Reproducing the Canon, Reproducing Inequity (Traditional Rhetoric)

Abstract

This chapter invites readers to identify the specific ways traditional legal rhetoric does harm to the cause of social justice and equity. In this way, this chapter operates as a critical casebook, presenting several appellate opinions for readers to deeply read and digest. Rather than tell the reader how traditional legal rhetoric harms, the objective is for readers to see this for themselves. These are not especially well-known cases; they are relatively run-of-the-mill cases, representing a wide spectrum of doctrines, including immigration law, privacy law, entertainment law, obscenity law, qualified immunity / excessive force, and freedom of religion / First Amendment. Each case, however, negatively impacts justice and equity for a member of a minoritized or marginalized community. After each case, the reader will confront discussion questions that surface the social and historical context involved in the case, the role of the judge, and other ways that traditional rhetorical frameworks influenced the legal outcome in the case.