In 2002, Temple University Press published Crossroads, Directions, and a New Critical Race Theory (Reference ValdesValdes et al. 2002). The book of essays, edited by critical race scholars Francisco Valdes, Jerome McCristal Culp, and Angela Harris, generated a stream of thoughtful commentary about the challenges facing critical race theory. Critical Race Realism: Intersections of Psychology, Race, and Law builds on a theme of this commentary: Critical race theory would benefit from greater attention to other disciplines, particularly sociology and psychology, but also economics and organizational behavior (Reference Carbado and GulatiCarbado & Gulati 2003; Reference MoranMoran 2003).
Like Crossroads, Critical Race Realism is an edited volume. It consists of a foreword by critical race theory pioneer Richard Delgado, a brief introduction, and 19 chapters written by law professors and social scientists (Chapter 1 serves as an extended introduction). Unlike Crossroads, which was meant to evaluate the first 10 years of critical race theory's development, Critical Race Realism aims to inaugurate a movement. The editors introduce critical race realism as a methodology that synthesizes critical race theory, empirical social science, and public policy. This methodology would use social science to “(1) expose racism where it may be found, (2) identify its effects on individuals and institutions, and (3) put forth a concerted attack against it, in part, via public policy arguments” (p. xv).
The volume's strength lies less in the particulars of this proposed methodology than in the picture the chapters reveal of a group of scholars struggling to bridge a theoretical perspective that tends to focus at the systems level, often assuming the prevalence of racial bias, and a rich, growing body of research and literature in the social sciences that exposes racial bias as it operates in day-to-day judgments and actions. That the editors were able to amass such a diverse representation of this struggle is proof of positive momentum.
The shortcomings of the volume mirror the challenges facing the movement. The volume is organized in three parts: Legal Actors and Participants, Civil Law, and Criminal Law. The delineation of these parts, however, does little to shed light on the ways in which social science on racial bias is relevant to policy. For example, how racial bias operates in legal decision makers such as prosecutors, eyewitnesses, or jurors should inform inquiry into the contours of various aspects of the legal system (e.g., Chapters 3, 4, 5, 6, 17, and 18); how racial bias operates in society, as influenced by law and other factors, should affect thinking about the details of various substantive laws, from tort law to antidiscrimination law and criminal hate crime statutes (e.g., Chapters 9, 11, 12, and 16); and how racial bias operates in policymaking, shaping, for example, laws governing street and white-collar crime, should influence the development of those policies (e.g., Chapter 15). Naturally, several chapters in the volume span across these categories, and they might easily organize differently still. To be effective, however, critical race realism will need to develop and communicate clearer understandings of the ways in which social science informs law and policy. Moreover, the volume is heavily weighted toward the first category, bias in legal decision makers. Much remains to be done in the other categories, particularly in understanding how race relations and institutional racism—a hallmark of critical race theory—affect and are affected by various laws and policies outside of the narrow operation of the legal system.
Second, although the volume is interdisciplinary in that social scientists and law professors appear together between the covers, for the most part the social scientists and law professors work independently of one another rather than as coauthors. Eight of the 18 principal chapters are edited versions of articles previously published in law reviews. The remaining essays are authored by psychologists, with a few exceptions. Only three chapters are coauthored by law professors and psychologists. Again, work remains to be done. Social scientists and policy makers, including legal scholars, must think more together, learning from differences in methodologies and also building stronger empirical and analytical connections between research and policy.
Third, as the volume's full title suggests, the volume draws in the social sciences almost exclusively from the field of psychology. Critical race realism will no doubt benefit equally from work in the fields of sociology, economics, and organizational behavior, none of which is adequately represented here.
Critical Race Realism is essential reading for anyone interested in building better bridges between social science and policy regarding race. The volume would also be a useful accompaniment to a course on critical race theory or social science and the law, at both the graduate and undergraduate level. The careful, concise construction of the essays provides easy access even for those not extensively schooled in the social sciences or the law. Not surprisingly, the editors of Critical Race Realism stake far more ground than they can cultivate in a single volume. The rest is work ahead.
