Narrative Preferences and Administrative Due Process
Jason A. Cade
University of Georgia Law School
July 1, 2011
Harvard Latino Law Review, Vol. 14, p. 156, 2011
NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 11-53
This Article illustrates, through sociolinguistic analysis, how an adjudicator’s biases against certain narrative styles can influence his or her assessments of credibility, treatment of parties, and decision-making in the administrative law setting. Poverty lawyers have long observed that many claimants in the administrative state continue to face procedural and discursive obstacles. Applying insights from a growing field of inter-disciplinary research, including conversation analysis, linguistics, and cognitive studies, this Article builds upon those observations by more precisely exploring through a case study of an unemployment insurance benefits hearing how structural and narrative biases can work to deny an applicant due process and exacerbate unequal power dynamics.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 39
Keywords: narrative, due process, administrative, poverty, cognitive studies, inter-disciplinary, unemployment benefits, Harvard Latino Law Review, interdisciplinary, conversation analysis, linguistics, ALJ, New York University, clinical, lucie white, sunday shoes
JEL Classification: J65
Date posted: July 26, 2011 ; Last revised: October 1, 2015
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.219 seconds