The Centrist Case Against Current (Conservative) Arbitration Law

54 Pages Posted: 29 Mar 2017  

Stephen J. Ware

University of Kansas - School of Law

Date Written: 2016


In The Politics of Arbitration Law and Centrist Proposals for Reform, I explained how issues surrounding consumer and other adhesive arbitration agreements became divisive along predictable political lines (progressives vs. conservatives) and proposed an intermediate (or centrist) position to resolve those issues. However, The Politics of Arbitration Law did not argue the case for my proposals. It left those arguments for this Article, which makes the case against current (conservative) arbitration law, and a third article, which will make the case against progressive proposals to reform arbitration law. In other words, this Article stands out from the many other articles critiquing current arbitration law because this Article’s critique comes from a centrist, rather than progressive, perspective. For that reason, this Article’s critique may be more likely than progressive critiques to gain traction with lawmakers.

Keywords: arbitration, consumer politics, employment, adhesion, class actions

Suggested Citation

Ware, Stephen J., The Centrist Case Against Current (Conservative) Arbitration Law (2016). Florida Law Review, Vol. 68, No. 5, 2016. Available at SSRN:

Stephen J. Ware (Contact Author)

University of Kansas - School of Law ( email )

Green Hall
1535 W. 15th Street
Lawrence, KS 66045-7577
United States
785-864-9209 (Phone)


Register to save articles to
your library


Paper statistics

Abstract Views