Learning from crisis: justice practices in the age of COVID-19

John Wesley summarised Methodism’s mission as spreading ‘scriptural holiness’. This article argues that the praxis of social justice as an expression of holiness is integral to the mission of the Church. The following themes from Wesley’s theology are examined: holiness as love; ‘justice, mercy, and truth’; social holiness; works of mercy as a means of grace; stewardship, and ‘the outcasts of men’. It argues that the praxis of justice, mercy and truth is integral to holiness and hence to mission of the Church. A contextualisation of this theme in the context of secularisation and migration is then developed.

The geochemical characteristics of geophagic clays from Calabar and Okon-Eket, southern Nigeria were evaluated to determine their quality and the possible health effects of their consumption. The study involved the measurement of the pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and total dissolved solids (TDS) of the slurried clay samples soaked in distilled water for 48h using digital multi-parameters probe as well as the elemental and mineralogical analyses of twenty geophagic clay samples for elemental and mineralogical constituents using both the ICP-MS and XRD, respectively. Medical data were also mined from medical facilities within the area in addition to the administering of questionnaire to adults involved in the geophagic practices in order to determine their justification for the practice as well as their and clay preferences. Results of physicochemical measurement revealed that the pH range of the samples ranges from 3.9 to 6.9 and 6.5 to 7.0; EC 0.3-377.7 and 0.12-82.38µS/cm; TDS 1.98-2,432.65 and 0.08-52.95mg/L for consumed and non-consumed clay, respectively. The elemental analyses revealed that the concentration of some potential harmful elements, PHEs, exceeded the recommended dietary intake by humans. This is especially true for Cu (9.1-23ppm), Pb (16.7-55.6ppm), Zn (13-148ppm), Ni (11.1-46.4ppm), Co (1.8-21.7ppm), Mn (16-338ppm), As (BDL-15ppm) and Cd (BDL-0.2ppm). The predominant phases established in the clay samples are quartz and kaolinite, while the minor minerals were montmorillonite and muscovite in all the clay samples. Respondents revealed that capacity for relief from gastrointestinal problems believes in the curative power to cure skin infections and cultural reasons as main justification for the geophagic practices. This is, however, not in conformity with information gleaned from the medical records which still indicated that the prevalent diseases in the area still include gastrointestinal problems in addition to malaria, hypertension and cardiac failure with minor cases of respiratory tract infections. The high concentrations of the PHEs may be responsible for or contribute in part to the prevalence of hypertension, cardiac failures and gastrointestinal problems within the study areas. Though the kaolinite present in the geophagic clays makes them suitable for use as traditional antacids; however, the toxic trace element concentrations and significant quartz content will most likely mask the beneficial effects of such kaolinite.

This mixed methods research study investigated if explicit instruction could affect EFL teachers’ perceptions and practices of classroom justice considering its three-dimensional conceptualization based on the social psychology theories of justice, encompassing the distributive, interactional, and procedural justice. To this end, 77 Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers, chosen through maximum variation sampling, attended a four-session online justice-training course. The data were collected both before and after the course intervention through close- and open-ended questionnaires. Quantitative data analysis results, obtained through running paired samples t-tests and Wilcoxon signed ranks tests, indicated that except for the distributive component, the treatment was effective in significantly enhancing the Iranian EFL teachers’ procedural, interactional, and total classroom justice perceptions. Content analysis of the posttest qualitative data, done through MAXQDA, revealed that the participants approved the course usefulness, its significance, and uses of justice enactment strategies in their classroom. Furthermore, they confirmed positive changes in their conceptions and practices of justice because of attending the course and showed enthusiasm in attending more such courses in the future. The convergence of the quantitative and qualitative results in this study demonstrated the effectiveness of the justice-oriented training course for enhancing EFL teachers’ just classroom behaviors. Hence, the results would be fruitful for teacher educators aiming to promote the pre- and in-service EFL teachers’ professional effectiveness through explicit instruction on classroom justice and its use in teacher education programs.

Born as a result of the community movement of the 1960s, East Wind is an intentional community located in the Missouri Ozarks. East Wind has been extremely successful by any measure. It has flourished for 30 years and its members operate several successful businesses which make the community self‐sufficient. Qualitative research performed at East Wind, including interviews with its members, portrays a society that places significant value on the individual dignity of its members, the achievement of economic justice by a sharing of resources, and emphasis on human relationships in community. In addition to its emphasis on social and economic substantive justice, it seeks to resolve disputes and affect conduct by the practice of restorative justice, thereby enabling the community and the actors to benefit mutually from the process. Restorative justice is part of the community’s attempt to provide a healthy living environment for all its members.

There’s the story of a young atheist arguing with his Orthodox Jewish father about the existence of God. It’s late Friday afternoon. After an hour or so, the father looks at his watch and concedes, “Well, my son, God might or might not exist, but it’s time for evening prayers.”Mitzvot are what matter. And what are mitzvot—what are commandments? Ways of bringing goodness to life through actions, through deeds. Said Rabbi Shimeon: “Not learning but doing is the chief thing.” Said Jesus: “Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord! Lord!’ shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of God” (Matthew 7:21). Said Muhammad: “If you derive pleasure from the good you do, and are grieved by the evil you commit, you are a true believer.”These are the words of three champions of monotheism. Their pragmatism is bracing. But what should followers of these theist traditions think of the good practiced by nonbelievers—people who would say it’s quite unnecessary, and even counterproductive, to bring “God” into ordinary morality, who would offer that morality can and should be understood from an entirely scientific, evolutionary, and historical point of view thus: the capacity for empathy, fairness, and altruism is wired into human beings and even other higher mammals from birth, thanks to millions of generations of reproduction-with-variation under the constraints of natural selection. Similarly, the laws of civility—from the Eightfold Way and the Ten Commandments to the Magna Carta, the Geneva Convention, and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights— are the culturally transmitted legacy of thousands of years of human social evolution overlaid upon older, natural reproductive-selective processes. Whereas laws of civility may once have needed the rhetorical force of God-talk to establish themselves, today they can be embraced rationally in the service of peace and prosperity.In short, the nonbeliever holds that arriving at the enlightened understanding that good actions are good-for-us, that better ones are good-for-us-all, and the best are good-for-all-living-things requires neither God nor religion. God (in their view) is actually “God,” a useful fiction at best, a mental catalyst, rather like the square root of minus one: put into the equation only to be taken out later.This dismissal of God and “his” goodness—in favor of evolution and its goodness— leaves modern, science-educated theists (and deists) unsatisfied. They believe that centuries of religious architecture, literature, and music ought not be treated only aesthetically and/or anthropologically, bracketed from real life, and considered to be about what was once picturesquely believed—but rather as capable, still, of transporting the self and transforming the world for the good. They believe, likewise, that ceremonies calmly asking for God’s blessing in progressive churches and synagogues the world over may not be worship in the traditions of self-abjection or irrational ecstasy, but they do more than “improve group fitness.” There’s a reason that the seal impressed upon births, marriages, and deaths by the invocation of the deity is so poorly replaced by secular language.For modern, science-educated theists, the theory of evolution and the way it accounts for the origins of ethics and aesthetics is not wrong, then, just inadequate. Arthur Green’s excellent essay in “God and the Twenty-First Century,” the March/April 2010 Tikkun, represents one response, one solution. It is to divinize evolution, to understand evolution as God’s only mode of operation. Evolution has a direction, which is the attainment of ever higher levels of complexity and organization—of ever greater “intensifications of beauty,” as Alfred North Whitehead put it—in the arrangement of matter and energy in the universe, culminating in human consciousness. This passage from dust to mindfulness, this many-billion-year saga, is sacred in its entirety. It is the new “Greatest Story Ever Told.”Reading Green brings to mind earlier attempts to divinize evolution: Whitehead’s process, Henri Bergson’s creative evolution, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin’s cosmogenesis, Samuel Alexander’s emergentism, as well as the “evolutionary spiritualities” (Andrew Cohen’s term) of Leibniz, Schelling, Hegel, and J. Huxley, for whom humankind was “nothing else but evolution become conscious of itself.” The danger with reconciling theism with science by sacralizing evolution, however, is the tendency to assign to evolution a wisdom equivalent to the God of Genesis. The resulting problem is an old one: the “problem of evil.” For just as it is difficult and even impossible to reconcile the existence of a single, absolutely powerful, knowledgeable, and beneficent Creator God with the innocent suffering that surrounds us, so one cannot hold to a good, evolution-devising, evolution-endorsing, or even evolution-constituted God for whom the agonies and early deaths of uncountable living creatures through history are justified by the result, since the vast majority of those agonies and deaths contributed nothing to evolution.Evolution, overall, may be “good” in as much as it eventuated in our being here to read and write articles like this. But looked at with any precision, evolution is a slow and messy affair, tragic in most directions. Is God really that careless, that wasteful? The evolution of species may be “the greatest … drama of all time,” as Arthur Green says, but on the evidence, it would seem that only a small and recent chapter of it begins to be “sacred.” It’s the chapter that opens with Eve’s eating of the apple, the allegorical mark of the emergence of human conscience, and it’s a chapter that’s still being written.I suggest that the only version of “evolutionary spirituality” that keeps God good and that makes spiritual as well as evolutionary sense, sees God him/her/itself as emerging from and evolving with us, and not existing before.This is not so strange an idea, or so new. As talmudist Aryeh Cohen, coming from quite another direction, writes in his careful essay in the same issue of Tikkun: “It is in the practice of justice that God exists and that redemption may happen.” The next logical step multiplies implications: perhaps it is not only in the doing of good (in “the practice of justice”) that God exists, but as the doing of good (as the practice of justice) that God exists. “God” is not a noun but a verb, as David Cooper declares in his book about the Kabbalah; but more pointedly God is not a being, but a doing. If God is as God does, and God does only good by definition, then it follows, in so far as doing (over mere mechanical action or reaction) involves even a trace of foresight, creativity, and review, that God’s existence and continuance is in human hands, no less than our continuance, increasingly, is in God’s. The human species is new in cosmic history. Doing good is newer still. God is not everywhere always, therefore, and never was; God is—only where good is being done, and when. Humanity is “theogenic,” and God “ethicogenic.”I understand that these declarations are under-supported in this short article. But consider this: seeing God as goodness performed, like music or dance, allows an educated believer to say “God” and to mean by “God” something viable, actual, and energizing that needs no apology or bracketing or empty hyperbole to promote. It encourages them—it encourages us—to understand that religious texts, and especially ancient religious texts, are not poor science or arcane readings suited only for ritual use, but recordings of the emergence of—and generators, still, of an openness to—that new, tenuous, and “vertical” dimension of human experience we call the ethical. This is the dimension into which we step, as out of a basement into fresh air, each time we volunteer ourselves into selflessness, or choose what is best for all, or welcome necessary complexity. One might call it elevation through submission—submission not to God Almighty (this is the old hyperbole), but to the gentle and persistent current of joy and care that runs through life: a charge coming to us from everywhere and nowhere to “choose life,” consciously, for all living things, in the freedom to do otherwise.The step into the ethical dimension and its upward loft is not arduous. It is often a small one. Said Moses to the Israelites:Surely this instruction which I enjoin upon you this day is not too baffling for you, nor is it beyond your reach. It is not in the heavens, that you should say, “Who among us can go up to the heavens and get it for us and impart it to us, that we may observe it?” Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, “Who among us can cross to the other side of the sea and get it for us and impart it to us, that we may observe it?” No, the thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your hearts, to observe it … Choose life, that ye may live(Deut. 30:11–14, 20:19).Look out of your window, then. Every animal not shot, every walker not carrying a gun, every car waiting patiently for a traffic light to change, every repairman writing up a job fairly, every person dying in a fresh hospital bed rather than on a battlefield or in a gutter, every street that is swept, every bush that is trimmed, every toddler studying a worm, is God evidenced and instanced. We should look upon these things and be glad, even reverent. We should rejoice at peace and simple decency, and not take them for granted. They are not the product of raw, biological evolution, but of the divine process of civilization, a process to which we contribute. Our “cup runneth over,” and by our ethical actions, that cup runs over for others. This is the wonder of good doing. “The wonder of [good] doing,” wrote Abraham Joshua Heschel,is no less amazing than the marvel of being ... and [it] may prompt us to discover “the divinity of deeds.” In doing sacred deeds, we may begin to realize that there is more in our doing than ourselves, that in our doing there is something—nay, someone—divine. [It is] “through the ecstasy of deeds” that we learn “to be certain of the hereness of God.”One perpetual challenge for thoughtful theists—a challenge almost as great as how to interpret evolution—is how to deal with theological anthropomorphism, which is the second entry point for atheists after the problem of evil.As Stewart Guthrie points out in Faces in the Clouds, anthropomorphism takes two forms. The first is easy to detect and easy to suppress: seeing the man in the moon or thinking that snakes are reincarnated bad people, that volcanoes are angry, that the stock market “shakes off” bad news, and so on. It is the stuff of instinct, of children’s books, poetry, and colorful journalism.The second form of anthropomorphism is not as easy to detect or neutralize. It is part of thinking itself. As Kant argued, space and time may or may not be “out there” apart from our thinking. More commonsensically, we know at some level that whereas we are born and die, the universe may not have had a beginning at all and may not end. Certainly, the universe is neither beautiful nor ugly nor safe nor dangerous, except to us. But neither, really, is it large or small or old or young. We might say that the universe “just is.” But metaphysical “being” too might be an indiscriminate extension of what our own persistence feels like to us. And so on. Like metaphor in language, this form of anthropomorphism is endemic to all human perception and thought, and we just have to live with it. We are, after all, part of the universe—even though we may be the only part evolved enough to ponder its form and meaning—and so can’t be totally wrong.Where, then, should religious anthropomorphism lie on the spectrum between children’s-book animism on the one hand and Nature-article objectivity on the other? Choosing the first as inevitable, atheists will gleefully quote the pre-Socratic wit, Xenophanes, who reasoned: “If lions could think, their gods would have manes and roar,” or cite Ludwig Feuerbach, who more seriously portrayed God as the wishful projection of human virtues onto an indifferent cosmos—and regard both as evidence of God’s nonexistence.In defense of this critique, serious theologians and philosophers have long sought to move to the other pole, devising ever less anthropomorphic descriptions of God. Among them are Spinoza’s Deus sive Natura (“God or Nature”), Hegel’s Absolute Spirit, Whitehead’s Process, Tillich’s Ground of Being, Hartshorne’s Eminent Self-Creation, Kaufman’s Creativity, and Green’s Sacred Evolution. Important to note is that while each helps de-anthropomorphize divinity (at the price of God’s addressability—but that’s another story), each also leaves God presiding over the Beginning and underlying all historical developments; each leaves God, though not human in any way, omnipresent, beyond understanding, and without end (Ein Sof), and thus, like the God of the Bible, the suitable object of awe. It would seem that the capacity to inspire awe, by size, beauty, power, and age, is the one capacity without which no God, in our estimation, could be considered God. Do you recall God’s answer to Job? Even a de-anthropomorphized God, it seems, would answer Job in essentially the same way.I think that these theologians and philosophers’ hyperbolic descriptions of God might be, if not a mistake, then an un-examined habit. For God may not be the oldest and strongest force in the universe, but the youngest and weakest one, neither celestial on a throne, nor embedded among subatomic events, but enacted in daily human encounters, choices, and deeds. This is a God to cherish, not to fear. Our tradition of depicting God with a human voice “and an outstretched arm” may not, then, be the result of naive anthropocentrism, but rather a reflection of the fact that voluntary goodness emerges from the matrix of human life in acts of love, duty, beauty, compassion, forbearance, and wisdom—it emerges from motherly, fatherly, brotherly, sisterly, and neighborly acts whose recently evolved, high-order complexity is essential not only to our happiness, but to our continuance and even to that of life on earth. Is it not miracle enough that a whole new level of being/doing is struggling to its feet on this planet? And if we are inclined to concede that the emotion of awe is necessary for any God to be God to us, may we not feel awe at a child’s first words? Or radical amazement at the flowering of the Torah on this speck of dust drifting among the mindless, wheeling stars?Influenced variously by the Hasidic masters, Felix Adler, Martin Buber, Emanuel Levinas, and Abraham Joshua Heschel were among the pioneers of the line of Jewish, existential, “theo-humanistic” religious thinking that we find in practitioners today as different as Michael Lerner and Harold Schulweis (both Heschel students). This line of thinking is happy to see divinity at work in ethical human relationships—people with each other and with other living things. It speaks often of human partnership with God. It celebrates the godliness of certain human deeds. But that divinity, that partnership, that godliness is derivative still, and dependent upon the much greater godliness of God the Creator/Sustainer/Evolver of the Universe, who remains in place, as it were, at the alpha and omega points of existence. I propose that we can let go of this conception and, in holding God to be good only, consider seriously that our ethical actions are the very substance of God, and say dayenu. I have tried to describe this variant of humanistic Jewish theology in my book God Is the Good We Do.As every reader ofTikkunknows, the word “tikkun” means healing, repair, uplift. Healing, repairing, and lifting-up are deeds, not just doctrines; they are transformations of the world around, not just private adjustments of attitude. Tikkun, one might say, is the obligation that evolution bequeaths to the creatures it “blesses,” first with consciousness and then with conscience, to effect life’s further evolution without causing or countenancing involuntary suffering.Let us resist the tradition of claiming that God is “that than which nothing greater can be conceived.” Let us stop competing with each other to compose dizzying encomiums to God’s cosmic creativity, eternity, wisdom, and might (shadows of kingship, all), and embrace instead the humbler truth at hand: that divinity is evidenced—indeed constituted—not by how the stars twirl or how life began, but by how graciously we step forward into the next moment.

The Practice ofJustice is a fundamental but in some ways also remarkably conservative-in the best sense of the word-critique of the prevailing system of lawyers' ethics and practices. It is fundamental, in the sense that William Simon razes to the ground the current structure of ethical rules and their presuppositions. It is conservative, in that he then shows how a system of lawyers' ethics can be rebuilt on its existing foundations, using existing construction materials-the ordinary working conceptions of law and justice that lawyers bring to bear in other aspects of their practices.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to consider the position of relationship-based practice in youth justice by looking at how “effective programmes” seem to have been given heightened importance over “effective” young person-worker relationships.Design/methodology/approach– By critically reviewing the literature on the topic, the paper promotes debate on the position of relationship-based practice in youth justice.Findings– It is argued that the young person-worker relationship is very important. A genuine and empathetic relationship can reduce the chances of re-offending and improve the child's personal, social and emotional development. By being respectful and listening attentively to children's “life stories”, barriers can be overcome, potentially resulting in lifestyle, social and behavioural change. However, although there is evidence that developing a trusting relationship is “effective” and that it is a key component of effective practice, what is less clear is how to practically secure the engagement of a child.Originality/value– In comparison to the emphasis on effective programme intervention, there has been less research done on the “characteristics” of effective staff practice in youth justice.

Organized crime's governance raises questions about mechanisms facilitating the exercise of illegal authority in society. The present research tested the association between masculine honor ideology and the justification of connivance practices facilitating criminal groups' activities. We examined the novel idea that national identification would attenuate and territorial identification would strengthen such a relationship, reflecting different sources of authority at the national and territorial levels. In Studies 1a and b (N = 398 and N = 399), we measured individuals' endorsement of masculine honor, justification of connivance practices, and national and territorial identifications. In Study 2 (N = 390), we experimentally manipulated the salience of these identities. Results supported the hypotheses that the link between masculine honor and justification of connivance was weaker at higher levels of national identification and stronger at higher levels of territorial identification. Implications and future directions are discussed.

On the justification of justification in radiation protection - legal and sociological considerations

Current Issues in Radiation Protection

This book provides an accessible, research-informed text for students, social workers and other social service workers and community development workers focused on practically linking climate change to social justice. The book is designed for: Those who want to embed an understanding of climate change and its social justice impacts in their everyday practice Those keen to explore the explicit but also often invisible ways we see injustice playing out and exacerbated by climate change Those interested in embarking on research and action which addresses climate change in an inclusive, creative and fair way Utilising existing and current research with organisations, government and communities, it examines key themes and contexts where work has been done and where more work is needed to design and implement inclusive and just action on climate change. With a core position revolving around the idea and practice of justice – for earth and everything that lives here, it draws on First Nations worldviews, critical analysis, community-led approaches and complexity theory, to outline some practical ways to adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change as well as a strategy to reshape our life and work for the longer term. It will be required reading for all scholars, students and professionals of social work, social welfare, community development, international development, community health and environmental and community education.

The collective monographic study analyzes a wide range of problems in the methodology, theory and practice of the judiciary and the administration of justice, which are presented in a systemic unity based on the doctrine of judicial jurisprudence. On this basis, an analysis of domestic judicial jurisprudence was made in the system of modern constitutionalism, which experiences not only the protective, but also the transformative influence of the judiciary. The development of the concept of judicial jurisprudence at a new, modern stage is an attempt to find optimal approaches to understanding the place and role of judicial practice in the system of sources of law, which are in demand by the practice of justice itself, and to bring together the positions of supporters and opponents of judicial precedent principles in the modern domestic legal order. The study of the relevant issues involves the analysis of the features of the legal nature of the judicial decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, their importance both for ensuring the uniformity of judicial practice and the development of substantive and procedural legislation. The work is aimed both at specialists — representatives of the theory and practice of justice, and at a wide range of readers interested in the legal analysis of the place and role of judicial jurisprudence in the legal system of the Russian Federation.

(2009). Nicholas Sagovsky, Christian Tradition and the Practice of Justice. Political Theology: Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 747-749.

For several years, I have pursued a project devoted to the study of race, lawyers, and ethics in the American criminal justice system. Building on the evolving jurisprudence of Critical Race Theory, the project spans a series of case studies investigating the rhetoric of race, or race-talk, in the prosecution and defense of racially motivated violence. The first work of the series examines the rhetoric of race in cases of black-on-white racially motivated violence, highlighting the self-subordinating, racialized defense of Damian Williams and Henry Watson on charges of beating Reginald Denny and others during the 1992 South Central Los Angeles riots. The next work inspects racial rhetoric in cases of white-on-black racially incited violence, extrapolating other-subordinating, racialized defense strategies from the criminal and civil trials of the United Klans of America and several Ku Klux Klan members in the 1981 lynching of Michael Donald in Mobile, Alabama. A third work analyzes the discursive and symbolic meaning of race in double trials involving successive state criminal and federal civil rights prosecutions, citing the trials of Lemrick Nelson and Charles Price arising out of four days of interracial violence in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, New York in 199L. A forthcoming work explores the federal criminal prosecution of five white New York City police officers on charges of physically and sexually assaulting Abner Louima, a young Haitian immigrant, at a Brooklyn station house in 1997. The purpose of this ongoing project is to understand the meaning of racial identity, racialized narrative, and race-neutral representation in law, lawyering, and ethics. To that end, the case studies serve as a means to develop working hypotheses regarding the sociolegal experience of subordination: specifically, the subordinating discourse and imagery of race trials, the nature of client and community harm caused by such subordination, the colorcoded partisanship of purportedly race-neutral ethics regimes that countenance such subordination, and the legitimacy of alternative race-conscious ethical regulation. The process of reworking these hypotheses, one hopes, will not only reveal the sociolegal structures of racial violence in American history, but also reconstruct dominant visions of racial dignity and community in American law. The reconstructive nature of this project derives in part from the teachings of Critical Race Theory and the emerging voices of color in Asian-Pacific and LatCrit scholarship. Unlike traditional canons of colorblind or color-coded representation, the vision of practice underlying this growing jurisprudential movement implies an ethic of good lawyering based on a color-conscious, contextual approach to civil and criminal advocacy. Still formative, the approach strives to accommodate the identity interests of client dignity and community integrity and, at the same time, to heed the injunction of effective representation. The centrality of context to this approach lends added significance to the celebrated publication of William Simon's The Practice of Justice: A Theory of Lawyers' Ethics. Together with the new wave quartet of Robert Gordon, David Luban, Deborah Rhode, and David Wilkins, Simon stands among the preeminent scholars in legal ethics, singular in his deft integration of critical theory into the study of the legal profession. Simon's trenchant critique of the profession and its jurisprudential underpinnings gives direction to second wave projects like the one at hand. Indeed, The Practice of Justice provides a normative framework for designing race-conscious, community regarding duties of legal representation. Instead of simply rehearsing Simon's critique and casting objections against it, this essay endeavors to put Simon's book to work in the service of fashioning an ethic of representation in race cases. The essay is divided into four parts. Part I outlines Simon's jurisprudential critique and revision of liberal ethics regimes. Part II describes a postliberal vision of ethics tied to race-consciousness and racial community. Part III contemplates the practicalities of institutionalizing a race-conscious, community ethic of representation. Part IV parses and responds to theoretical objections to a race-conscious regulatory regime.

The Legal and the Ethical in Legal Ethics: A Brief Rejoinder to Comments on "The Practice of Justice"