As Justice Holmes reminded us in his famous dissent in Lochner, the court needs to be part of the constitutional framework that is shared by all, not only by the old liberal hegemons who used to be nationalists and now are not clearly nationalists anymore. There are many social goals that the state alone cannot promote unless they are coordinated by social and cultural forces. This is especially true in traditional societies and in societies with large religious communities. Often, politicians think and hope that it is enough to legislate in order to create a new social reality. Finally, many believe that victories in the courts will bring us desired social change. However, it is not at all clear that courts can, or should, be the ones entrusted, on their own, with the task of creating social change.
But they should be very careful to grant this protection in a way that does not make them full, equal partners or even the hegemons of political decision-making within society. The Indiana Journal of Law and Social Equality (“Journal”) serves as an interdisciplinary academic forum for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and students to contribute to society’s understanding of legal and policy issues concerning social justice and equality. IJLSE aims to become a major outlet for leading scholars and practitioners to improve race and gender relations, foster new research in and across the disciplines, and provide the intellectual foundation for the pursuit of social justice. Professor Renteln studies international law, human rights, comparative legal systems, Constitutional law and legal and political theory.
The Essay contributes to these conversations by articulating a comprehensive framework for progressive inheritance law that redresses long-term inequality. The words justice and judge have similar meanings because they have a common ancestry. They are derived from the same Latin term, jus, which is defined in dictionaries as “right” and “law.” However, those definitions of jus are so broad that they obscure the details of what the term meant when it formed the words that eventually became justice and judge.
The result of Mautner’s approach is that the book discusses not merely the court or Israeli law, but Israeli society itself, with its strengths and challenges. True, both the Israeli-Arab conflict and the debate among Jews about what the Jewishness of the state is or should be or can be, are debates that are not connected only to the state of Israel. Consequently, Mautner has systematically provided us with analyses that do not only describe the increase in judicial activism, or the changes in the scope of doctrines such as standing and justiciability. Rather, he connects such processes to social, political, and cultural developments within Israel’s society. A socio-legal journal originally published by Federation Press and relaunched as an open access journal by La Trobe University in 2019.
The etymology of jus reveals the kind of right and law it signified was related to the concepts of restriction and obligation. Vestiges of this sense of jus survived in the meaning of justice and judge. Evolution of the number of total citation per document and external citation per document (i.e. journal self-citations removed) received by a journal’s published documents during the three previous years. External citations are calculated by subtracting the number of self-citations from the total number of citations received by the journal’s documents. Evolution of the total number of citations and journal’s self-citations received by a journal’s published documents during the three previous years. All types of documents are considered, including citable and non citable documents.
All editing is performed by student members of the board of editors and the staff of the SMU Law Review Association. Efforts to advance justice and improve the rule of law can be divided into two categories. One set of efforts-by far the better funded and more established of the two-focuses on state institutions, on improving the effectiveness and fairness of the courts, the legislature, the police, the health and education systems, etc. A second set of efforts, sometimes termed legal empowerment, focuses on directly assisting ordinary people, especially the poor, who face justice problems. There are two primary reasons for complementing state-centered reforms with this second type of undertaking. First and most simply, institutional reform is slow and difficult, and there is a need to tend to those wounded by broken systems not yet fixed.