Political science has generally been divided into the fields of political theory, comparative government, international relations, public administration, policy formation, state and local government, and public law. The public law or legal process field has also been called the law and politics field to emphasize that it is the study within political science of the judicial process, constitutional law, and related subjects. Law and politics research has changed greatly since 1955 in both methodology and substance. It is the purpose of the articles in this symposium to illustrate some of the more recent trends in law and politics research, particularly trends of interest to law professors, sociologists, and others in the broader area of law and society research.

During the past few years there has been a refreshing wave of studies of the relationship between policy inputs and outputs in American urban and state politics. These studies have attempted to go beyond the analysis of the political processes of a unit of government, to analyze its relationship and that of other factors such as socio-economic characteristics to the policy outputs of that unit. They have gone beyond the analysis of “who governs?” to the analysis of “what difference does it make who governs?” and “what difference do certain socioeconomic characteristics make?” (Wilson, 1964: 133). In other words, what are the consequences of these inputs for the life of the average citizen? These consequences have been analyzed in terms of the policy outputs and services of these governments in areas such as education, welfare, criminal justice, planning programs, and general social welfare measures.

“Students of law and society have grown increasingly aware of the contribution to the character of the legal system made by the attorney in his professional role.” In his capacity as “gate keeper to the courts” the private attorney is a significant actor in the judicial process, especially at the community level (Jacob and Vines, 1963: 251). His decisions, formulated within limits set by the norms, rules, and expectations of the profession (i.e., bar associations) initially determine who has a right to lodge a grievance, at what cost, under what conditions, and to what ends.

The Legal Services Program of the Office of Economic Opportunity provides a unique opportunity to explore the professional values and attitudes of lawyers, because the Program challenges the traditional prerogatives of bar associations in controlling access to the legal resources. The three aspects of the Program representing the most serious challenge to the traditional practice of law are: (1) OEO's insistence that local programs utilize the legal process as an instrument of social and political reform on behalf of the poor; (2) the conscious, though wavering, effort to structure programs so as to insure their independence from local bar domination; and (3) the concept and practice of “maximum feasible participation” of the poor in the actual management of local programs. The response of private practitioners to the OEO challenge provides some insights into such matters as the profession's criteria for gatekeeping and the lawyers' instruments of control.

The subject of the police is a neglected issue among political scientists. The police are rarely viewed from perspectives natural to political science, nor are they studied comparativly among countries. The few studies that have been done are written largely from the point of view of public administration; they tend to be wholly descriptive and to deal largely with matters of formal organization and management. The neglect of the police is not unique to political scientists; the record of other social sciences is hardly better. Even in sociology there has been surprisingly little. Historical monographs on countries rarely refer to the police at all; inspection of indexes of basic histories of most foreign countries will reveal very few references to the police. Unrest in American cities and violence between police and minorities, as well as between police and students, is beginning to convince the scholarly community that the police are crucial social actors. The impetus so far for empirical study has come largely from government, in the form of various national study commissions (President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Criminal Justice, 1967; National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1967; National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, 1969). The kindling of interest in the police is new; it may be dated from 1965.

In the 1920s and early 1930s the Marxist legal theorist, Eugene Pashukanis, advanced the thesis that the achievement of communism would produce not only the dissolution of the state but of the legal system as well. Briefly, he argued that law was a direct result of economic exchange, that economic exchange was an integral part of bourgeois society, that all law was hence bourgeois law, and, finally, that the demise of bourgeois society would carry law with it. The fascination Pashukanis exerts is a direct product of the purity of his conclusion. The Revolution does not bring about a revision of the legal system, nor (except for a transitional period) does it even substitute one legal system for another. To the extent that the Revolution succeeds, it obliterates law qua law altogether.