Pensando o direito: pensando o direito em movimento

Laura Beth Nielsen


Este artigo defende que uma maneira de se “pensar o direito” é pensar no “direito em movimento”. Meu argumento é que uma perspectiva do “direito em movimento” incorpora quatro elementos fundamentais ou ‘multiplicidades’ que são: (1) metodologias múltiplas; (2) perspectivas múltiplas; (3) vocalidades múltiplas; e (4) mídias múltiplas, incluindo objetos. Essas ideias não são originais e por isso não posso reivindicar crédito por elas, como fica evidente pelo número de colegas inspirados que articularam perspectivas para cada uma dessas multiplicidades. No entanto, a tentativa de colocar todas essas perspectivas num esquema abrangente, com a inclusão dessas quatro multiplicidades num mesmo projeto, mostra que a perspectiva do direito em movimento pode trazer novos frutos. Para tanto, este artigo combina a análise de algumas pesquisas dentro do movimento direito e sociedade que exemplificam tais tendências com a minha própria pesquisa sobre a litigância de direitos civis no trabalho para discutir a necessidade de uma perspectiva múltipla para nossos “futuros múltiplos.” 


Direito em movimento; Perspectivas múltiplas; Direito & Sociedade; Litigância de direitos civis no trabalho

Texto completo:

PDF (English)


Berrey, E. (2011). Why Diversity Became Orthodox in Higher Education, and How It Changed the Meaning of Race on Campus. Critical Sociology, in press.

Berrey, E.; Hoffman, S. G. & Nielsen, L. B. (2012). Situated Justice: A Contextual Analysis of Fairness and Inequality in Employment Discrimination Litigation. Law & Society Review, 46, 1-36.

Blumer, H. (1962). Society as Symbolic Interaction. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human Behavior and Social Processes (pp. 179-192). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Bumiller, K. (1987). Victims in the Shadow of the Law: A Critique of the Model of Legal Protection. Journal of Women and Culture in Society, 12, 421-534.

Curran, B. A. (1977). The Legal Needs of the Public: The Final Report of a National Survey. Chicago: American Bar Foundation.

Edelman, L. B.; Krieger, L. H.; Eliason, S. R.; Albiston, C.; & Mellema, V. (2008). Judicial deference to institutionalized employment practices. Paper presented at the Discoveries of the Discrimination Research Group Conference. Stanford Law School.

Engel, D. M. & Munger, F. W. (2003). Rights of Inclusion: Law and Identity in the Life Stories of Americans with Disabilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ewick, P. & Silbey, S. (1992). Conformity, Contestation, and Resistance: An Account of Legal Consciousness. New England Law Review, 26, 731-749.

Ewick, P. & Silbey, S. (1998). The Common Place of Law: Stories From Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Felstiner, W.; Abel, R. & Sarat, A. (1980). The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, and Claiming. Law and Society Review, 15, 631-655.

Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, Prejudice, and Discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 357-411). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fiske, S. T. (2005). What We Know about the Problem of the Century: Lessons from Social Science to the Law, and Back. In L. B. Nielsen & R. L. Nelson (Eds.), Handbook of Employment Discrimination Research: Rights and Realities (pp. 59-74). Dordrecht: Springer.

Galanter, M. (1974). Why the Haves Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change. Law and Society Review, 9, 95-160.

Galanter, M. (1983). Reading the Landscape of Disputes: What We Know and Don't Know (and Think We Know) About Our Allegedly Contentious and Litigious Society. UCLA Law Review 31, 31-71.

Gómez, L. E. (2012). Looking for Race in All the Wrong Places. Law and Society Review, 46, 221-245.

Grossman, J. B.; Kritzer, H. M.; & Macaulay, S. (1999). Do the "haves" still come out ahead? Law and Society Review, 33, 803-810.

Hagan, J. & Rymond-Richmond, W. (2009). Darfur and the Crime of Genocide. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, T. C. (2006). The Politics of Lawyers: An Emerging Agenda. Law and Social Inquiry, 24, 1007-1011.

Haltom, W. & McCann, M. (1999). Hegemonic Tales and Everyday News: How Newspapers Cover Civil Litigation. Unpublished manuscript, on file with authors.

Haltom, W. & McCann, M. (2004). Distorting the Law: Politics, Media, and the Litigation Crisis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hirsh, C. (2008). Settling for less? The organizational determinants of discrimination-charge outcomes. Law and Society Review, 42, 239-274.

Kritzer, H. M. & Silbey, S. (2003). In Litigation Do the "Haves" Still Come Out Ahead. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Luker, K. (1985). Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Macaulay, S. (1963). Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study. American Sociological Review, 28, 55-67.

Major, B., Gramzow, R. H.; McCoy, S. K.; Levin, S.; Schmader, T. & Sidanius, J. (2002). Perceiving Personal Discriminaiton: The Role of Group States and Legitimizing Ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 269-282.

Major, B. & Kaiser, C. (2005). Perceiving and Claiming Discrimination. In L. B. Nielsen and R. L. Nelson (Eds.), Handbook of Employment Discrimination Research: Rights and Realities. Dordrecht: Springer.

McDonnell, T. E. (2010). Cultural Objects as Objects: Urban Space and the Interpretation of AIDS Campaigns in Acra, Ghana. American Journal of Sociology, 115, 1800-1852.

Merry, S. E. (1990). Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness Among Working-Class Americans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Newman, J. O. (1985). Rethinking fairness: Perspectives on the litigation process. Yale Law Journal, 94, 1643-1659.

Nielsen, L. B. (2000). Situating Legal Consciousness: Experiences and Attitudes of Ordinary Citizens about Law and Street Harassment. Law and Society Review, 34, 201-236.

Nielsen, L. B. (2010). Mixed Methods in Empirical Legal Studies Research. In H. Kritzer (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.

Nielsen, L. B.; Nelson, R. L.; & Lancaster, R. (2010). Individual Justice or Collective Legal Mobilization? Employment Discrimination Litigation in the Post Civil Rights United States. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 7, 175-201.

Obasogie, O. K. (2013). Blinded by Sight: Seeing Race Through the Eyes of the Blind. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Oberman, M. (2013). Two Truths and a Lie: In re John Z and Other Stories at the Intersection of Teen Sexuality and the Law. Law and Social Inquiry, 38, 364-402.

Riles, A. (2006). Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Robinson, P. H. & Darley, J. M. (1997). The utility of desert. Northwestern University Law Review, 91, 453-499.

Sarat, A. (1990). The Law is All Over: Power, Resistance, and the Legal Consciousness of the Welfare Poor. Yale Journal of Law and Humanities, 3, 343-379.

Sarat, A. & Felstiner W. (1995). Divorce Lawyers and Their Clients: Power and Meaning in the Legal Process. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarat, A. & Scheingold, S. (1998). Cause Lawyering and the Reproduction of Professional Authority: An Introduction. In A. Sarat and S. Scheingold (Eds.), Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarat, A. & Scheingold, S. (2001). Cause Lawyering and the State in a Global Era. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarat, A. & Scheingold, S. (1997). Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities. New York: Oxford University Press.

Southworth, A. (1999). Lawyers and the “Myth of Rights” in Civil Rights and Poverty Practice. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal, 8, 469-511.

Southworth, A. (2000). Review essay: The Rights Revolution and Support Structures for Rights Advocacy. Law and Society Review, 34, 1203-1219.

Teles, S. M. (2010). The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.



  • Não há apontamentos.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Indexado em:

  Crossref logo periodicos logo j4f logo worldcat logo sherpa romeo