Interpretive Sociolegal Research

Abstract

A major challenge for scholars seeking new directions in sociolegal research is the persistence of old paradigms and assumptions about law. The challenge for the new is not to be cast as part of the old by efforts that assimilate its methods, goals, and results to earlier approaches. Such efforts, aimed at comparison and clarification, tend to “domesticate” the new, or in Boa Santos's words “doubly institutionalize” a developing project by reading the order of a conventional analysis into the emergent order appearing in the interstices of new scholarly work. In this essay we focus on interpretivism as a developing project in sociolegal research. In particular, we discuss three aspects of interpretive research that are at the center of current debates in sociolegal theory: meaning construction and the dynamics of power, legal ideology, and knowledge as politics. Our discussion focuses on different readings of ideology, on different understandings of power, and on the politics of interpretive research connected with these readings. To illuminate the struggles over these points and at the same time illustrate the process of domestication, we begin with a recent paper by David Trubek and John Esser, “‘Critical Empiricism’ in American Legal Studies.” Their paper lays out a treatment of ideology and politics that provides a basis for our broader discussion of interpretive work in the second half of this essay.

How Law Shapes Experiences of Parenthood for Same-Sex Couples

“…This framework seeks to address not only how the law is understood by people in everyday life but also the effects of people's understandings of the law (Ewick & Silbey, 1998;Silbey, 2005). Rather than view the law and social life as separate entities, this theory understands them as mutually constitutive (Harrington & Yngvesson, 1990). In other words, social changes can force a shift in the legal landscape and the law and legal decisions can also impact how individuals think about themselves and the options they see as available to them (Richman, 2009).…”

Juridical Framings of Immigrants in the United States and France: Courts, Social Movements, and Symbolic Politics

“…A constitutive conception of law (Hunt, 1985; Harrington and Yngvesson, 1990; Brigham, 1996) allows us to better appreciate the full scope of judicial engagement with immigration policy, particularly the reciprocal relations between immigrant rights and the politics of immigration. Drawing on post‐structuralist theories of the role of language in constituting social relations, this approach conceptualizes observable legal practices – norms, principles, and conventions – as embodying ideology.…”

Same-Sex Marriage in a Welcoming World: Rights Consciousness of Heterosexuals in Liberal Religious Institutions

“…While debate exists about the nature of that relationship and the extent to which rights matter (e.g., McCann, 1996;Rosenberg, 1996), many argue that rights, social context, and consciousness are mutually constitutive (e.g., Ewick and Silbey, 1998;Harrington and Yngvesson, 1990;McCann, 1994;Ygnvesson, 1993). In this way, rights are emblematic of communication, meaning-making, and social inclusion.…”