Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T11:12:13.196Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Law and the Building Blocks of the Familiar

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Sandra R. Levitsky
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article draws on the insights offered by Francesca Polletta, Calvin Morrill, and Elizabeth Chiarello in their comments on my book, Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights (2014) to further specify the conditions that unleash the emancipatory potential of law. I argue that much of law's emancipatory power lies in its capacity to “construct anew”—to demonstrate new solutions to social problems by connecting the familiar with the strange. Drawing on the case of child care, I find that laws do not automatically provide the cultural resources to construct new claims for state intervention, but that existing laws—and the symbols, narratives, and norms that we associate with them—serve as grist for the political imagination and can be transposed to new contexts or institutions. In the absence of cultural resources in one institution (such as work), advocates can use legal discourse to strategically shift responsibility for a social problem to a new institution (such as education), opening up possibilities for new models, organizational actors, constituencies, and frames.

Type
Review Essay
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , Winter 2018 , pp. 258 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albiston, Catherine R. Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act: Rights on Leave. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Barnett, W. Steven, Friedman‐Krauss, Allison H., Weisenfeld, G. G., Horowitz, Michelle, Kasmin, Richard, and Squires, James H. The State of Preschool. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, 2016.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. Making Rights Real: Activists, Bureaucrats, and the Creation of the Legalistic State. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Friedland, R., and Alford, R. “Bringing Society Back In: Symbols, Practices, and Institutional Contradictions.” In The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, edited by Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul, 232–63. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Gornick, Janet C., and Meyers, Marcia K. Families That Work: Policies for Reconciling Parenthood and Employment. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2003.Google Scholar
Hacker, Jacob S. The Great Risk Shift: The Assault on American Jobs, Families, Health Care, and Retirement and How You Can Fight Back. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Hays, Sharon. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Heckman, James J. “Catch ‘em Young.” Wall Street Journal, January 10, 2006, A14.Google Scholar
Hunt, Alan. “Rights and Social Movements: Counter‐Hegemonic Strategies.” Journal of Law and Society 17 (1990): 309–28.Google Scholar
Kalev, Alexandra, and Dobbin, Frank. “Enforcement of Civil Rights Law in Private Workplaces: The Effects of Compliance Reviews and Lawsuits Over Time.” Law and Social Inquiry 31 (2006): 855–903.Google Scholar
Kirp, David L. The Sandbox Investment: The Preschool Movement and Kids‐First Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Lerner, Sharon. “Pre‐K on the Range.” American Prospect, December 4, 2012.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Sandra. Caring for Our Own: Why There Is No Political Demand for New American Social Welfare Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Levitsky, Sandra, and Russell, Kelly. “‘Pre‐K for All': Understanding Transformations in Cultural Categories of Worth.” Unpublished manuscript. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 2017.Google Scholar
Marshall, Anna‐Maria. Confronting Sexual Harassment: The Law & Politics of Everyday Life. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2005.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael. “Law and Social Movements: Contemporary Perspectives.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 2 (2006): 17–38.Google Scholar
Mettler, Suzanne, and Soss, Joe. “The Consequences of Public Policy for Democratic Citizenship: Bridging Policy Studies and Mass Politics.” Perspectives on Politics 2 (2004): 55–73.Google Scholar
Michel, Sonya. Children's Interests/Mothers' Rights. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Morgan, Kimberly. “A Child of the Sixties: the Great Society, the New Right, and the Politics of Federal Child Care.” Journal of Policy History 13 (2001): 215–50.Google Scholar
Pedriana, Nicholas, and Stryker, Robin. “Political Culture Wars 1960s Style: Equal Employment Opportunity—Affirmative Action Law and the Philadelphia Plan.” American Journal of Sociology 103 (1970): 633–91.Google Scholar
Rose, Elizabeth. The Promise of Preschool: From Head Start to Universal Pre‐Kindergarten. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Sewell, William H. Jr. “A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation.” American Journal of Sociology 98 (1992): 1–29.Google Scholar
Shonkoff, Jack P., and Phillips, Deborah A. From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Silbey, Susan, and Sarat, Austin. “Critical Traditions in Law and Society Research.” Law and Society Review 21 (1987): 165–74.Google Scholar
Soss, Joe. “Making Clients and Citizens: Welfare Policy as a Source of Status, Belief, and Action.” In Deserving and Entitled: Social Constructions and Public Policy, edited by Schneider, A. and Ingram, H., 291–328. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Steensland, Brian. “Cultural Categories and the American Welfare State: The Case of Guaranteed Income Policy.” American Journal of Sociology 111 (2006): 1273–1326.Google Scholar
Steinfels, Margaret O'Brien. Who's Minding the Children? The History and Politics of Day Care in America. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1973.Google Scholar
Stryker, Robin. “Half Empty, Half Full, or Neither: Law, Inequality, and Social Change in Capitalist Democracies.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 3 (2007): 69–97.Google Scholar
Swidler, Ann. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies.” American Sociological Review 51 (1986): 273–86.Google Scholar
Wrigley, Julia. “Different Care for Different Kids: Social Class and Child Care Policy.” Educational Policy 3 (1989): 421–39.Google Scholar