Reconceiving Reparations: Multiple Strategies in the Reparations Debate
Eric J. Miller
Loyola Law School Los Angeles
Boston College Third World Law Journal, Vol. 4, No. 24, 2004
Much of the current debate over African-American reparations is characterized by a posture of confrontation and demand, and is exemplified in the law by seeking redress using the doctrines of tort and unjust enrichment. This confrontational posture presents a variety of legal, political, and ethical problems for reparations advocates, and has alienated potential allies from the reparations movement. This Article examines and exposes the confrontation model's shortcomings, proposing as an alternative a "conversational" model for reparations debate and advocacy. The conversational framework is not only a superior litigation strategy that more closely approximates traditional civil rights litigation, it also embraces the complexity of the current debate on race, premitting the nation to engage in a more inclusive discussion of the future of race in America.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 36
Keywords: reparations, civil rightsAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: December 24, 2007
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.407 seconds