Talk:Critical legal studies

Philosophy: Social and political Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy

Law Start‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There are a number of problems with this article: Firstly, it is still quite biased towards the American Academy. While this is where CLS began, it is now a global phenomenon. It is of the utmost importance that this page reflect the diversity of the movement, especially when it is once more growning in importance, with many of the most important International Journals publishing CLS (EJIL, AJIL, Human Rights Quarterly, etc, etc). Secondly, perhaps even worse, the summary of its main points almost entirely come from the 80s and early 90s, with little or nothing about the Lacanian insights, the engagements with Derrida, Agamben, Habermas, Badiou, Lefebvre, etc. I think it is really important to start to rework this article to make it more current. (Illanwall (talk) 14:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC))[reply]

I'm curious as to why Jurgen Habermas is excepted from having an influence on CLS when Mark Tushnet, one of the founders and most prominent members of CLS, in one of the most influential CLS writings, directly applies Habermas's theories on human interests. See Tushnet, Mark, An Essay on Rights, 62 Tex. L. Rev 1363, 1394 (citing to a section called "Habermas and Human Interests"). In other words, god wikipedia is worthless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.29.71 (talk) 06:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect habermas is not included precisely because he is an influence rather than a major figure. Derrida, Rawls, Badiou equally are all influences and have written critical texts on law, but don't frame themselves as CLS. However, a good suggestion might be to start an influences section, dealing with Marx (and marxism), the French 1968 authors, the split with the Frankfurt school, the shift from the early heavily Marxist 'all law is politics' to the deconstructive school of the 80s and 90s (everyone from Cornell, Douzinas, etc).(Illanwall (talk) 13:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Having come to this page to try and understand what CLS is actually about, I was confused by the ambiguity of the closing lines in the intro. Are those two final sentences supposed to be examples? Much of the rest of the article feels heavily POV and unclear. 71.79.24.115 15:33, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all. I was reviewing the Critical legal studies page for research, and found that the external link to Koskenniemi's writings on CLS and international law was outdated. I updated it to http://www.helsinki.fi/eci/Staff/JULKAISUT_ENG-11b-1.pdf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.202.34 (talk) 03:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incorporation of Roberto Unger

I recently began to rewrite the lead and add necessary references to the article. In the course of doing so I emphasized the role of Roberto Unger in the movement. Numerous articles on CLS say as much, which I cite, and can only be taken seriously (see esp. Hutchinson and Smolin).

For anyone in the field of legal scholarship, this should be no surprise, and will know that Unger was tenured at the Harvard Law School in the 1970s (the height of the movement) and is now a chaired professor there. (I emphasize this point only in response to the critique of him as a Brazilian politician--we would not call JS Mill a politician while ignoring his works in philosophy.)