1 E.g., Burger, Our Vicious Legal Spiral, 16 Judges J. 23 (Fall 1977); id., Isn't There a Better Way 68 A.B.A. J. 274, 275 (1982); Sander, , Varieties of Dispute Processing, 70 F.R.D. 111 (1976); Bok, Law and Its Discontents: A Critical Look at Our Legal System, Bar Leader, Mar.-Apr. 1983, at 21. Recently, a revision of a Civil Procedure casebook was promoted in the following terms: Within the past decade the winds of change in American civil procedure have been blowing with extraordinary force. The most portentous draft is the one that has alerted the country to the need for non-court alternatives to resolve legal disputes. Judges, scholars, legislators and bar leaders are searching energetically for new mechanisms. A major “alternatives” movement has developed in the law and the law schools. Courses in civil procedure already feel the effects of this movement. … Casebooks clearly must reflect this development. Foundation Press, Announcing a Major ReLision of a Renowned Casebook 1 (Jan. 1985) (promotional release on file with author).Google Scholar

2 See Burger, sources cited in note 1; Miranker, Silicon Valley Courts Alternatives to Lawsuits, S.F. Examiner, Dec. 1, 1985, at D-1, col. 1.Google Scholar

3 E.g., Bok, Bar Leader (cited in note 1).Google Scholar

4 E.g. Preface, Dispute Resolution, 88 Yale L.J. 905 (1979); Cattani, From Courthouses of Many Doors to Third Party Intervenors, Christian Sci. Monitor, Jan. 17, 1979, at 12–13; McKay, Civil Litigation and the Public Interest, 31 U. Kan. L. Rev. 355, 369 (1983).Google Scholar

5 American Bar Association Special Committee on Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution, A Selected Bibliography (1985).Google Scholar

6 E.g., Abel, The Contradictions of Informal Justice, in Abel, R., ed., 1 The Politics of Informal Justice 267 (1982) (“Abel, Politics”); Nader, Disputing Without the Force of Law, 88 Yale L. J. 998 (1979); Hofrichter. Justice Centers Raise Basic Questions, in Neighborhood Justice: Assessment of an Emerging Idea 193 (1982); Delgado et al., Fairness and Formality: Minimizing the Risk of Prejudice in Alternative Dispute Resolution. 1985 Wis. L. Rev. 1359.Google Scholar

7 See J. Marks, E. Johnson, & P. Stanton, Dispute Resolution in America: Processes in Evolution 51–56 (1984) (recognizing problems with ADR); see also the discussion that follows immediately here.Google Scholar

8 Harrington at 172–73, quoting US., Dep't of Justice & Nat'l Inst. for Dispure Resolution, Ad Hoc Panel on Dispute Resolution and Public Policy, Paths to Justice 2–3 (1983).Google Scholar

9 Passages that appear to treat nonformalism as an unqualified good appear throughout the Goldberg et al. volume, e.g., 33–49 (how to negotiate effectively); 102–4 (how to get people to mediate): 196–201 (how to be an ethical arbitrator); 271–288 (how to save time and money with mini-trials); 347–69 (ch. 7, “Neighborhood Justice Centers”) (enthusiastic rrearrnent of NJCs, contrasting markedly with those of Hofrichter and Harrington): 503–16 (how to get funding for nonformal programs); 539–54 (planning to inregrate ADR into legal process).Google Scholar

10 Id. at 11, 502. See also Rifkin, Mediation from a Feminist Perspective: Promise and Problems, 2 Law & Inequality J. 21 (1984) (cited elsewhere in volume): Lefcourt. Women, Mediation, and Family Law, 18 Clearinghouse Rev. 266 (1984) (warning of ADR's ineffectuality in spousal abuse cases).Google Scholar

11 See in this issue Barbara Yngvesson, Disputing Alternatives: Settlement as Science and as Politics; 13 Law & Soc. Inquiry 000 (1988) (reviewing the Goldberg et al. volume).Google Scholar

12 See, e.g., Bell, Minority Admissions, and the Usual Price of Racial Remedies, 67 Calif. 1. Rev. 1 (1979); D. Bell, Race, Racism, and American Law 1–51 (1980) (cost of racial justice for blacks too high; whites refuse to pay it, instead shift cost to blacks and lower-class whites).Google Scholar

13 See Freeman, , Legitimizing Racial Discrimination Through Antidiscrimination Law: A Critical Review of Supreme Court Doctrine, 62 Minn. 1. Rev. 1049 (1978).Google Scholar

14 See id.Google Scholar

15 See Deleado, , The Ethereal Scholar: Does Critical Legal Studies Have What Minorities Want 22 Harv. C.R:-C.L. 1. Rev. 302, 303–10 (1987).Google Scholar

16 Cf. Delgado et al., 1985 Wis. L. Rev. (cited in note 6) (suggesting that, for minorities, formal in-court adjudication is preferable to its alternatives).Google Scholar

17 See Freeman, 62 Minn. L. Rev. (cited in note 13) (discussing “perpetrator” perspective, in which racial remediation law focuses on vicious-willed racists, punishes them, and deems racism cured).Google Scholar

18 Id.Google Scholar

19 Cf. Delgado et al., 1985 Wis. L. Rev. (cited in note 6).Google Scholar

20 Hofrichter at 82, 147; Goldberg et 31. at 369–71; Delgado et al., 1985 Wis. L. Rev. at 1367, 1374.Google Scholar

21 Sources cited in note 20 supra.Google Scholar

22 See supra note 4 and accompanying text.Google Scholar

23 Delgado et al., 1985 Wis. L. Rev. at 1374; Hofrichter at 146.Google Scholar

24 See supra note 19 and accompanying text.Google Scholar

25 Cf. Hofrichter at 121–58; Goldherg et al. at 91.Google Scholar

26 See Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3(c)(l)(a) (1972).Google Scholar

27 See Ginger, A., 1 Jury Selection in Civil and Criminal Trials 45 (1985); 28 U.S.C. 144, 455 (1982).Google Scholar

28 Ginger at 23–24; 18 U.S.C. 1503 (1982); 42 U.S.C. 1985 (1982).Google Scholar

29 Cf. Ginger at 59; United Stares v. Johnson, 584 F.2d 148, 155 (6th Cir. 1978); cut. dented 440 US. 918 (1979).Google Scholar

30 See note 28 supra.Google Scholar

31 Kalven, H. & Zeisel, H., The American Jury 494 (1966).Google Scholar

32 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). See also id. R. 11 (permitting assessing costs against attorneys who plead in bad faith).Google Scholar

33 See Fed. R. Evid. 403; see id. R. 103, 105.Google Scholar

34 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 16; Brook Village North Assocs. v. General Elec. Co., 686 F.2d 66, 71 (1st Cir. 1982).Google Scholar

35 Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 4.4 (1983).Google Scholar

36 See Adorno, T., Frenkel-Brunswick, E., Levinson, D., & Sanford, R., The Authoritarian Personality (1969); Simpson, G. & Yinger, J. Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination 78 (4th ed. 1972) (“Simpson & Yinger”); see generally Lawrence, The Id, the Ego and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism, 39 Stan. L. Rev. 317 (1987).Google Scholar

37 E.g., Kovel, J., White Racism-A Psychohistory 44 (1984) (“Kovel, White Racism”); 1. Katz, Stigma-A Social Psychological Analysis (1981) (“Katz, Stigma”); G. Myrdal. An American Dilemma (1962) (“Myrdal”).Google Scholar

38 G. Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (25th Anniversary Ed. 1979) (“Allport”). See Simpson & Yinger at 107; M. Goodman, Race Awareness in Young Children (rev. ed. 1964).Google Scholar

39 Allport at 79–80, 197–202. See Racism Flares on Campus, Time, Dec. 89, 1980, at 28 (racism now acceptable in some quarters following change in national mood).Google Scholar

40 The term American Creed was coined by Myrdal (cited in note 37). It includes values that stem from the tenets of democratic and Judeo-Christian teachings, id. at 23.Google Scholar

41 See Allport at 337–38; P. Van den Berghe, Race and Racism 20–21 (2d ed. 1978).Google Scholar

42 See generally Myrdal; Katz, Stigma at 23; Kovel, White Racism at 54–55.Google Scholar

43 See supra notes 39–42 and accompanying text.Google Scholar

44 E.g., Katz at 16, 109; Allport at 327–28; Katz, & Gurin, , Race Relations and the Social Sciences: Overview and Further Discussion, in 1. Katz, & Gurin, P., eds., Race and the Social Sciences 342, 373 (1969); Westie, The American Dilemma: An Empirical Test, 30 Am. SOC. Rev. 527, 529 (1965).Google Scholar

45 See Crambs, , Negro Self-concept Reappraised, in Banks, J. & Grambs, J., eds., Black Self-Concept: Implications for Education and Social Sciences 184 (1972); see Simpson & Yinger at 730.Google Scholar

46 Cf. Abel, Politics at 267, 309 (dispossessed instinctively prefer formal institutions, distrust informality).Google Scholar