Sensibilities for Social Justice Lawyers

This essay describes six sensibilities that are crucial for 21st Century social justice lawyers. It urges social justice lawyers to know thoroughly the literature on lawyering and social change movements, to be clear about their fundamental aims, to connect their efforts with others, to observe from multiple perspectives, to combat cultural encapsulation, and to put in the time necessary to ensure the survival, advancement, and flourishing of clients and communities

Foucault\u27s Approach to Power: Its Allure and Limits for Collaborative Lawyering

This Article examines the considerable influence that French philosopher Michel Foucault\u27s conceptualization of power has had on U.S. theorists of lawyering for social change. Led by Professors Gerald L6pez of New York University and Lucie White of Harvard, a substantial literature has emerged in the past two decades urging progressive lawyers to reshape their lawyering practices to collaborate more closely with clients and community groups. Proponents of this model of activist law practice have often invoked Foucault and acknowledged that his ideas about power underlie and inform their visions of lawyering. But until this Article, theorists of collaborative lawyering have not fully articulated, nor critically analyzed, the intellectual interconnections between Foucault\u27s views on power and this model of lawyering for social change. Premised on a conviction that theoretical clarity and practical lawyering effectiveness go hand in hand, this Article provides an accessible exposition of Foucault\u27s complicated ideas about power, set in the larger context of his work, and a balanced assessment of their utility and limitations for social change lawyering. It uses an environmental justice scenario to help convey the collaborative approach to lawyering and the role that visions of power play in daily lawyering practice. It details the many ways in which Foucault\u27s view of power fits neatly with the projects of this model of collaborative lawyering and also reveals a number of areas in which his approach is unhelpful, areas in which these lawyers must part company with him and draw instead from other models ofpower and social change