Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Law and Social Movements: An Interdisciplinary Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines

Part of the book series: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research ((HSSR))

Abstract

This chapter explores the growing interdisciplinary exchange between law and social science that has led to the emergence of “law and social movements” as a distinctive scholarly field. Its main goal is to examine why this exchange has occurred, what vision of law and social movements it has produced, and what it means for the underlying disciplines. Toward this end, the chapter analyzes how American scholars have seized onto social movements as key actors in legal theory and what this says about ongoing debates within legal scholarship over the role of law as a tool of progressive social change. The chapter then traces the parallel development of legal mobilization within social movement theory, emphasizing the particular construction of law as a resource valued for its indirect effects on movement activism. Doing so reveals how the creation of law and social movements is not simply an interdisciplinary synthesis, but responds to different problems in law and sociology. In law, movements have been used by scholars to present a model of progressive legal reform that promises to reclaim the transformative potential of law while preserving traditional roles for courts and lawyers. In sociology, law has provided a link between movements and institutional politics that helps to explain the professional character and durability of movement organizations without undercutting their claim to outsider status. Both visions, the chapter argues, ultimately respond to barriers to progressive social transformation in democratic societies erected by conservative countermobilization and depend on conceptions of law as a flexible resource deployed to build power and shift culture. The chapter ends by exploring the challenges and opportunities of this interdisciplinary project—pointing out intellectual gaps, while suggesting how greater exchange between legal scholarship and social science might produce deeper understanding of core theoretical concepts and enrich empirical inquiry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This chapter draws upon and adapts work published as follows: Cummings (2017a, 2017b, 2017c).

References

  • Abel, R. (1973). Law books and books about law. Stanford Law Review, 26, 175–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abel, R. (1995). Politics by other means: Law in the struggle against apartheid, 1980-1994. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackerman, B. (1991). We the people: Volume I—Foundations. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adamany, D., & Grossman, J. B. (1983). Support for the supreme court as a national policy maker. Law & Policy Quarterly, 5, 405–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albiston, C. R. (2011). The dark side of litigation as a social movement strategy. Iowa Law Review Bulletin, 96, 61–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alfieri, A. V. (1991). Reconstructive poverty law practice: Learning lessons of client narrative. Yale Law Journal, 100, 2107–2147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfieri, A. V. (2007). Faith in community: Representing “Colored Town”. California Law Review, 95, 1829–1878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amenta, E., & Caren, N. (2007). The legislative, organizational, and beneficiary consequences of state-oriented challenges. In D. Snow, et al. (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 461–488). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. A. (2009). Out of the closets and into the courts: Legal opportunity structure and gay rights litigation. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arkles, G., et al. (2010). The role of lawyers in trans liberation. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 8, 579–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashar, S. (2007). Public interest lawyers and resistance movements. California Law Review, 95, 1879–1925.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashmin, A., & Alfini, J. J. (1974). The key to judicial merit selection: The nominating process. Chicago, IL: American Judicature Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachman, S. (2001). Lawyers, law and social change. Bloomington, IN: Unlimited Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkin, J. M. (2005). How social movements change (or fail to change) the constitution: The case of the new departure. Suffolk Law Review, 39, 27–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkin, J. M. (2009). Brown, social movements, and social change. In R. L. Hayman, Jr. & L. Ware (Eds.), Choosing equality: Essays and narratives on the desegregation experience (pp. 246–255). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balkin, J. M., & Levinson, S. (2001). Understanding the constitutional revolution. Virginia Law Review, 87, 1045–1109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balkin, J. M., & Siegel, R. B. (2006). Principles, practices, and social movements. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154, 927–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ball, Howard. (1987). Courts and politics: The federal judicial system. Edgewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkan, S. E. (1984). Legal control of the southern civil rights movement. American Sociological Review, 49, 552–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnum, D. G. (1985). The supreme court and public opinion: Judicial decision-making in the post-New Deal period. Journal of Politics, 47, 652–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, R. (1966). Detection and anticipation of impact: The nature of the task. In R. Bauer (Ed.), Social indicators (pp. 36–48). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1976). Serving two masters: Integration ideals and client interests in school desegregation litigation. Yale Law Journal, 85, 470–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. (1980). Brown v. Board of Education and the Interest-Convergence Dilemma. Harvard Law Review, 93, 518–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellow, G. (1977). Turning solutions into problems: The legal aid experience. NLADA Briefcase, 33, 106–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benford, R., & Snow, D. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, E., et al. (1970). Public interest law. George Washington Law Review, 38, 674–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bickel, A. (1962). The least dangerous branch: The supreme court at the bar of politics. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, C. (1960). The people and the court: Judicial review in a democracy. New York, NY: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, J. R., & Johnson, C. A. (1982). Implementing a permissive policy: Hospital abortion services after Roe v. Wade. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 1−24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boutcher, S. (2010). Mobilizing in the shadow of the law: Lesbian and gay rights in the aftermath of Bowers v. Hardwick. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts, and Change, 31, 175–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boutcher, S., & Stobaugh, J. F. (2013). Law and social movements. In D. A. Snow, et al. (Eds.), Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements (pp. 1–5). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brescia, R. (2010). Line in the sand: Progressive lawyering, “master communities,” and a battle for affordable housing in New York City. Albany Law Review, 73, 715–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brill, H. (1973). The uses and abuses of legal assistance. Public Interest, 31, 38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown-Nagin, T. (2005). Elites, social movements, and the law: The case of affirmative action. Columbia Law Review, 105, 1436–1528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown-Nagin, T. (2011). Courage to dissent: Atlanta and the long history of the civil rights movement. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buechler, S. M. (2011). Understanding social movements: Theories from the classical era to the present. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burstein, P. (1991). Legal mobilization as a social movement tactic: The struggle for equal employment opportunity. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1201–1225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldeira, G. A. (1991). Courts and public opinion. In J. B. Gates & C. A. Johnson (Eds.), American courts: A critical assessment. (p. 303). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Ross, H. L. (1968). The Connecticut crackdown on speeding: Time-series data in quasi-experimental analysis. Law and Society Review, 3, 33–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper, J. D. (1972). Lawyers before the Warren Court: Civil liberties and civil rights, 1957–1966. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, J. D. (1976). The Supreme Court and national policy making. American Political Science Review, 70, 50–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, W. (2011). Public interest litigation in Taiwan: Strategy for law and policy changes in the course of democratization. In P. Yap & H. Lau (Eds.), Public Interest Litigation in Asia (pp. 136–160). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase, A. (1984). Lawyer training in the age of the department store. Northwestern Law Review, 78, 893.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, A. K. (2013). Rights lawyer essentialism and the next generation of rights critics. Michigan Law Review, 111, 903–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chua, L. (2012). Pragmatic resistance, law, and social movements in authoritarian states: The case of gay collective action in Singapore. Law and Society Review, 46, 713–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, L. D. (1971). The lawyer in the civil rights movement—Catalytic agent or counter-revolutionary? University of Kansas Law Review, 19, 459–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemens, E. (1993). Organizational repertoires and institutional change: Women’s groups and the transformation of U.S. Politics, 1890-1920. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 755–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coglianese, C. (2001). Social movements, law, and society. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 85–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortner, R. C. (1968). Strategies and tactics of litigants in constitutional cases. Journal of Public Law, 17, 287–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L. (2009). Hemmed in: Legal mobilization in the Los Angeles anti-sweatshop movement. Berkeley Journal of Employment & Labor Law, 30, 1–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L. (2017a). Rethinking the foundational critiques of lawyers in social movements. Fordham Law Review, 85, 1987-2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L. (2017b). The puzzle of social movements in American legal theory. UCLA Law Review, 64 (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L. (2017c). The social movement turn in law. Law & Social Inquiry 42 (forthcoming 2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L., & Eagly, I. (2001). A critical reflection on law and organizing. UCLA Law Review 48, 443–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L., & NeJaime, D. (2010). Lawyering for marriage equality. UCLA Law Review, 57, 1235–1331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. L., & Trubek, L. G. (2008). Globalizing public interest law. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 13, 1–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. (1957). Decision-making in a democracy: The Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. Journal of Public Law, 6, 279–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. (2011). Law, issue frames and social movements: Three case studies. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 14, 363–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Sousa Santos, B., & Rodriguez-Garavito, C. A. (Eds.). (2005). Law and globalization from below: Towards a cosmopolitan legality. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Tocqueville, A. (1835). P. Bradley (Ed. 1945), Democracy in America. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Depoorter, B. (2013). The upside of losing. Columbia Law Review, 113, 817–862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, M. R. (2000). Community lawyering: Revisiting the old neighborhood. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 32, 67–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolbeare, K. M., & Hammond, P. E. (1971). The school prayer decisions: From court policy to local practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorf, M. C., & Tarrow, S. (2014). How an anticipatory countermovement brought same-sex marriage into the public arena. Law & Social Inquiry, 39, 449–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dupuis, M. (2002). Same-sex marriage, legal mobilization, and the politics of rights. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. B., Leachman, G., & McAdam, D. (2010). On law, organizations, and social movements. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 6, 653–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsesser, C. (2013). Community lawyering—The role of lawyers in the social justice movement. Loyola Journal of Public Interest Law, 14, 375–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, L. (1991). Courts and interest groups. In J. B. Gates & C. A. Johnson (Eds.), American courts: A critical assessment (pp. 335–371). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, L., & Kobylka, J. F. (1992). The supreme court and legal change: Abortion and the death penalty. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erskine, K., & Marblestone, J. (2006). The movement takes the lead: The role of lawyers in the struggle for a living wage in Santa Monica, California. In A. Sarat & S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause lawyers and social movements (pp. 249–276). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escudero, K. (2013). Organizing while undocumented: The law as a “double edged sword” in the movement to pass the DREAM act. The Crit: A Critical Legal Studies Journal 6, 30–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskridge, W. (2001). Channeling: Identity-based social movements and public law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 419–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskridge, W. (2002). Some effects of identity-based social movements on constitutional law in the twentieth century. Michigan Law Review, 100, 2062–2407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etheridge, C. F. (1973). Lawyers versus indigents: Conflicts of interest in professional-client relations in the legal profession. In E. Friedson (Ed.), The profession and their prospects (pp. 245–265). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felstiner, W. L. F., et al. (1980–1981). The emergence and transformation of disputes: Naming, blaming, claiming…. Law and Society Review, 15, 631–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foner, E. (1988). Reconstruction: America’s unfinished revolution, 1863–1877. New York, NY: Perennial Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, D., & Braman, D. (2012). Judicial backlash or just backlash? Evidence from a national experiment. Columbia Law Review, 112, 731–793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fore, W. (2015). DeBoer v. Synder: A case study of litigation and social reform. Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, 22, 169–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S., & Glick, B. (2007). Integrative lawyering: Navigating the political economy of urban redevelopment. California Law Review, 95, 1999–2072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, C. H., & Kosaki, L. C. (1989). Republican schoolmaster: The U.S. Supreme Court, public opinion, and abortion. American Political Science Review, 83, 751–771.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J. (2015). Supporting social justice movements: A brief guide for lawyers and law students. Hastings Race & Poverty Law Journal, 12, 191–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B. (2003). Mediated popular constitutionalism. Michigan Law Review, 101, 2596–2636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B. (2009). The will of the people: How public opinion has influenced the Supreme Court and shaped the meaning of the constitution. New York, NY: MacMillan Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, D., & McAdam, D. (1992). Collective identity and activism: Networks, choices, and the life of a social movement. In A. Morris & C. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 273–297). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galanter, M. (1974). Why the “Haves” come out ahead: Speculations on the limits of legal change. Law and Society Review, 9, 95–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galanter, M., & Krishnan, J. K. (2004). “Bread for the poor”: Access to justice and the rights of the needy in India. Hastings Law Journal, 55, 789–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, W. A. (1975). The strategy of social protest. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, M. (2011). The lawyer as gatekeeper: Ethical guidelines for representing a client with a social change agenda. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, 24, 551–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, S. B. (2014). Risky arguments in social-justice litigation: The case of sex discrimination and marriage equality. Columbia Law Review, 114, 2087–2153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg-Hiller, J. (2002). The limits to union: Same sex marriage and the politics of civil rights. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J. (2007). The lawyer is not the protagonist: Community campaigns, law, and social change. California Law Review, 95, 2133–2145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R. (1984). Critical legal histories. Stanford Law Review, 36, 57–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graber, M. A. (1993). The nonmajoritarian difficulty: Legislative deference to the judiciary. Studies in American Policy Development, 7, 35–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenhouse, L., & Siegel, R. B. (2011). Before (and after) Roe v. Wade: New questions about backlash. Yale Law Journal, 120, 2028–2087.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinthal, M. (2011). Power with: Practice models for social justice lawyering. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law & Social Change, 15, 25–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinier, L. (2009). Beyond legislatures: Social movements, social change, and the possibilities of demosprudence. Boston University Law Review, 89, 539–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinier, L., & Torres, G. (2014). Changing the wind: Notes toward a demosprudence of law and social movements. Yale Law Journal, 123, 2740–2804.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gusfield, J. R. (Ed.) (1970). Protest, reform and revolt: A reader in social movements. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handler, J. F. (1978). Social movements and the legal system: A theory of law reform and social change. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, G., & Jaffe, S. (1972). Public interest law firms: New voices for new constituencies. American Bar Association Journal, 58, 459–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H., & Sacks, A. (1959). The legal process.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H., & Wechsler, H. (1953). The federal courts and the federal system. New York, NY: Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilbink, T. M. (2004). You know the type…: Categories of cause lawyering. Law & Social Inquiry, 29, 657–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilbink, T. M. (2006). The profession, the grassroots and the elite: Cause lawyering for civil rights and freedom in the direct action era. In A. Sarat & S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause lawyers and social movements (pp. 60–83). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilson, C. (2002). New social movements: The role of legal opportunity. Journal of European Public Policy, 9, 238–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, D. E., & Kramer, L. (2013). Introduction: The empirical revolution in law. Stanford Law Review, 65, 1195–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, M. J. (1992). The transformation of American Law, 1870-1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, A. (1990). Rights and social movements: Counter-hegemonic strategies. Journal of Law and Society, 17, 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, A. C., & Monahan, P. J. (1984). Law, politics, and the critical legal scholars: The unfolding drama of American legal thought. Stanford Law Review, 36, 199–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. C. (1983). Resource mobilization theory and the study of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 9, 527–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, J. C., & Eckert, C. M. (1986). Channeling black insurgency: Elite patronage and professional social movement organizations in the development of the black movement. American Sociological Review, 51, 812–829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalman, L. (1996). The strange career of legal liberalism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapczynski, A. (2008). The access to knowledge mobilization and the new politics of intellectual property. Yale Law Journal, 117, 804–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karin, M. L., & Runge, R. R. (2011). Toward integrated law clinics that train social change advocates. Clinical Law Review, 17, 563–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitschelt, H. (1981). New social movements in West Germany and the United States. Political Power and Social Theory, 5, 273–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klandermans, B. (1986). New social movements and resource mobilization: The European and the American approach. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 4, 13–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klandermans, B., & Roggeband, C. (2007). The handbook of social movements across disciplines. New York, NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klarman, M. (1994). How Brown changed race relations: The backlash thesis. Journal of American History, 81, 81–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, L. (2001). Foreword: We the court. Harvard Law Review, 115, 5–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, S. E. (1990). The poor in court: The legal services program and Supreme Court decision making. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S. R. (2006). To lead with law: Reassessing the influence of legal advocacy organizations in social movements. In A. Sarat & S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause lawyers and social movements (pp. 145–163). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, W. (1922). Public opinion. New York, NY: Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobel, O. (2007). The paradox of extralegal activism: Critical legal consciousness and transformative politics. Harvard Law Review, 120, 937–988.

    Google Scholar 

  • London, S. (2011). Reproductive justice: Developing a lawyering model. Berkeley Journal of African-American Law & Policy, 13, 71–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • López, G. P. (1992). Rebellious lawyering: One Chicano’s vision of progressive law practice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, I. (2013). Rich people’s movements: Grassroots campaigns to untax the one percent. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, G. T., & Wood, J. L. (1975). Strands of theory and research in collective behavior. Annual Review of Sociology, 1, 363-428.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAdam, D. (1982). Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930–1970. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, M. (1991). Legal mobilization and social reform movements: Notes on theory and its application. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 11, 225–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, M. (1994). Rights at work: Pay equity reform and the politics of legal mobilization. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, M. (1998). How does law matter for social movements? In B. Garth & A. Sarat (Eds.), How does law matter? (pp. 76–107). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, M. (2006). Law and social movements: Contemporary perspectives. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2, 17–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, M., & Silverstein, H. (1998). Rethinking law’s “allurements”: A relational analysis of social movement lawyers in the United States. In A. Sarat & S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause lawyering: Political commitments and professional responsibilities (pp. 261–292). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. (1973). The trend of social movements in America: Professionalization & resource mobilization. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 1212–1241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melucci, A. (1980). The new social movements: A theoretical approach. Social Science Information, 19, 199–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merry, S. E. (1990). Getting justice and getting even: Legal consciousness among working class Americans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, W., & Sheehan, R. (1993). The Supreme Court as a counter-majoritarian institution? The impact of public opinion on Supreme Court decisions. American Political Science Review, 87, 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishler, W., & Sheehan, R. (1996). Public opinion, the attitudinal model, and supreme court decision making: A micro-analytic perspective. Journal of Politics, 58, 169–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morag-Levine, N. (2003). Partners no more: Relational transformation and the turn to litigation in two conservationist organizations. Law & Society Review, 37, 457–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, A. D. (1986). The origins of the civil rights movement: Black communities organizing for change. New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NeJaime, D. (2012). The legal mobilization dilemma. Emory Law Journal, 61, 663–736.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nolette, P. (2015). Law enforcement as legal mobilization. Law and Social Inquiry, 40, 123–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Note. (1970). The new public interest lawyers. Yale Law Journal, 79, 1069–1152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberschall, A. (1973). Social conflicts and social movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, P. E., & Marwell, G. (1992). Mobilizing technologies for collective action. In A. D. Morris & C. M. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 251–272). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakulski, J. (1988). Social movements in comparative perspective. In L. Kriesburg & B. Misztal (Eds.), Research in social movements, conflicts and change, volume 10 (pp. 247–267). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. A. (1977). Poor people’s movements: Why they succeed, how they fail. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polletta, F. (2000). The structural context of novel rights claims: Southern civil rights organizing, 1961–1966. Law & Society Review, 34, 367–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porta, D. D., & Diani, M. (1999). Social movements: An introduction. New York, NY: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, R., & Siegel, R. (2004). Popular constitutionalism, departmentalism, and judicial supremacy. California Law Review, 92, 1027–1044.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pound, R. (1910). Law in books and law in action. American Law Review, 44, 12–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rekosh, E. (2008). Constructing public interest law: Transnational collaboration and exchange in Central and Eastern Europe. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 13, 55–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhode, D. L. (2008). Public interest law: The movement at midlife. Stanford Law Review, 60, 2027–2086.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, D. J., & Spaeth, H. J. (1976). Supreme Court decision making. San Francisco, CA: Chandler Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, G. (1991). The hollow hope: Can courts bring about social change?. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rostow, E. V. (1952). The democratic character of judicial review. Harvard Law Review, 66, 193–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, E. (2001). Passing through the door: Social movement literature and legal scholarship. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 1–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabel, C. F., & Simon, W. H. (2004). Destabilization rights: How public law litigation succeeds. Harvard Law Review, 117, 1016–1101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarat, A., & Scheingold, S. (2006). Introduction. In A. Sarat & S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause Lawyers and Social Movements (pp. 1–34). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheingold, S. (1974). The politics of rights: Lawyers, public policy, and political change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlanger, M. (2015). Stealth advocacy can (sometimes) change the world. Michigan Law Review, 113, 897–916.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraub, D. (2013). Sticky slopes. California Law Review, 101, 1249–1314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scotch, R. K. (1988). Disability as the basis for a social movement: Advocacy and the politics of definition. Journal of Social Issues, 44, 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segal, J. A., & Spaeth, H. J. (1993). The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, R. B. (2006). Constitutional culture, social movement conflict and constitutional change: The case of the de facto ERA. California Law Review, 94, 1323–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silbey, S. (2005). After legal consciousness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1, 323–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, H. (1996). Unleashing rights: Law, meaning, and the animal rights movement. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. (1992). “The Long Walk Home” to politics. Law and Society Review, 26, 923–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. In B. Klandermans, H. Kriesi & S. Tarrow (Eds.), International social movement research, (pp. 197-217). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1992). Master frames and cycles of protest. In A. D. Morris & C. M. Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp. 133–155). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D. A., Rochford, Jr., E. B., Worden, S. K., & Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review, 51, 464–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, D. A., Soule, S., & Kriesi, H. (2004). Mapping the terrain. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule & K. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 3–16). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southworth, A. (2008). Lawyers of the right: Professionalizing the conservative movement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spector, R. (2015). “Dignified jobs at decent wages”: Reviving an economic equity model of employment discrimination law. Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, 36, 123–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staggenborg, S. (1986). Coalition work in the pro-choice movement: Organizational and environmental opportunities and obstacles. Social Problems, 33, 374–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staggenborg, S. (2011). Social movements. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stumpf, H. P., et al. (1971). The legal profession and legal services: Explorations in local bar politics. Law and Society Review, 6, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, S. (1983). Struggling to reform: Social movements and policy change during cycles of protest. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Center for International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teles, S. M. (2009). The rise of the conservative legal movement: The battle for control of the law. New Jersey, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres, G. (2007). Legal change. Cleveland State Law Review, 55, 135–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres, G. (2009). Social movements and the ethical construction of law. Capital University Law Review, 37, 535–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, M. (1984). An essay on rights. Texas Law Review, 62, 1363–1403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushnet, M. (1987). The NAACP’s legal strategy against segregated education, 1925–1950. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulmer, S. S. (1984). The Supreme Court’s certiorari decisions: Conflict as a predictive variable. American Political Science Review, 78, 901–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhala, L. (2012). Legal opportunity structures and the paradox of legal mobilization by the environmental movement in the UK. Law & Society Review, 46, 523–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, O. V. (2008). Public interest law: A Brazilian perspective. UCLA Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 13, 219–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vose, C. E. (1959). Caucasians only: The Supreme Court, the NAACP, and the restrictive covenant cases. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, E. T. (2014). Grassroots for hire: Public affairs consultants in American democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, H. (1959). Toward neutral principles of constitutional law. Harvard Law Review, 73, 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, L. E. (1990). Subordination, rhetorical survival skills, and Sunday shoes: Notes on the Hearing of Mrs. G. Buffalo Law Review, 38, 1–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalman, M. (2011). An integrated justice model of wrongful convictions. Albany Law Review, 74, 1465–1524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziegler, M. (2010). Framing change: Cause lawyering, constitutional decisions, and social change. Marquette Law Review, 94, 263–310.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Law, 385 Charles E. Young Drive East, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA

    Scott L. Cummings

Authors
  1. Scott L. Cummings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott L. Cummings .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Conny Roggeband

  2. Department of Sociology, VU-University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bert Klandermans

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cummings, S.L. (2017). Law and Social Movements: An Interdisciplinary Analysis. In: Roggeband, C., Klandermans, B. (eds) Handbook of Social Movements Across Disciplines. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57648-0_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57648-0_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57647-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57648-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation