structured civil causes and organisations seems particularly relevant in the context of strategic litigation. This article aims to map out particular factors in the EU legal and institutional systems that directly affect the prospects of strategic litigation against illiberal reforms using EU law. On the one hand, the EU legal system does not provide direct access to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). The multilevel system of judicial protection in the EU means that litigation aimed at resisting illiberalism mostly needs to start before national courts, making it vulnerable to political capture of national judiciary. On the other hand, the EU law system is based on the purposive constitutional framework of the Treaties. The tendency to follow a teleological interpretation of the CJEU makes it a promising ground for advocating for new interpretations of the law in light of a changing social context. Finally, EU law is a system with a particular legal culture and a field of experts who are well-versed in applying that culture. This field does not directly overlap with the specialised lawyers who often initiate strategic litigation; who tend to be experts in the fields of migration, transparency or the environment; and who do not have a broader understanding of EU law and its integration logic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article serves as an introduction to the special issue on 'Populism and Right-Wing Legal Mobilization in Europe'. We point to the dependence of populists in power on non-state actors: populist governments have ideological and political reasons to need the support of civil society's right-wing representatives and have the financial and institutional means to strengthen those organizations. We then map right-wing legal mobilization in Europe based on the analyses in the special issue. By right-wing legal mobilization, we understand the organized efforts, resources, and strategies employed by individuals, groups, or organizations with conservative or right-leaning ideologies to embody their values in positive law and its interpretation. The text concludes with a dynamic normative framework to assess this type of mobilization. Drawing on recent contributions from comparative constitutional law, human rights, and socio-legal studies, we argue that the analysis and evaluation of right-wing legal mobilization could be based on a comprehensive analysis of three bundles of issues: (1) the relationship between mobilizing actors and the courts, as well as the local standard of judicial independence, (2) the relation of right-wing argumentation to systemic linkages and historical trajectories of human rights, (3) the redistributive effect (economic and symbolic) and the potential success of such mobilization on the legal capacities of other actors who may have opposing interests. From this perspective, the problematic part of right-wing legal mobilization in the context of populism is, therefore, not its ideological, conservative character but its influence on the rule of law to gain strategic advantage. In the process, the very idea of the rule of law and the related issue of civic agency may be compromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This article addresses the processes that led to the recognition of LGBT rights in Brazil, the role played by civil society mobilization, and the interaction between the Federal Supreme Court and the National Congress in these processes. Methods: The study's primary method is document analysis. Our sample was established in 2021 and includes four court decisions and 93 law proposals presented from 2011 to 2020 by 83 legislators whose profiles are also analysed (data collected in 2021). Moreover, the article references secondary source interviews conducted in 2017 and 2018. Results: The Federal Supreme Court was responsible for all the LGBT rights recognized at the federal level in Brazil. Our data shows that federal legislators, on the other hand, have been unable to make bills focused on LGBT rights (pro or against) pass. Some highlights from the results show that 46.2% of the proposals on the matter are contrary to those rights, and 48.2% of the legislators who mobilize the matter are affiliated with the Evangelical Bench, an influential conservative institution in the Brazilian National Congress. Although not yet able to make law proposals pass, those legislators with a conservative profile tend to use LGBT rights as political currency by presenting bills or making speeches against these rights. They also play a role in not allowing pro-LGBT rights achievements in the legislative arena. Aware of the legislators' profile, civil society organizations tend not to focus all their efforts on this arena and to take or create legal opportunities, even though the path through courts still represents several obstacles. Moreover, although the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court has shown a willingness to decide on LGBT rights, the outcomes of the rulings depend on the composition of the body, which is influenced by nominations made by the president. That is, the same court Brazil has relied on to recognize LGBT rights could be responsible for denying them had it had the same powers but different members. Conclusions: While the deadlock in the Federal Congress persists, and the judicial decisions that recognized LGBT rights remain effective, LGBT persons continue to exercise their conquered rights. However, the conservative wave in Brazil places the country in a context of uncertainty and vulnerability with regard to LGBT rights. Policy Implications: This study's contribution lies in showing why Brazil is an unpaired case when it comes to LGBT rights recognition and how vulnerable these conquered rights are in the country. The article provides an overview of the recognition processes taking multiple arenas and actors into account. Therefore, the analyses and the database of law proposals fill a gap in the literature and can contribute to future work from both scholars (for example, other studies from the database) and practitioners (for example, the development of legal mobilization frames and strategies). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Derecho del Estado is the property of Universidad Externado de Colombia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present article investigates key dilemmas in collective legal mobilization initiatives in the field of asylum and migrants' rights. Focusing on my own experiences from working in the Asylum Commission -- a trans-sectional mobilization initiative that ran in Sweden from 2019 to 2022, involving researchers, civil society representatives, and professionals -- I analyze two central dilemmas that characterized our work. First, I consider how we collectively struggled for the legal right to asylum and through this struggle also reproduced injustices and potential border control harms which are embedded in asylum regulations. Second, I analyze how the Commission strived to provide a knowledge-based account of the consequences of legislative changes post the long summer of migration in 2015 that would have an impact on future legislation, while simultaneously taking an open stand in solidarity with people who were excluded from the legislative process; i.e., asylum seekers. The article underlines the need for sociolegal research that highlights ways to address dilemmas in legal mobilization work and offers empirical insights from collective mobilization for migrants' rights in a Northern European country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we argue that the individual rights strategy, the most common way to realize non-discrimination law, is inadequate when it comes to combatting ethnic discrimination. We start our paper by analysing the obstacles for victims of ethnic discrimination to initiate and conduct a legal procedure and thereby mobilize the law. These obstacles consist of the complexity of the concept "ethnic discrimination" in practice as well as the challenges of the "individual rights strategy". Additionally, we investigate if there are other, better legal pathways to combat existing discriminatory practices, focusing on ethnic profiling and institutional racism (i.e. systemic discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity) by governmental organizations. Two alternative legal pathways to combat discrimination are presented: (1) more attention for strategic litigation on behalf of victims of discrimination, and (2) more attention for proactive obligations in the law, such as imposing public sector equality duties on organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tensions between societal and legal norms regarding rape shape people's perceptions of the law and the use of various legal strategies. This article investigates what happens when a claim of rape is discredited, resulting in the claimant, instead, being prosecuted for presenting a false accusation. Based on the analysis of verdicts in cases of false accusations of rape, we identify four pathways into the criminal justice process for such cases and three turning points whereby an accusation of rape is contested by the police and instead prosecuted as a false accusation. We conclude that this seems to follow from the strength of the ideal that victims of rape are listened to and encouraged to come forward with their claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the effect of adopting right-to-work on unfair labor practice charges filed at the National Labor Relations Board. Most charges accompany union elections, which are expected to decrease under right-to-work. However, this work's synthetic control method results show that unfair labor practice trends in rates and success are generally unaffected by right-to-work adoption. Underlying these stable rates of filing and success is a more resource-intensive strategy where federations collaborate on charges with their constituent members. Using the cases of Michigan and Indiana, which both adopted right-to-work in 2012 and a unique dataset of all charges filed from 2000 to 2019, I show that legal mobilization is one union activity that adjusts under right-to-work as unions and federations look to protect workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract Brazil and Colombia are outstanding cases of rights recognition through courts. However, when it comes to comprehensive sex education (CSE), the legal battles in these countries have experienced notably different moments. Drawing on judicial cases from the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court and the Colombian Constitutional Court, we identify the actors involved in the legal battles over CSE and show how the legal opportunity structure (i.e., the configuration of power, the access to the courts, the systems of alliance and conflicts, and the availability of legal frames) shaped the course and outcomes of the legal mobilization that took place in these countries in different ways. For this, we work with document analysis of court case files and consider a sample established in February 2023 containing 9 cases from Brazil and 24 cases from Colombia. We argue that (i) the Colombian court is much more open to civil society than the Brazilian court, resulting in a broader and more diversified use of litigation, and that (ii) the different configuration of political power has led the Brazilian mobilization to assume a feature of resistance to conservative attacks on CSE, while in Colombia, litigation has become a tool for expanding the right to sex education and protecting LGBTQ students.

Climate change is a wicked problem, a framework not often used in sociolegal studies. The problem is complex, not readily named, and not limited to one jurisdiction. Therefore, the places of law are multiple: human rights instruments, supranational tribunals, regional courts, and local governments and NGOS. Litigation concerning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions has largely not resulted in favorable judgments, and the papers in this collection turn to other ways of conceptualizing law and courts in responding to climate change. Relevant legal strategies include environmental legal enforcement, but also changes in investment, and response to the many disasters that are related to climate change. The papers in this collection travel across jurisdictions, actors and problems to assess legal strategies concerning climate change.

The present article investigates key dilemmas in collective legal mobilization initiatives in the field of asylum and migrants’ rights. Focusing on my own experiences from working in the Asylum Commission – a trans-sectional mobilization initiative that ran in Sweden from 2019 to 2022, involving researchers, civil society representatives, and professionals – I analyze two central dilemmas that characterized our work. First, I consider how we collectively struggled for the legal right to asylum and through this struggle also reproduced injustices and potential border control harms which are embedded in asylum regulations. Second, I analyze how the Commission strived to provide a knowledge-based account of the consequences of legislative changes post the long summer of migration in 2015 that would have an impact on future legislation, while simultaneously taking an open stand in solidarity with people who were excluded from the legislative process; i.e., asylum seekers. The article underlines the need for sociolegal research that highlights ways to address dilemmas in legal mobilization work and offers empirical insights from collective mobilization for migrants’ rights in a Northern European country.

This article examines the potential of transformative constitutionalism (TC) for reshaping labour law in Latin America. While traditionally labour law scholarship has been skeptical of the ability of the courts to protect labour rights, recent years have witnessed a return toexamining constitutions and the role of courts in the field. The article examines the concept of Transformative Labour Law in Latin America, which seeks to place the struggles between labour and capital within a legal discourse that can address the challenges faced by labour regulation in the region. By employing a methodology that combines constitutional theory and socio-legal literature, the article highlights the productive interactions between social processes and legal provisions. The article consists of five sections, beginning with an introduction that provides context for the study (I). Subsequent sections examine key features characterizing Latin American labour markets and identify challenges facing labour law (II), introduce TC in Latin America as a conceptual framework for analysing labour-capital relations through the law (III), and outline the key components of transformative labour law in the region (IV) before concluding with final remarks (V). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although courts are not usually perceived as forums for democratic participation, the existence of legal mechanisms such as amicus curiae briefs has allowed civil society organizations to actively participate in judicial debates. This article examines amicus curiae participation in LGBT rights cases decided by the Colombian Constitutional Court between 1992 and 2022. Based on interviews and a review of norms, rulings, and amicus curiae briefs, I argue that the accessibility of the Court's rules and the presence of justices interested in promoting the participation of non-judicial actors in constitutional debates created legal opportunities that encouraged and shaped amicus curiae participation in LGBT rights litigation. This article contributes to a better understanding of the role that courts can play in legal mobilization and in building a more democratic judicial system.

In this interview, Arrington discusses her research for an upcoming book. This work examines the methods used by activists and legal professionals to advocate for rights in South Korea and Japan. During the discussion, Arrington details how social actors utilize legal mechanisms and strategies to influence government actions. She concludes by highlighting the emergence of governance approaches rooted in legalism within the two societies.

Workers subject to algorithmic management, both in platform work and in conventional employment settings, often face a justice gap in enforcing their rights, due to the opacity characterizing most automated algorithmic decision-making processes. This paper argues that trade unions are in a more favourable position than individual workers to fill this justice gap through litigation, especially when collective redress mechanisms are available. However, this becomes possible only when the legal system is favourable to this type of litigation. This article analyses three legal domains at EU level where justiciable rights are more likely to be violated through algorithmic management devices, in order to assess whether it is legally feasible for trade unions to promote algorithmic litigation under EU law. Even when the legal framework is conducive to this type of litigation, it cannot be automatically expected that trade unions will more frequently resort to it to better enforce the rights of workers subject to algorithmic management devices. Previous research shows that trade unions are traditionally keen on turning to litigation only when they are able to link it to their broader strategies. This paper claims that this may be the case against employers using algorithmic management. For trade unions, resorting to litigation can be strategically instrumental not only to fulfil the legal purpose of alleviating the justice gap faced by workers through a better ex post enforcement of their rights, but also to achieve the meta-legal purpose of mobilizing them and the para-legal purpose of strengthening collective bargaining, especially considering that this would constitute an effective means to induce stronger ex ante compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After fourteen years of legislative initiative, the Indigenous Health Act was finally passed. This article will briefly describe the formation and changes of this law. Based on the changes in the rights framework and provisions, it will explain the advocacy actions of civil advocacy groups from the field to the forum, as well as the legal mobilization in the face of multiple political systems. How narratives that reveal health inequalities among indigenous peoples became legal norms, and what unfinished business was left behind by legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social conflicts stemming from industrial mining projects in Peru have increasingly been fought in court cases in recent years. This article analyzes the dark side of this judicialization of mining conflicts, a process through which state authorities criminalize participation in social protests and attempt to prevent the mobilization of social movements. This use of the law by public authorities is an example of the so-called shrinking space in which the scope of action of civil society actors is increasingly restricted and constrained worldwide. This article presents an in-depth analysis of a specific court case against a group of mining opponents in the Cajamarca region of Peru. Based on ethnographic field research conducted in Peru, the article discusses three different modalities of the law’s domination, exploring the various ways the law rules those who oppose large-scale extractive projects.

With the patriation of the Constitution in 1982, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) inherited extraordinary political powers. In response to the Court's expanded power of judicial review, there was a sizeable increase in the number of political actors "intervening" in SCC cases. Scholars of Canadian law and politics are deeply divided on whether civil society participation in the courts—particularly as intervenors—is democratically legitimate. This important debate cannot be settled without an empirical evaluation of who intervenes. This research note provides an analysis of all the Charter cases heard by the SCC between 2013 and 2021. In contrast to the field's dominant theory on interest-group legal mobilization—the Court Party thesis—the findings reveal that equity-deserving interest groups, such as those representing women, have an irregular presence in Court. Instead, powerful actors such as governments and legal associations make up a majority of the "repeat player" intervenors. While further research is warranted, the research note concludes that without the maintenance of sufficient support structures, intervention may be unable to perform a democratizing function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legal Mobilization in the Field of Asylum Law: a Revival of Political Opportunity Structures? Increasingly, we see collective actors in the field of asylum in Europe turn to litigation as the preferred strategy to attain their goals, which is a form of legal mobilization. Both at the national and European level, non-governmental organizations (NGO) are active in high-profile cases. These NGOs operate in a different national political and legal system, but do have similar European-level opportunities. Next to that, current literature suggests a possible relevance of organizational factors, such as resources, to explain the use of these legal mobilization strategies. By looking at NGOs with different levels of legal mobilization in two national contexts, a cross-case comparison is made in this article to explain what external and/or internal factors are relevant in making NGOs 'turn to the courts'. This article draws on empirical data to establish what drives four NGOs from Italy and the Netherlands to mobilize the law. This data is compared to existing literature on legal mobilization to show a potential revival of a theory that has been left behind over the last years: research on Political Opportunity Structures. This strand of literature emphasizes the importance of possibilities, constraints and threats at the (national) political level that drives NGOs in their strategy choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Der Artikel untersucht die Bedeutung der sogenannten Legal Technologies für die Sozialpolitik und das Sozialrecht in Deutschland. Auf der Basis einer empirischen Untersuchung entwickelt er eine Typologie von Anbietern digitaler Rechtsdienstleistungen und diskutiert ihre Bedeutung sowie die Implikationen für das Politikfeld. Die Hauptthese des Textes lautet, dass neue Geschäftsmodelle für digitale Rechtsdienstleistungen Konzentrationsprozesse befördern, die auch auf anderen Online-Märkten zu beobachten sind. Sie fordern die bisherigen anwaltlichen Strategien der Positionierung und Kooperation heraus und können Zugänge zum Recht so verändern, dass Rückwirkungen auf das Feld der Sozialpolitik zu erwarten sind. This paper deals with the transformation of the market for legal services in Germany which has been fostered by digitalization. Legal technology has opened up a new market for digital legal services which also affects social policy and social law. Based on empirical research, the paper presents a typology of digital legal service providers who challenge established market positions of lawyers in social law. It discusses to what extent the transformation of this market is similar to other internet markets and what might be the implications of this development for social policy and social law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores litigation as a practice of memorialization through a qualitative study of the legal mobilization to halt and re-site the Norwegian national memorial for the 22 July 2011 terror attack. In arguing that adversarial legal processes initiated by grassroots actors can represent a form of commemorative work with an ambiguous societal status, the article contributes to the emergent literature on transitional justice practices in established democracies and in post-terror contexts. In the Norwegian case, the law became an arena for contested negotiations over the hierarchy of victims. The litigation process also shaped how the fallout of 22 July is understood. Furthermore, this mobilization engendered frictions regarding the potential of future 22 July commemorations to perpetuate trauma. Litigation may be understood as a rupture with the national narrative of law as an accountability tool, because of the stigma and unresolved and painful contestation around democratic citizenship that it produces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social conflicts stemming from industrial mining projects in Peru have increasingly been fought in court cases in recent years. This article analyzes the dark side of this judicialization of mining conflicts, a process through which state authorities criminalize participation in social protests and attempt to prevent the mobilization of social movements. This use of the law by public authorities is an example of the so-called shrinking space in which the scope of action of civil society actors is increasingly restricted and constrained worldwide. This article presents an in-depth analysis of a specific court case against a group of mining opponents in the Cajamarca region of Peru. Based on ethnographic field research conducted in Peru, the article discusses three different modalities of the law’s domination, exploring the various ways the law rules those who oppose large-scale extractive projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We study the conditions under which the European Court of Justice (ECJ) expanded the European Union's reach into issues of national judicial independence. The ECJ's 2018 ruling in a case known as Portuguese Judges contained a far-reaching constitutional interpretation that had a transformative impact on the European Union's rule of law crisis. We conduct a theoretically guided investigation into both the domestic origins and the judicial outcome in the Portuguese Judges case. We show how the ECJ, with implicit support from the majority of the Member States, strategically exploited suitable characteristics of an inconspicuous case to produce a landmark ruling that enabled unprecedented enforcement action against democratic backsliding in Poland and Hungary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How do Taiwanese judges acquire autonomy in decision-making, free from intervention from the judicial administration? Using diverse archival data and in-depth interviews with 31 incumbent judges, this article makes three statements. First, the judiciary has multiple and inter-connected mechanisms to secure autonomy in decision making. The establishment of judicial independence is a dynamic and interactive process. Second, a distinctive "sandwich mobilization model" can be observed in the emergence and sustaining of internal mechanisms. Both the bottom-up mobilization by ordinary judges and the top-down policy reform by the judicial administration are critical driving forces for the establishment of judicial autonomy. Third, as Taiwan's judiciary normalized, the institutional tension inherent in the continental judicial system emerged. That is, the individual space for judicial decision-making stands in contrast to the bureaucratic monitoring of individual judges' performance. Particularly, untenured junior judges are under critical impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: circuit courts; Federalist Society; legal mobilization; conservative legal movement; Supreme Court EN circuit courts Federalist Society legal mobilization conservative legal movement Supreme Court 389 399 11 03/28/23 20230401 NES 230401 The conservative legal movement has been gaining traction for nearly half a century and owes much of its success and incorporation into mainstream American politics to the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies (FedSoc). Count of Federalist Society judges, by circuit and senior status Most cases at the circuit court level are decided by a three-judge panel where judges are randomly assigned. [Extracted from the article]

On February 21, 2022, the Colombian Constitutional Court decriminalized abortion up to the twenty-fourth week of gestation and clarified that the grounds under which abortion had been allowed since 2006 should continue to apply in the remaining weeks of pregnancy. This decision, more than any other, is the material manifestation of the strategic efforts of a broad sector of Colombian feminism grouped under the slogan Causa Justa (Just Cause). This article briefly presents the history of feminist mobilization around abortion in Colombia, emphasizing its contributions for thinking about progressive reform in highly conservative environments: the importance of taking advantage of political opportunities, the appropriation of legal reform, and incremental change. Three different moments are discussed: political mobilization and the construction of meaning (1979–2004), progressive legal mobilization and appropriation of incremental reform (2004–2018), and feminist legal mobilization (2018–present). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social movements and interest groups in Europe are increasingly using litigation as a form of legal mobilization in their campaigns. Current literature often depicts this as a result of favourable opportunities in movements’ legal contexts, with activists responding to rising prospects of legal success. This comparative study of fifteen cases of mobilizations against mineral exploration projects in Sweden explores a puzzle in relation to this view: Why do movements frequently litigate even when the prospects of legal success seem non-existent? Using frame analysis within a multi-institutional politics (MIP) approach, this study explores how movements interpret opportunities in appeal processes linked to mineral exploration projects. While confirming that the prospect of legal success is a relevant motivator in several cases, the results also indicate that some movements interpret the court as a democratic arena, presenting opportunities to mobilize adherents and signal popular resistance to policy makers and extractive companies. These diverging interpretations of the court are tentatively connected to organizational needs for mobilizing adherents, previous experiences of litigating and available institutional logics in society. Building upon the MIP approach, this study introduces the idea that the democratic understanding of the appeal process signifies a ‘creative infringement’. A democratic institutional logic is imported into the court, an arena typically dominated by an institutional legal-bureaucratic logic. Movements’ increasing use of litigation may thus be driven not only by goals of legal success, but also by creative reinterpretations of legal processes as arenas in which goals of popular participation and democracy may be achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The field of disability studies has largely overlooked the role of trade unions in the promotion of the rights of workers with disabilities. To address this oversight, this article explores how union activists pursue disability rights and how this cause is situated in their struggle for workers' rights in Belgium, a country which both has a strong welfare system and gives a predominant role to social partners in industrial relations. It argues that there is a division of work inside unions between representatives at branch level who lobby to increase job opportunities in sheltered workshops and diversity officers at interbranch level who attempt to strengthen equality in the ordinary labour market. Although these two groups do not pursue disability rights in the same way, they share in common a reluctance to mobilise antidiscrimination law because the ideals of equality contradict the routinised practices of employers and of workers' organisations. In most countries, people with disabilities experience higher unemployment rates than those without a disability. When they work, they are more likely to be found at lower-skilled and part-time positions, as they face discrimination. In Belgium, trade unions are very active in supporting workers' rights but their attitude towards disability rights is still very poorly documented. Based on interviews with union activists, this study shows that trade unions focus mainly on the development of an adapted work sector, by increasing the number of places in sheltered workshops. Diversity officers working in trade unions aim to combat discrimination in employment but they are reluctant to criticise an employer who do not comply with the law because they fear to harm further negotiation with employers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For many of us who study, or practice legal mobilization, the image of a duck-rabbit can be regarded as a metaphor of the very different world views and vocabularies that legal scholars and legal practitioners as well as social scientists and social activists use in explaining and practising law-based advocacy. Conventional, siloed approaches by academics and practitioners alike are common, though hardly desirable. We feel that rather than ask which vocabulary is more important, it is imperative to focus on the process of how people can understand each other, irrespective of the language and terms they are using. Moreover, we are curious why it is important to make such distinctions in conceptualizing and analysing the context of law-based advocacy and the many forms that legal mobilization adopts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Legal mobilization is a contested topic. There is little consensus among scholars regarding what legal mobilization is, let alone how it functions, particularly in relation to the separation or balance of powers doctrine, the latter which concerns the formal mandates of public actors and their interactions in relation to rule of law as a form of governance. We argue that the use of law by civic actors to advance social change should be distinguished from the use of law by states and other powerful actors to subvert the rule of law or to suppress critical voices. Thus, in distinguishing legal mobilization from lawfare, we argue that legal mobilization as a legitimate form of counterpower to lawfare has emerged as a viable and important component of governance. Pragmatically speaking, the illegitimate use of law by authoritarian regimes and corporations, the existence of corruption and both substantive and procedural limitations of formal rule of law mechanisms to deliver impartial justice have forced legal advocates to think creatively. In this paper, after conceptualizing legal mobilization and lawfare as opposing uses of law, we analyse the potential of legal mobilization as counterpower in relation to the trias politica doctrine, drawing on a case study of mobilizing Sinti, Roma and Traveller rights in The Netherlands to analyse how law is used to resist lawfare and pursue social justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responding to the limits of court-based analyses and top-down position-taking in prevailing legal mobilization scholarship, this article goes beyond the courtroom to explore the value of rights-based legal mobilization from the perspective of those engaged in the campaigns to challenge racialized water disconnection in Johannesburg (2004–9) and Detroit (2014–). Against the backdrop of the 'losing' cases of Mazibuko and Lyda , the article finds evidence in the feedback from protagonists, of the relevance of rights-based mobilization notwithstanding the judicial defeats. The value of legal mobilization ascribed by affected communities and their allies aligns with the understanding of law as a form of political power in a dialectical relationship between structure and agency (Crawford and Andreassen 2013 : 8–9). Using an expanded version of the 'power cube' (Gaventa 2006 and 2005), referred to here as the 'powerpack', the article engages in a bottom-up nuanced analysis of the multi-dimensional power of legal mobilization. In doing so, it contributes towards a deeper understanding of the transformative potential of rights-based mobilization for egalitarian socio-economic change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2021 6(3), 1553-1574 | Article | (Table of Contents) I. Introduction. - II. Passalacqua's theory of EU legal mobilization. - III. The Coleman v Attridge litigation. - III.1. Altruism. - III.2. Euro-expertise. - III.3. An open EU legal opportunity structure. - IV. Coleman contributes to a new interpretation of national law. - V. EU legal mobilization in theory and practice | (Abstract) The importance of the preliminary reference procedure for the production of EU case-law is widely recognized in EU legal scholarship, but uncovering the motivations and strategies of the individuals that are involved in the preliminary reference procedure is difficult. The conditions that have the potential to influence whether a national judge poses a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice are so varied and complex that generalizations are difficult to discern. In a recent article, Virginia Passalacqua argues that preliminary reference legal mobilization is most likely to occur when three conditions exist: altruism, Euro-expertise, and a favourable EU legal opportunity structure. This Article tests Passalacqua's theory by applying it to a new area of law. Although Passalacqua derived her theory from an intimate knowledge of EU migration law, her theory "travels well" when it is extended to a new domain, namely, EU disability rights litigation.

The word "adat" has several different meanings in Indonesia. Adat can be used to describe informal dispute settlement procedures, a habit that keeps repeating itself, or a norm that develops into a code of behavior. Adat is perceived in this article as a narrative and a strategy employed by oppressed groups to fight against various forms of exclusion, particularly in relation to land grabbing for resource extraction and conservation carried out by the state and private sectors. This article will analyze the evolution and distinctions of Adat-based studies and movements in Indonesia during the colonial and national periods. Using existing secondary material from various studies on indigenous studies and movements, this article shows the differences in agendas, strategies and actors that use adat in legal discourse and legal mobilization over time. The connection between local, national, and international contexts will also be covered in this study, along with how rural communities dealing with agrarian issues have turned to adat as a strategy for legal mobilization.

In this interview, Arrington discusses her research for an upcoming book. This work examines the methods used by activists and legal professionals to advocate for rights in South Korea and Japan. During the discussion, Arrington details how social actors utilize legal mechanisms and strategies to influence government actions. She concludes by highlighting the emergence of governance approaches rooted in legalism within the two societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that, despite au pairs' provision of valuable service to US families, their legal classification as cultural exchange participants, historical devaluation of care work, and persistent domination via gender, nation, and citizenship all contribute to their marginalization in movements for labor rights. Using historical, demographic, and interview evidence, I show that, while au pairs are likely to identify as laborers rather than cultural exchange agents, they are less likely than more traditional workers to identify with burgeoning legal movements. This lack of identification results from the invisibilization of care labor broadly, rather than the absence of legal consciousness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Scholars in many disciplines have examined how social movements use the law to create social change. While the study of the law and social movements has largely relied on studies of the US civil rights movement to develop theoretical tools for understanding how movements target the state to create legal changes, none of these studies have examined the legal strategy of the Black Power movement. This article draws on data from a larger project on Black Power law and the National Conference of Black Lawyers to develop the idea of the courtroom as contested space and construct a concept of courtroom resistance. I argue that the courtroom, operating as hegemonic white space, was viewed as a site of contestation by Black Power activists who found creative ways to challenge the legal, ideological, and physical "space" of the courtroom. These conceptual tools open an important avenue for researchers interested in examining the relationship between social movements and the law and how race operates in the courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The mobilization of law to address the degradation of the environment implicates a wide range of institutions, actors, and materials. This article maps developments in the study of environmental legal mobilization. It examines the different theoretical approaches that account for why and how groups mobilize the law (or do not), including explanations focusing on law; legal opportunity structures; resources; and/or ideas, identities, and knowledge. It then considers some of the methodological challenges of studying environmental legal mobilization and highlights recent efforts to overcome them and broaden the scope of the analysis. The article then identifies four trends that are shaping the mobilization of law: (a) changing forms of environmental law and regulation; (b) shifts in the political landscape, including repression of civil society and the undermining of the rule of law; (c) the growing diversity of the environmental movement; and (d) the cumulative impacts of environmental and climate degradation on the very institutions, processes, and resources available for the mobilization of law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Low-wage workers continue to face high levels of exploitation in the workplace. The regulatory frameworks that exist to protect workers and provide avenues for redress for violations of workers' rights rely on individual or collective claims-making by workers. Worker centers have developed creative mobilization strategies to support worker claims and build worker power in the low-wage labor market. This paper leverages qualitative case study data to better understand the process of worker claims-making and the psychosocial toll it can take on workers. Based on these case studies, this paper argues that worker centers and other alt-labor groups need to take into account the costs and challenges for workers endemic to the claims-making process under current regulatory regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the relationship between emergent LGBTQ movements and the state in the Arab world over the past two decades. Focusing on the efforts of various LGBTQ social movements to confront the criminalization of homosexuality in the Arab region, the article puzzles over a cascade of legal victories for LGBTQ rights advocates in Lebanon in recent years in spite of a hostile justice sector mired with corruption. It interrogates a set of prevalent assumptions about the effect of regime type (democracy v. authoritarianism) on gay rights activism and litigation. This article explains how some LGBTQ Arab movements have successfully relied on strategic litigation to confront criminalization laws while others have had less success in pursuing overtly confrontational approaches. The paired comparison between Tunisia and Lebanon shifts our focus back to the agency of judges and social movement leaders in shaping legal outcomes for LGBTQ citizens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an apparently paradoxical or contradictory way, our new century seems to show two trends: on the one hand, an increasingly informal, disorganized, oftentimes violent spate of uprisings, and on the other hand, a growing exploitation of legal strategies. Given these developments, how do we rethink the relationship between social struggles and law? This article employs a casuistic approach in order to explore current modes of interconnections between law and society. It argues that law is that language that through the institution of norms gives shape to the world of social relations. Through this same language, law performs actions in this world that it institutes through its categories. This piece also proposes a technical understanding of the concept of legal mobilization and argues that the innovative use of legal technique (rather than a political grammar) and the institutions of social cooperation could be seen as elements that re-describe and re-signify legal mobilization.

Like any other adjudicative body, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is an essentially reactive institution: it cannot create disputes on its own motion, but it needs to be 'mobilized'. This simple observation leads us to a question of central importance in the field of courts and social justice: who brings social justice claims before the Court of Justice? This is a particularly salient question if confronted with the Court's restrictive legal standing rules: individuals and collective actors have limited access to the Court and engaging in EU litigation requires the availability of specific resources and allies. This paper relies on an original dataset of 291 rulings of the CJEU in the field of migration, complemented with qualitative empirical research, to unveil and map the actors that defend migrant rights in Luxembourg. The analysis offers an innovative and critical reflection on the accessibility of international courts by disadvantaged groups, showing how some features of the preliminary reference procedure affect the type of actors that engage in EU litigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the grounded realities of how foster youth attempt to improve their own lives by navigating the foster care system. From 2014 to 2016 in southern California, I conducted life history interviews with eight foster youth; interviewed two legal representatives; administered questionnaires to two social workers; and conducted participant observation. Referencing the California Foster Care Bill of Rights and deploying the legal mobilization model, interviews with foster youth focused on their perceptions about rights and how they seek redress for violations to their rights. Their experiences expose the system's preoccupation with bureaucratic procedures, rather than teaching or acknowledging specific or written rights. Interlocutors aggregately experienced forty rights violations, variously responding with the following modes of action: Doing nothing; Non-Legal action; and Formal-Legal action. In all instances, their knowledge (or lack thereof) about their rights and the foster care system critically informed their actions and revealed their awareness of the power dynamics within the system. This case study centers foster youth perspectives and narratives which are important for identifying effective alternatives that ensure foster youth rights, mobilization for when rights are violated, and ultimately center their voices and power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]