Overview

An analysis of how problematic laws ought to be framed and considered From the murder of George Floyd to the systematic dismantling of voting rights, our laws and their implementation are actively shaping the course of our nation. But however abhorrent a legal decision might be—whether Dred Scott v. Sanford or Plessy v. Ferguson—the stories we tell of the law’s failures refer to their injustice and rarely label them in the language of infamy. Yet in many instances, infamy is part of the story law tells about citizens’ conduct. Such stories of individual infamy work on both the social and legal level to stigmatize and ostracize people, to mark them as unredeemably other. Law’s Infamy seeks to alter that course by making legal actions and decisions the subject of an inquiry about infamy. Taken together, the essays demonstrate how legal institutions themselves engage in infamous actions and urge that scholars and activists label them as such, highlighting the damage done when law itself acts infamously and focus of infamous decisions that are worthy of repudiation. Law's Infamy asks when and why the word infamy should be used to characterize legal decisions or actions. This is a much-needed addition to the broader conversation and questions surrounding law’s complicity in evil.

Full Product Details

9781479812080

Table of Contents

Reviews

A compelling examination by a diverse group of scholars on the historical, political, cultural and social meanings of 'legal infamy.' No one in the field of interdisciplinary law and culture studies has had more success than Austin Sarat at using the thematic essay anthology as a platform for robust, and rigorous, intellectual engagement. Law's Infamy is poised to become a significant contribution to the field. -- Kendall Thomas, co-editor of Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Founded the Movement An excellent, challenging, and thought-provoking book whose essays position many instances of complicity and 'infamy' into thoughtful, compelling, and unusual juxtaposition. The move to discuss the 'anti-canon' of 'infamous' cases is a brilliant approach to the problem of judicial complicity. -- Linda R. Meyer, Quinnipiac University Contributors to Sarat, Douglas, and Umphrey's volume ask when and why the word 'infamy' should be used to characterize legal decisions or actions. They consider how legal institutions themselves engage in infamous actions, and they urge that scholars and activists identify infamous decisions that are worthy of repudiation and label them as such, highlighting the damage done when law itself acts infamously. * Law and Social Inquiry *

An excellent, challenging, and thought-provoking book whose essays position many instances of complicity and 'infamy' into thoughtful, compelling, and unusual juxtaposition. The move to discuss the 'anti-canon' of 'infamous' cases is a brilliant approach to the problem of judicial complicity. --Linda R. Meyer, Quinnipiac University A compelling examination by a diverse group of scholars on the historical, political, cultural and social meanings of 'legal infamy.' No one in the field of interdisciplinary law and culture studies has had more success than Austin Sarat at using the thematic essay anthology as a platform for robust, and rigorous, intellectual engagement. Law's Infamy is poised to become a significant contribution to the field.--Kendall Thomas, co-editor of Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Founded the Movement

A compelling examination by a diverse group of scholars on the historical, political, cultural and social meanings of 'legal infamy.' No one in the field of interdisciplinary law and culture studies has had more success than Austin Sarat at using the thematic essay anthology as a platform for robust, and rigorous, intellectual engagement. Law's Infamy is poised to become a significant contribution to the field. -- Kendall Thomas, co-editor of Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings That Founded the Movement An excellent, challenging, and thought-provoking book whose essays position many instances of complicity and 'infamy' into thoughtful, compelling, and unusual juxtaposition. The move to discuss the 'anti-canon' of 'infamous' cases is a brilliant approach to the problem of judicial complicity. -- Linda R. Meyer, Quinnipiac University

Author Information

Austin Sarat (Editor) Austin Sarat is William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College in Amherst, Massachusetts. He has written or edited dozens of books, including Lethal Injection and the False Promise of Humane Execution, Law's Infamy: Understanding the Canon of Bad Law, and Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities and Cause Lawyering and the State in a Global Era, which won the 2004 Reginald Heber Smith Book Award. Lawrence Douglas (Editor) Lawrence Douglas is the James J. Grosfeld Professor of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought and Chair of Law, Jurisprudence, and Social Thought at Amherst College. Professor Douglas is the author of seven books, including The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of the Holocaust and The Right Wrong Man: John Demjanjuk and the Last Great Nazi War Crimes Trial, a New York Times Editor’s Choice. His most recent book is Will He Go? Trump and the Looming Electoral Meltdown in 2020. Martha M. Umphrey (Editor) Martha Merrill Umphrey is Bertrand H. Snell 1894 Professor in American Government in the Department of Law, Jurisprudence and Social Thought at Amherst College, and President of the Association for the Study of Law, Culture, and the Humanities. She is the co-editor of Lives in the Law, The Place of Law, and The Limits of Law, among others.

Tab Content 6

Customer Reviews

Recent Reviews

Countries Available