Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:46:51.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legal Tasks for the Sociologist

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Carl A. Auerbach
Carl A. Auerbach*
Affiliation:
School of Law, University of Minnesota
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

I shall comment here on the theoretical framework Professor J. H. Skolnick suggests for studies in the sociology of law and the adequacy of the bibliography in his Social Problems article “The Sociology of Law in America: Overview and Trends.” While I welcome Skolnick's emphasis on theory and the “larger philosophical issues,” I think his theoretical orientation would unnecessarily constrict social studies of law.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , November 1966 , pp. 91 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 1966 by the Law and Society Association

References

1. J. H. Skolnick, The Sociology of Law in America: Overview and Trends, Law and Society: Supplement to Summer, 1965 Issue of Social Problems 4 (1965) [hereinafter cited as Skolnick].

2. Ibid. at 24.

3. Id. at 37.

4. Id. at 29.

5. Ibid. The quotation is from an article by Professor Selznick to be published in the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

6. Skolnick 38.

7. Ibid.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10. P. Selznick, Sociology and Natural Law, 6 Natural L.F. 84, 99 (1961) (original italics).

11. Id. at 95. (“The ideal of legality has to do with the way rules are made and how they are applied, but for the most part it does not prescribe the content of legal rules and doctrines. The essential element in legality . . . is the governance of official power by rational principles of civic order.” “Official action, even at the highest levels of authority, is enmeshed in and restrained by a web of accepted general rules. Where this ideal exists, no power is immune from criticism nor completely free to follow its own bent.”)

12. Id. at 99–100, 107–108.

13. Id. at 98–99.

14. Id. at 91–92.

15. Id. at 101 (original italics).

16. Particularly chapter 5, sections 2–6, pp. 165–185.

17. Particularly chapter 8, sections 10 ff.

18. 17 J. Legal Ed. 412 (1965).

19. J. Stone, Legal System and Lawyers' Reasonings 166 (1964).

20. Ibid.

21. Skolnick 30.

22. Id. at 28.

23. C. A. Auerbach, Administered Prices and the Concentration of Economic Power, 47 Minn. L. Rev. 139, 187–190 (1962).

24. Skolnick 11.

25. Ibid.

26. Id. at 6.

27. Ibid.

28. Id. at 7.

29. Id. at 6.

30. Stone, op. cit. supra note 18, at 20.

31. Skolnick 23.

32. Ibid.

33. Id. at 37.

34. Ibid.

35. A. Rose, Some Suggestions for Research in Sociology of Law, 9 Social Problems 281 (1962).

36. S. Bailey, Congress Makes a Law ( 1.957); Newman & A. Miller, The: Control of Atomic Energy (1948); E. E. Schattschneider, Politics, Presspres and the Tarife (1935).

37. A, Bentley, The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures (1908).

38. D. Truman, The Governmental Process (1951).

39. B, Cross, The Legislative Struggle (1953).

40. V. O. Key, Political, Parties and Pressure Groups (1915).

41. S. M. Lipset, The First New Nation: The United States in Historical and Comparative Perspective (1963): and Political Man, The social bases of Politics (1960).

42. E. Latham, The Croup Basis of Politics: Notes for a Theory. 46 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 376 (1952).

43. J. C Wahlke & H. Eulau, eds., Legislative Behavior: A Reader in Theory and Research ( 1959); H. Eulau, S. Eldersveld & M. Janowitz, Political Behavior: A Reader in Theory and Research ( 1956); H. Eulau et al., The Role of the Representative: Some Empirical Observations on the Theory of Edmund Burke. 53 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 742 (1959).

44. C. Horsky, The Washington Lawyer 1952); M. McDonald, The study of Political Parties (1955); L. $$Milbraith, The Washington Lobbyists (1963) K. Schriftgisser, The Lobbyists (1951); M. Shubik, Readings in Game Theory and Political Behavior (1954); D. Derge, The Lawyer in the Indiana General Assembly, 6 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 19 ( 1962); D. Luce & I. Rogow, A Game Theoretic Analysis of Congressional Power Distribution for a Stable Two-Party System, 1 Behavioral Science 83 (1956); and Shapley & M. Shubik, A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System, 48 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 787 ( 1954).

45. Sec, e.g., B. Berelson, P. Lazarsfeld & B. McPhee, A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign (1954); A. Campbell, G. Gurin & W. Miller, The Voter Decides (1951); A. Campbell, P. Converse & D. Spokes, The American Voter ( 1960): and Wallace, Some Functional Aspects of Stability and Change in Voting, 69 Amir. J. Soc. 161 ( 1968).

46. P. Selznick, Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation (1957); TVA and the Grass Boots: A Study in tile Sociology of Formal Organization (1949); and Foundations of the Theory of Organization. 13 A.m. Soc. Rev. 25 (1948).

47. R. Presthus, The Organizational Society: An Analysis and a Theory (1962); Weberian and Welfare Bureaucracy in Traditional Society, 6 Behavioral Science 148 (1961); Behavior and Bureaucracy in Many Cultures, 19 Pub. Adm. Rev. 25 (1959); and The Social Bases of Bureaucratic Organization, 38 Social Forces 103 (1958).

48. R. E. Lane, The Regulation of Businessmen (1954); Law and Opinion in the Business Community, 17 Pub. Opin. Q. 239 (1953); Businessmen and Bureaucrats, 32 Social Forces 145 (1953); Why Businessmen Violate the Law, 44 J. Crim. L. 151 (1953); and Government Regulation and the Business Mind, 16 Amer. Soc. Rev. 163 (1951).

49. E. Latham, The Politics of Railroad Coordination, 1933–1936 (1959).

50. M. H. Bernstein, Regulating Business by Independent Commission (1955).

51. E. S. Redford, CAB General Passenger Fare Investigation, in Inter-University Case Program; National Regulatory Commissions: Need for a New Look (1959); and Administration of National Economic Control (1952).

52. Caves, Air Transport and its Regulators (1962).

53. See, e.g., C. A. Auerbach, The Internal Organization and Procedure of the Federal Trade Commission, 48 Minn. L. Rev. 383 (1964); N. Boyer, Policy Making by Government Agencies, 4 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 267 (1960); Forehand and H. Guetzkow, Judgment and Decision-Making Activities of Government Executives as Described by Superiors and Co-Workers, 8 Management Science 3 (1962); Glover & C. Lawrence, A Case Study of High Level Administration in a Large Organization (Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Management, 1960); Improvement in the Conduct of Federal Rate Proceedings, Report of the Committee on Rulemaking in Support of Recommendation No. 19, and Licensing of Domestic Air Transportation by the Civil Aeronautics Board, Report of the Committee on Licenses and Authorization in Support of Recommendations No. 20 and No. 21, in Selected Reports of the Administrative Conference of the United States, Sen. Doc. No. 24, 88th Cong., 1st Sess. (1963); Nagel & Curris, The Exercise of Procedural Discretion by the Regulatory Agencies, 17 Ad. L. Rev. 173 (1965); S. Nagel & Lubin, Regulatory Commissioners and Party Politics, 17 Ad. L. Rev. 39 (1964); and S. Scher, The Politics of Agency Organization, 15 Western-Pol. Q. 328 (1962).

54. M. Janowitz, The New Military: Changing Patterns of Organization (1964); and The Professional Soldier: A Social and Political Portrait (1960).

55. See, e.g., M. H. Bernstein, The Job of the Federal Executive (1958); P. T. David & Pollock, Executives for Government: Central Issues of Federal Personnel

Administration (1957); S. B. Sweeney & T. J. Davy, (eds.), Education for Administrative Careers in Government Service (1958); F. H. DeLong, Who Are the Career Executives? 19 Pub. Adm. Rev. 108 (1959); W. Pincus, The Opposition to the Senior Civil Service, 18 id. at 324 (1958); Smith, The Academic Man as Regulatory Commissioner, 68 Pub. Util. Fort. 145 (1961); Smith, Should Regulatory Commissioners Come from Staff Personnel?, 66 id. at 871 (1960); Smith, Professional Administrators as Regulatory Commissioners, 64 id. at 257 (1959); Smith, Laymen as Regulatory Commissioners, Pt. I, 63 id. at 673 (1959), Pt. II, 63 id. at 750 (1959); Smith, Businessmen as Regulatory Commissions, 31 J. Bus. 132 (1958); Smith, Accountants as Regulatory Commissioners, 59 Pub. Util. Fort. 93 (1957); Smith, Engineers as Regulatory Commissioners, Pt. I, 60 id. at 718 (1957), Pt. II, 60 id. at 846 (1957); and Smith, Lawyers as Regulatory Commissioners, 23 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 375 (1955); B. P. Van Riper, The Senior Civil Service and the Career System, 18 Pub. Adm. Rev. 189 (1958); and Warner, Van Riper, Martin & Collins, A New Look at the Career Civil Service Executive, 22 id. at 188 (1962).

56. S. Ulmer, Quantitative Analyses of Judicial Processes: Some Practical and Theoretical Applications, 28 Law and Contemp. Prob. 164 (1963); The Political Party Variable in the Michigan Supreme Court, 11 J. Pub. L. 352 (1963); Supreme Court Behavior in Racial Exclusion Cases: 1935–1960, 56 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 325 (1962); Supreme Court Behavior and Civil Rights, 13 Western Pol. Q. 288 (1960); The Analysis of Behavior Patterns on the United States Supreme Court in Civil Liberty Cases for the 1958 Term, 22 J. Pol. 629 (1960); Polar Classification of Supreme Court Justices, 12 S. C. L. Q. 407 (1960); and An Empirical Analysis of Selected Aspects of Law Making of the United States Supreme Court, 8 J. Pub. L. 414 (1959).

57. W. Murphy, Elements of Judicial Stategy (1964); W. Murphy & C. H. Pritchett (eds.), Courts, Judges and Politics (1961); C. H. Pritchett, Congress Versus the Supreme Court, 1957–1960 (1961); Civil Liberties and the Vinson Court (1954); and The Roosevelt Court (1948).

58. J. Schmidhauser, Judicial Behavior and the Sectional Crisis of 1837–1860, 23 J. Pol. 615 (1961); and The Justices of the Supreme Court: A Collective Portrait, 3 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 1 (1959).

59. F. Kort, Simultaneous Equations and Boolean Algebra in the Analysis of Judicial Decisions, 28 Law & Contemp. Prob. 143 (1963), and Predicting Supreme Court Decisions Mathematically: A Quantitative Analysis of the “Right to Counsel” Cases, 51 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 1 (1957). See also F. Fisher, The Mathematical Analysis of Supreme Court Decisions: The Use and Abuse of Quantitative Methods, 52 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 321 (1958), and F. Kort, Reply to Fisher, 52 id. at 339.

60. S. Nagel, Testing Relations Between Judicial Characteristics and Judicial Decision-Making, 15 Western Pol. Q. 425 (1962); Ethnic Affiliation and Judicial Propensities, 24 J. Pol. 92 (1962); and Political Party Affiliation and Judges' Decisions, 55 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 843 (1961).

61. H. Spaeth, Judicial Power as a Variable Motivating Supreme Court Behavior, 6 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 54 (1962); and An Approach to the Study of Attitudinal Differences as an Aspect of Judicial Behavior, 5 id. at 165 (1961).

62. E. Snyder, Political Power and the Ability to Win Supreme Court Decisions, 39 Social Forces 36 (1960); and E. Snyder, Uncertainty and the Supreme Court's Decisions, 65 Amer. J. Soc. 241 (1959).

63. J. Peltason, Federal Courts in the Political Process (1955).

64. J. Grossman, Role-Playing and the Analysis of Judicial Behavior: The Case of Mr. Justice Frankfurter, 11 J. Pub. L. 285 (1963).

65. See e.g., T. Becker, An Inquiry into a School of Thought of the Judicial Behavior Movement, 7 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 254 (1963); W. Berns, Law and Behavioral Science, 28 Law & Contemp. Prob. 185 (1963); W. Mendelson, The Neo-Behavioral Approach to the Judicial Process: A Critique, 57 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 593 (1963); J. Roche, Political Science and Science Fiction, 52 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 1026 (1958); and M. Wiener, Decision Predictions by Computers: Nonsense Cubed — and Worse, 48 A.B.A.J. 1023 (1962).

66. See e.g., W. Beaney, The Right to Counsel (1955); F. Beutel, Study of the Bad-Check Laws in Nebraska (1957); R. S. Brown, Loyalty and Security: Employment Tests in the United States (1958); Conard (Allocation of Cost of Automobile Accidents); W. Gellhorn, Children and Families in the Courts of New York City (1954); C. A. Auerbach, Administered Prices and the Concentration of Economic Power, 47 Minn. L. Rev. 139 (1962); E. Barrett, Police Practices and the Law from Arrest to Release or Charge, 50 Calif. L. Rev. 11 (1962); W. Beany & Beiser, Prayer and Politics: The Impact of Engel and Schempp on the Political Process, 13 J. Pub. L. 475 (1965); H. Cairns et al., Sex Censorship: The Assumptions of Anti-Obscenity Laws and the Empirical Evidence, 46 Minn. L. Rev. 1009 (1962); Goldblatt & Cromien, The Effective Social Reach of the Fair Housing Practices Law of the City of New York, 9 Social Problems 365 (1962); M. Jahoda & S. Cook, Security Measures and Freedom of Thought: An Exploratory Study of the Impact of Loyalty and Security Programs, 61 Yale L. J. 295 (1952); C. Morris & J. Paul, The Financial Cost of Automobile Accidents, 110 U. Pa. L. Rev. 913 (1962); G. Patric, The Impact of a Court Decision: Aftermath of the McCollum Case, 6 J. Pub. L. 455 (1957); M. Rosenberg & Sovern, Delay and Dynamics of Personal Injury Litigation, 59 Colum. L. Rev. 1115 (1959); F. J. Sorauf, Zorach v. Clauson: The Impact of a Supreme Court Decision, 53 Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 777 (1959); and G. Stigler, Administered Prices and Oligopolistic Inflation, 35 J. Bus. 1 (1962). It would be proper to cite here also the numerous works of many economists dealing with the impact of the antitrust and regulatory laws and decisions upon the American economy.

67. Gebhard, Gagnon, Pomeroy & Christenson, Sex Offenders (1965); A. Kinsey et al., Pregnancy, Birth and Abortion (1958); A. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953); and A. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948).

68. C. Vose, Caucasians Only: The Supreme Court, the NAACP, and the Restrictive Covenant Cases (1959); C. Vose, Litigation as a Pressure Group Activity, 282 Annals 20 (1958); and S. Krislov, Constituency Versus Constitutionalism: The Desegregation Issue and Tensions and Aspirations of Southern Attorneys General, 3 Midwest J. Pol. Sci. 75 (1959).

69. Skolnick 9.

70. Davis, Behavioral Science and Administrative Law, 17 J. Leg. Educ. 137 (1963).

71. Stone, supra note 18, at 19.

72. A. Rose, Some Suggestions for Research in Sociology of Law, 9 Social Problems 281 (1962).

73. Skolnick 10.

74. See Skolnick 6.

75. C. A. Auerbach, Law and Social Change in the United States, 6 UCLA L. Rev. 516 (1959). See also C. A. Auerbach, On Professor H. L. A. Hart's “Theory and Definition in Jurisprudence,” 9 J. Legal Ed. 39 (1956).