Public education systems in 17 states in the U.S. were legally segregated before 1954, when the Supreme Court declared the practice illegal. The Brown v. Board of Education case had a big influence on how the American society viewed race. Since 1954, focus has moved from segregation to integration. The change is positive and in the view of New York based veteran corporate lawyer Hartley Bernstein a showcase of how the change of a few sentences in legal books can change society.
There are two opposing views of if law can bring about a social change. One group maintains that no change is possible through law and that the job of lawmakers is to validate current practices. Their argument goes that if politicians or bureaucrats tried to force new legal codes on a population that is not prepared it would lead to either anarchy or social revolution. Law, they firmly hold, cannot change society and does not affect people.
In the opposing group, and Hartley Bernstein seconds this line of thought, are other lawyers who counter that law can have significant affect on a society and its mores. They cite the spread of liberal attitudes in America since the legal change brought about by Martin Luther King, Jr and his associates. Lynching used to be norm; at least in the Southern U.S. Law banning the practice has affected the people’s attitude even in America’s most conservative region - the Bible Belt. This group cites many other examples; such as France’s declaration of universal suffrage after the French Revolution and women’s struggle of the 1960s for legal change. In both cases a few people asked for changes in existing law and the changes brought about a affected the wider society.
To conclude the arguments between the two groups of lawyers - each maintaining if law affects common people - will continue in the foreseeable future.
About Hartley Bernstein: Hartley Bernstein is a corporate and securities attorney and civil litigator with a specialty in business transactions and civil litigation.
There are two opposing views of if law can bring about a social change. One group maintains that no change is possible through law and that the job of lawmakers is to validate current practices. Their argument goes that if politicians or bureaucrats tried to force new legal codes on a population that is not prepared it would lead to either anarchy or social revolution. Law, they firmly hold, cannot change society and does not affect people.
In the opposing group, and Hartley Bernstein seconds this line of thought, are other lawyers who counter that law can have significant affect on a society and its mores. They cite the spread of liberal attitudes in America since the legal change brought about by Martin Luther King, Jr and his associates. Lynching used to be norm; at least in the Southern U.S. Law banning the practice has affected the people’s attitude even in America’s most conservative region - the Bible Belt. This group cites many other examples; such as France’s declaration of universal suffrage after the French Revolution and women’s struggle of the 1960s for legal change. In both cases a few people asked for changes in existing law and the changes brought about a affected the wider society.
To conclude the arguments between the two groups of lawyers - each maintaining if law affects common people - will continue in the foreseeable future.
About Hartley Bernstein: Hartley Bernstein is a corporate and securities attorney and civil litigator with a specialty in business transactions and civil litigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment