E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
A common belief, at least in advanced capitalist societies, is that state law is
the supreme, unified, hierarchical, and exclusive legal order in society. This
is the image of the monistic law state. As I demonstrate in
Legal Pluralism Explained: History, Theory, Consequences, this widely
held image is descriptively false, theoretically unsound, and normatively
problematic. State legal systems are internally pluralistic and coexist with
other forms of law that often are more immediately influential in relation to
social behavior within communities. This is true across the Global South as well as in the United
States and the European Union. Among various implications that bear on widely held beliefs about law, this analysis suggests
that "United States legal system," when used to refer to a singular, organized
whole, is a misnomer.
Here is the
book
description: Legal pluralism involves the coexistence of multiple forms of law.
This involves state law, international law, transnational law, customary law,
religious law, indigenous law, and the law of distinct ethnic or cultural
communities. Legal pluralism is a subject of discussion today in legal
anthropology, legal sociology, legal history, postcolonial legal studies,
women's rights and human rights, comparative law, international law,
transnational law, European Union law, jurisprudence, and law and development
scholarship.
A great deal of confusion and theoretical disagreement surrounds
discussions of legal pluralism—which this book aims to clarify and help resolve.
Drawing on historical and contemporary studies—including the Medieval period,
the Ottoman Empire, postcolonial societies, Native peoples, Jewish and Islamic
law, Western state legal systems, transnational law, as well as others—it shows
that the dominant image of the state with a unified legal system exercising a
monopoly over law is, and has always been, false and misleading. State legal
systems are internally pluralistic in various ways and multiple manifestations
of law coexist in every society. This book explains the underlying reasons for
and sources of legal pluralism, identifies its various consequences, uncovers
its conceptual and normative implications, and resolves current theoretical
disputes in ways that are useful for social scientists, theorists, and law and
development scholars and practitioners.