Summary Of Sarat's The Law Is All Over

with more legal resources repeat players or RP. The RP is able to pursue their long-term interests through litigation and their legal competence. Not only would the RP get an experienced attorney, but he would get greater continuity, better record-keeping, more anticipatory or preventative work, more experience and specialized skill in pertinent areas, and more control over counsel (Galanter 1974 p. 21). The cost of litigation causes the OS to refrain from pursuing their interests after a cost benefit analysis. Therefore the RP and OS approach litigation differently. RPs not only knows the rules of litigation, they have often helped to create the rules, giving them an unfair advantage. Galanter points out that the government has agreements
Sarat, author of “The Law is All Over,” argues that the legal consciousness of the welfare poor can be interpreted in the way that they act towards the law and its processes. Law is a very powerful concept to the welfare poor because of its ability to secure or deny rights that entitle individuals to life sustaining programs. Sarat describes the law as a web that works to trap individuals, with limited resources, in its abundance of rules. Officials of the law make the rules and their presence visible, while working to keep the law unclear. Sarat does not believe that the welfare poor subscribe to the myth of rights proposed by Scheingold, author of “The Politics of Rights.” Scheingold argues that the law’s legitimacy comes from the people’s willingness to believe, follow, and participate in its practices. Members of society believe their individual rights are secured by the constitution, but Scheingold disagrees. Sarat believes that the welfare poor have a realistic perception of the law, and its
Galanter, author of “Rights Talk,” seeks to answer the question, under what condition can litigation redistribute equally? Galanter examines the legal system in terms of three elements; rules, courts, and lawyers. Galanter points out that the parties that can secure a lawyer tend to fare better in the outcomes of litigation. Hence the saying “any man who represents himself in court has a fool for a client.” A lawyer can explain the victim his rights, navigate the complex legal system, and their loyalty is to their client not to the courtroom (Galanter 1974 p, 22). Galanter argues that economic status, collaboration, and opposing self-interest compete within society and its complex legal system. Liberal interest groups are thought to use bargaining within the legal system to eliminate the political process at certain points (Scheingold p.25). The legal system is supposed to be unbiased to these self-interested individuals and make decisions according to the letter of the law. Without an attorney OSs may not recognize when their