Why the “Haves” Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change
- 1 January 1974
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Law & Society Review
- Vol. 9 (1) , 95-160
- https://doi.org/10.2307/3053023
Abstract
This essay attempts to discern some of the general features of a legal system like the American by drawing on (and rearranging) commonplaces and less than systematic gleanings from the literature. The speculative and tentative nature of the assertions here will be apparent and is acknowledged here wholesale to spare myself and the reader repeated disclaimers.I would like to try to put forward some conjectures about the way in which the basic architecture of the legal system creates and limits the possibilities of using the system ;as a means of redistributive (that is, systemically equalizing) change. Our question, specifically, is, under what conditions can Iitigation be redistributive, taking litigation in the broadest sense of the presentation of claims to be decided by courts (or court-like agencies) and the whole penumbra of threats, feints, and so forth, surrounding such presentation.This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Public Ordering of Private Relations: Part One: Initiating Civil Cases in Urban Trial CourtsLaw & Society Review, 1974
- Ethnic Enterprise in AmericaPublished by University of California Press ,1972
- A Theory of JusticePublished by Harvard University Press ,1971
- Varieties of Police BehaviorPublished by Harvard University Press ,1968
- Law and Equal OpportunityPublished by Harvard University Press ,1968
- When Americans ComplainPublished by Harvard University Press ,1966
- The Logic of Collective ActionPublished by Harvard University Press ,1965
- Justice in the U.S.S.R.Published by Harvard University Press ,1963
- Phases of German Civil Procedure IHarvard Law Review, 1958
- Regulating Business by Independent CommissionPublished by Walter de Gruyter GmbH ,1955