Sociology: Social Movements - Book Report/Review Example

Social Movements The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law by Steven M. Teles New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008 360pp ISBN 9780691122083. In 1960s and 1970s, the conservatives sought to reverse the legal system by turning their attention to judiciary, interest groups, and professional networks rather than relying on traditional electoral process. In the growth of conservative legal movement, Teles analyzes partial success of conservative legal movement and their challenge to liberal domination of American legal bodies and law (Binder 2009 p. 34-37). In this book, the author reveals numerous challenges that conservatives faced in search for dominance with their main rivals legal liberalism. In addition, the author describes how conservative aggression helped them. For instance, legal profession defined their mobilization, which was a legacy for the liberal movement. It is necessary to note that a combination of different liberal groups in America such as ACLU, LDF NAACP, liberal faculty, and law schools formed strong groups that aimed at pushing liberal ideas into laws (Binder 2009 p.30). For instance, the case of the Ford foundation that led to development and adoption of the legal service program showed how liberals dominated the society. This issue of Ford Foundation received sharp criticism from conservatives through public interest law firms like the chamber of commerce. Unfortunately, because of lack of enough academic support and influence from business sector, the first generation of conservatives did not succeed in their mission. The author greatly relied on the resource materials from federalist society, Olin foundation, and institute for justice, law economics, and centre for individual rights to examine the conservative’s movements in American society. In addition, he conducted extensive interviews with Supreme Court judges, conservative figures, and law enforcers to explain how the Liberalists dominated the judicial system in America (Teles 2010 p. 32-34). The main purpose of conducting interviews was that memories of such events are well remembered and forms a coherent history on what took place; therefore, it is easy to document what happened. The author did not greatly rely on archived information; archived information on documentary history of conservative legal movement is very little. Using available archival data to explain the inner life of conservative movement, the author examine how groups and foundations promoted conservative ideologies and established a strong network to dismantle the legal liberalism dominance from American legal institutions. The methodology that Teles uses is somehow reliable and validity given that he mostly relied on archived data and personal interviews. Although to some extent, people may exaggerate information in order to favor one side. Although the author used archived data to write about the battle for legal system, this data was not well suited because there is limited information that is documented that talks about this movement. However, the employment of other methods such as interviews with conservative figures was reliable because they narrated to the author what they experienced because of their actions to challenge liberalists. It gave chronology of events and how they happened. Relying on key figures, journals and political articles, the author has produced in-depth study of the conservative legal movement. In his argument, the author stresses that the conservative legal movement grew from trial and error rather than a rational plan and strategy that worked for them. He outlines the reality, not of organized plan and strategy implemented but of political and individual entrepreneurs learning from trial and error method to attain their goal. The conservative figures were arguing that the liberal were dominating law institutions in America, which gave them much power. From this perspective, it is clear that the main aim of this movement was to limit the powers of the government that was controlled by liberalism. Teles observe that the first generation of the conservative movement driven by business firms and public interest firms failed and led the conservative movement to revise their approach to legal change in America. The government on the other hand was determined to suppress the growing conservative spirit by making sure that government officials controlled halls of State power. Therefore, they controlled all levels of laws and turned the law against the rules of the constitution. According to Halluing (2010 p. 44), he examines that the government was not willing to let the conservatives occupy any legal institution in the country. It is rational to argue that the book seeks to go beyond electoral politics to comprehension of role played by conservatives and other learned entrepreneurs in redefining American law. During the 1970s, conservatives in American society realized that electoral triumphs were in contrary with their desired policy change because the state did everything to win political power. The enduring legal program and plan frustrated the conservatives’ strategies. The government as way of reacting to conservative movement decided to ensure that the legal liberalist remained in power and in control of American politics for a long time because it was endorsed by law schools, activists’ courts, public interest lawyers and organized bars (Engel 2011 p. 31-35). Some tactics employed by the conservatives to counter the liberalist failed because of lack of proper strategy. For instance, there approach to counter growing liberalism relying on businesspersons to support them failed because of kind of relationship that existed between the two groups. However, following the introduction of law and economics into legal system, the generation of conservatives managed to survive defeat from liberals. The earliest conservative firms in the 1970s were not active. Their close associations with the business industry made them appear largely on business front than legal movement. Their business counterparts demanded a plan that that promised instant results rather than long-term change. In addition, there was increased tension between ideas of the conservative legal activist and their corporate partners, which destabilized the movement. In the 1980s, there emerged a new strong and energetic generation of conservative activists who analyzed the weakness of their legal movement and ushered in new ideas. They did not tolerate business ties as they focused on changing intellectual environment as a way of influencing the existing courts. Their attention changed to academics and educational institutions (Teles 2010 p.35-38). It is vital to recount the spread of economics and law fields with focus on market solutions into school of law curriculum. This new development slowly shaped ideological shift in number of groups as the society does not participate in litigation or take sides on public matters. Rather it calls for serious intellectual discussion over legal questions. This served as a platform for variety of views for conservative thought. The federal society helped the conservatives by establishing a strong legal network in society. The new generation conservatives helped by the institute for justice acquired litigation plan and program based on advocacy. They skillfully and carefully selected cases to build constitutional law and sought to form coalitions or alliances with racial minorities, small firms, and poor clients as a move to gain support from these bodies. Surprisingly, conservative lawyers downplayed judicial restraint ideology that was held by some conservatives in 1960s and 1970s. This was as a response to the leftward flow of courts. Initially, the conservatives had viewed the courts as platform for economic rights against legal prosperity. The author does not condone what he refers to as “myth of diabolical competence”- the idea that players involved in the American conservative movement at the time had a plan that they successfully implemented without a problem (Teles 2008 p.41-43). The American conservatives faced many problems and difficulties due to their close interaction or association with business leaders in America. American conservative activists are seen as having vague relationship with businesses or corporate. They heavily relied on business funding and support but on the other hand, they advocated or rooted for a free enterprise that posed a great threat to the existing commercial interests. The emergence of other libertarian companies such as center for individual rights had to be patient for business leadership of conservative movement to dwindle and find a replacement with a coalition between charitable and intellectual foundations. By making the relationship between conservatives and businesses movements shaky, the conservative legal movement provided a new platform of analysis of area where business or firm funding and support was viewed as crucial in describing political and intellectual success. Teles (2008 p.44), suggests that conservatives have tried to justify their funding as appropriate and views it to be more important than its total quantum. Despite the fact that the author convinces in explaining the importance of institutional history by critically explaining the success and failure of some movements such as non-electoral political movements, his argument is at times faulty or unanimated by the notions of his conservative subjects. In his writing, Teles begins by stating that intellectual history is essential but not sufficient and summarizes with the comment that conservatives became more influential and necessary by opposing and ultimately changing their ideas. However, the real intellectual change that conservatives have undergone in America is partly covered in his explanation. For instance, the author concentrates at the beginning of his study to the rising tensions within American conservative society when Harriet Miers was nominated by Bush to take the position of US Supreme Court. This controversy is adequately discussed, it would have been prudent for the authors’ analysis to question further the extent to which American conservatives have been compelled to change and re-examine their ideological rules and the consistence of their political alliance as a result of such developments during Bush administration. This methodology used by the author in his writing can be seen as baseless because he failed to research further, what conservatives did to criticize such developments in government. The conservatives have accepted the structure of other legal groups and their role in helping diffuse and distribute potential internal ideological difference. In this manner, institutional design is directly related to ideology. Therefore, support from pro-bono legal activism helped conservatives to carry on with their work, which in turn made them succeed. Teles identify and examine some intellectual shifts in society. Some influential federal societies have opted in supporting and advocating for original definition of constitutional law thereby deviating from their notion of judicial restraint. The conservative legal movement was influenced by previous success of liberals. He supports this analysis by arguing that at the beginning of the conservative legal movement, the demands differed but at the end, their goal was achieved. Common opposition to liberal teachers, professors, lawyers and judges, drew conservative alliance. It is important to note that the foundation of the conservative legal movement was viewed as a reaction to the perceived success of the American liberals in shaping bodies like the American bar association (Teles 2010 p.65-68). The success of the conservative legal movement is directly linked to the role played by the liberals. The liberal ideologies and their organizational and intellectual influence on conservatives is important and necessary given the trend of right to left defection after reality mugged the liberals. Before the emergence of new deal period, the doctrine of judicial restraint was supported by liberals as strategies to counter and curb conservative judges. This was a tactic used by the liberals in order to curb the influence of the conservatives. Among, the tactics used by legal conservatives, this plan succeeded because they resorted to use of courts to advance libertarian policies and interests and hence limit the power of the government but they did not succeed since liberals dominated all legal institutions. Conservatives concentrated on shielding and advocating for economic liberties while opposing affirmative action in admissions in university. In addition, they criticized restrictions on campus free address or speech. The conservative legal movement sought for support in legal reform at the government level and continued to oppose takings in the government courts. At the end, they managed to succeed in their struggle by turning defeat into prosperity. It is clear that some groups such as Manne and Olin had difference of opinion and therefore, they decided to use alternative means in winning cases in courts. Though they were both aligned to the left wing, the model they chose drove them on different paths but towards same end. The institute for justice was determined to attaining libertarian objectives by focusing on groups that were associated with liberalism (Teles 2008 p.57). This book has much to give to those who wish to develop their intellectual advocacy through the establishment of interest groups such as think tanks. It gives an insightful assessment of the consequence of conservative legal movement and is very keen not to suggest unnecessary influence to conservative legal movement in America. In his conclusion, he argues that improved standards in organizational capacity of the conservatives have assisted them in competing with other legal groups or networks, which comprise the liberals. The author provides analytical examination of events on how intellectuals, political entrepreneurs, and intellectual networks acted as new platform for political competition in legal discipline made elections less important (Teles 2008 p.81-83). The writer did a good job in explaining how the conservative legal movement managed to outperform liberalism. However, the writer of this book had a narrow scope in that he dwelled much on the evolution of libertarian public interest law schools and firms, the role of federal society and development of law and economics. He fails to explain what happened to liberalism after conservatives took over legal system. The reader is left with many questions. For instance, did their influence on legal system diminish? Did they continue to influence some legal decisions? It is clear that the liberal ideas dominated American society in both wider society and academics. The conservative movement managed to limit the powers of the liberals; therefore, they succeeded in their mission while liberals failed to maintain their position in society. Works Cited Binder, Sarah. Advice and Dissent: The Struggle to Shape the Federal Judiciary. Virginia: Brooking Institution Press, 2009. Print. Engel, Stephen. American Politicians Confront the Court: Opposition Politics and Changing Responses to Judicial Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Print. Halluing, Mark. The American Liberal Tradition Reconsidered The Contested Legacy of Louis Hartz. Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2010. Print. Teles, Steven. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Studies in American Politics: Historical, International, and Comparative Perspectives. New Jersey: Princeton University, 2010. Print. Teles, Steven. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2008. Print. Read More