Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T17:30:00.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Civil Rights and Social Change: The Contributions of Interest Groups, Social Movements and the Courts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2015

Karen O'Connor*
Affiliation:
Emory University

Extract

The twenty participants in this seminar came from a variety of colleges and universities that ranged from major research institutions to small teaching colleges. The academic ranks and interests of those in attendance also were diverse. This heterogeneity of participants was intentional and designed to facilitate a meaningful exchange of ideas and perspectives on the topics to be discussed. Formal class sessions were held for three and one-half hours each morning. The instructor made herself available for individual discussions later each day. Seminar participants were urged to take advantage of the unique location of the seminar. It was held at the APSA convention site only a few blocks away from the Martin Luther King, Jr. birth site and the MLK Center for Nonviolent Social Change.

The focus of this seminar in the main was to explore the role that interest groups have played and are likely to continue to play in the judicial process. Our focus was on the federal level, particularly the United States Supreme Court. Given the varied backgrounds and interests of those attending this seminar, it was believed that such an approach would provide a broader and richer understanding of not only the development of law concerning civil rights but also of the judicial process itself.

After introductions the first morning, we immediately launched into a discussion of the readings for the day. They were designed to acquaint the participants with some of the literature on interest group litigation. Interestingly, however, the focus of our attention was immediately turned to the idea of “group” and what was meant by interest group or social movement. Several participants had been grappling with these questions in their own research, and others had had extensive experience in a diverse set of groups. A lengthy discourse from varied perspectives then ensued.

Type
Essays on Civil Rights
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Sorauf, F., “Winning in the Courts: Interest Groups and Constitutional Change,” this Constitution, Fall 1984, pp. 410.Google Scholar
O'Connor, K. and Epstein, L., “The Role of Interest Groups in Supreme Court Policy Formation,” in Eyestone, R., ed., Public Policy Formation, JAl Press, 1984, pp. 101145.Google Scholar
Caldeira, G. and Wright, J., “Organized Interests and Agenda Setting in the U.S.Supreme Court,” American Political Science Review, 12 1988, pp. 11091127.Google Scholar
O'Connor, K. and Epstein, L., “Court Rules and Workload: A Case Study of Rules Governing Amicus Curiae Participation,' The Justice System Journal, 1983, pp. 3544.Google Scholar

Early Litigation—The Progressive Legacy:

Vose's, Clement E.Caucasians Only (1958) is the best single treatment of the early efforts of the NAACP. A shortened ver-sion of this piece in the Western Reserve Law Review should be read if you are not familiar with this work.Google Scholar
Vose, C., “NAACP Strategy in Restrictive Covenant Cases,” Western Reserve Law Review, 1955, pp. 101145.Google Scholar

Other Reading:

Vose, C., “The National Consumers' League and the Brandeis Brief,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, 1957, pp. 178190.Google Scholar
Friesen, J. and Collins, R., “Looking Back on Muller v. Oregon,” American Bar Association Journal, 1983, pp. 472477.Google Scholar
At the second meeting we will build on our previous day's discussion by refocusing our attention of the role of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund in the development of the law from She/ley v. Kraemer to Brown v. Board of Education and beyond.Google Scholar

Readings:

Someone Has to Translate Rights into Realities,” Conversation with Civil Rights Lawyer Greenberg, Jack, Civil Liberties Review, 1975, pp. 104128.Google Scholar
Wasby, S., “How Planned is ‘Planned Litigation,’American Bar Foundation Research Journal, 1984, pp. 83138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, K., Women's Organizations' Use of the Courts, 1980, chap. 5.Google Scholar
Aron, N., Liberty and Justice for All, 1989, chaps. 4 and 5.Google Scholar
At the third meeting we will sum up the effectiveness of litigation as a mechanism of civil rights groups for social change. We will also explore new strategies and examine the Webster case as a new high point in interest group involvement in litigation. Possible new avenues for continued effect interest group pressure, such as involvement in the judicial process, also will be discussed.Google Scholar

Readings:

Friendly, F. and Elliott, M., The Constitution: That Delicate Balance, 1984, chap. 12.Google Scholar
Greenhouse, L., “High Court Asks Sharp Questions in Abortion Case,” The New York Times, 04 27, 1989.Google Scholar
Court Hears Varying Advice as It Prepares to Review Abortion Case,” The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, 03 12, 1989, p. 11.Google Scholar
Wermiel, S., “With Liberals Watching Nervously, High Court Takes Conservative Tone into Backlog of Big Cases,” The Wall Street Journal, 02 6, 1989, p. A10.Google Scholar
National Organization for Women, Mobilization Bulletin. A copy of the Webster opinion.Google Scholar