1932

Abstract

In democratic backsliding, threats to democracy no longer come from abrupt, radical ruptures promoted by those who are close to, but outside of, state power. They come from those who win elections and, while in office, systematically undermine accountability institutions and minority rights. Zakaria used the term illiberal democracies to describe these regimes where popularly elected governments are divorced from political freedoms and accountability. Law is not absent from these stories. Rising autocrats seek to make their moves legal and use law—as a weapon or as a shield—in attempts to amass power and suppress opposition. Authors coined the term autocratic legalism to describe these power-grabbing tactics that operate through law. Others use different concepts, such as constitutional retrogression or abusive constitutionalism. I review this growing body of literature and outline a research agenda on the encounters between law and illiberalism.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110921-105921
2022-10-18
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/18/1/annurev-lawsocsci-110921-105921.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110921-105921&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abel RL. 2018a. Law's Trials: The Performance of Legal Institutions in the US “War on Terror.” Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  2. Abel RL. 2018b. Law's Wars: The Fate of the Rule of Law in the US “War on Terror.” Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alviar García H 2015. Engulfed by the family: women in the Colombian Development State between 1966 and 1990. Rev. Direito GV 11:365–90
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Alviar García H 2020. The legal architecture of populism: exploring antagonists in Venezuela and Colombia. Human Rights in a Time of Populism: Challenges and Responses GL Neuman 81–99 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BBC News. 2019. Hungary tries for baby boom with tax breaks and loan forgiveness. BBC News Feb. 11. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47192612
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bonica A, Sen M. 2020. The Judicial Tug of War: How Lawyers, Politicians, and Ideological Incentives Shape the American Judiciary Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  7. Bourdieu P. 2002. Les conditions sociales de la circulation internationale des idées. Actes Rech. Sci. Soc. 145:3–8
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown W. 2019. In the Ruins of Neoliberalism: The Rise of Antidemocratic Politics in the West New York: Columbia Univ. Press
  9. Bugaric B. 2019. Could populism be good for constitutional democracy?. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 15:41–58
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bugaric B, Tushnet MV. 2021. Power to the People: Constitutionalism in the Age of Populism New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  11. Castro HA, Bezerra C, Cassimiro PHP. 2021. Espaço cívico sob Bolsonaro: fechamento e resiliência institucional. See Vieira et al. 2021. In press
  12. Chua LJ. 2019. Legal mobilization and authoritarianism. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 15:355–76
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Corrales J. 2015. The authoritarian resurgence: autocratic legalism in Venezuela. J. Democr. 26:237–51
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Corrales J. 2020. Trump is using the legal system like an autocrat. New York Times March 5. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/05/opinion/autocratic-legalism-trump.html
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dardot P, Laval C 2019. Never-Ending Nightmare: The Neoliberal Assault on Democracy, transl G Elliott London: Verso
    [Google Scholar]
  16. de Sa e Silva F. 2020. From car wash to Bolsonaro: law and lawyers in Brazil's illiberal turn (2014–2018). J. Law Soc. 47:S1S90–110
    [Google Scholar]
  17. de Sousa Santos B. 2009. A crítica da razão indolente: contra o desperdício da experiência São Paulo, Braz: Cortez
  18. Dezalay Y, Garth BG. 2002. The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  19. Dezalay Y, Garth BG, eds. 2005. Global Prescriptions: The Production, Exportation, and Importation of a New Legal Orthodoxy Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press
  20. Dezalay Y, Garth BG 2010. Asian Legal Revivals: Lawyers in the Shadow of Empire Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  21. Ding I, Javed J. 2020. The autocrat's moral-legal dilemma: popular morality and legal institutions in China. Comp. Political Stud. 54:6989–1022
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Drinóczi T, Bień-Kacała A. 2021. Illiberal Constitutionalism in Poland and Hungary: The Deterioration of Democracy, Misuse of Human Rights and Abuse of the Rule of Law London: Routledge
  23. Ewick P, Silbey SS. 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  24. Felstiner WLF, Abel RL, Sarat A. 1980. The emergence and transformation of disputes: naming, blaming, claiming. Law Soc. Rev. 15:3/4631–54
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Freeman W. 2020. Sidestepping the constitution: executive aggrandizement in Latin America and East Central Europe. Const. Stud. 6:135–58
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Fukuyama F. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man New York: Free
  27. Gallagher ME. 2017. Authoritarian Legality in China: Law, Workers, and the State Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  28. Garth BG. 2014. Building strong and independent judiciaries through the new law and development: behind the paradox of consensus programs and perpetually disappointing results. DePaul Law Rev 52:2383–400
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ginsburg T, Huq AZ. 2019. How to Save a Constitutional Democracy Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  30. Ginsburg T, Moustafa T, eds. 2008. Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  31. Gordon RW. 2010. The role of lawyers in producing the rule of law: some critical reflections. Theor. Inq. Law 11:1441–68
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Greene J. 2021. How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession with Rights Is Tearing America Apart. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt
  33. Halliday TC, Karpik L, eds. 1997. Lawyers and the Rise of Western Political Liberalism: Europe and North America from the Eighteenth to Twentieth Centuries Oxford, UK: Clarendon
  34. Halliday TC, Karpik L, Feeley M. 2007. Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex and Political Liberalism London: Hart Publ. , 1st ed..
  35. Halliday TC, Karpik L, Feeley MM. 2012. Fates of Political Liberalism in the British Post-Colony: The Politics of the Legal Complex New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  36. Hart HLA. 2015. The Concept of Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  37. Hollis-Brusky A, Wilson JC. 2020. Separate but Faithful: The Christian Right's Radical Struggle to Transform Law and Legal Culture Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  38. Jamin J. 2014. Cultural Marxism and the radical right. The Post-War Anglo-American Far Right: A Special Relationship to Hate84–103 New York: Palgrave Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Kairys D. 1983. Law and politics. George Washington Law Rev 52:2243–62
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Kairys D 1998. The Politics of Law: A Progressivist Critique New York: Basic Books
  41. Karpik L, Halliday TC. 2011. The legal complex. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 7:217–36
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Kelsen H. 1967. Pure Theory of Law, transl. M. Knight. Berkeley: Univ Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kennedy D 2007. Form and substance in private law adjudication. 88 Harvard Law Review 1685 1976. The Canon of American Legal Thought K David, WF William 647–730 Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Landau D. 2013. Abusive constitutionalism. U.C. Davis Law Rev 47:189–260
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Levitsky S, Way LA. 2002. The rise of competitive authoritarianism. J. Democr. 13:251–65
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Levitsky S, Way LA. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  47. Levitsky S, Way LA. 2020. The new competitive authoritarianism. J. Democr. 31:151–65
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Levitsky S, Zibblat D. 2018. How Democracies Die New York: Crown:
  49. Linz JJ, Stepan AC. 1996. Toward consolidated democracies. J. Democr. 7:214–33
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Luhmann N. 1983. 1969. Legitimation durch Verfahren [Legitimation through procedure] Frankfurt: Suhrkamp
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Luhmann N. 1995. 1982. Social Systems, transl J Bednarz, D Baecker Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Luhmann N. 2004. 1993. Law as a Social System, transl. K Ziegert New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  53. McCann M. 2014. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  54. McCann M, Kahraman F. 2021. On the interdependence of liberal and illiberal/authoritarian legal forms in racial capitalist regimes…the case of the United States. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 17:483–503
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Mounk Y. 2018. The People Versus Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger and How to Save It Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  56. O'Donnell GA 1999. Polyarchies and the (un)rule of law in Latin America: a partial conclusion. The (Un)Rule of Law and the Underprivileged in Latin America JE Méndez, GA O'Donnell, PS Pinheiro 303–38 Notre Dame, IN: Univ. Notre Dame Press
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Pereira AW. 2005. Political (In)Justice: Authoritarianism and the Rule of Law in Brazil, Chile, and Argentina Pittsburgh, PA: Univ. Pittsburgh Press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Pirro ALP, Stanley B. 2022. Forging, bending, and breaking: enacting the “illiberal playbook” in Hungary and Poland. Perspect. Politics 20:186–101
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Polanyi K. 1944. The Great Transformation New York/Toronto: Farrar & Rinehart
  60. Prado MM. 2021. Executive aggrandizement in Brazil: the case of the Amazon fires. See Vieira et al. 2021. In press
  61. Rajah J. 2012. Authoritarian Rule of Law: Legislation, Discourse and Legitimacy in Singapore New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  62. Sarat A. 1990. “The law is all over”: power, resistance and the legal consciousness of the welfare poor. Yale J. Humanit. 2:2343–79
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Sarat A, Kearn TR. 1993. Beyond the great divide forms of legal scholarship and everyday life. Law in Everyday Life A Sarat, TR Kearns 21–62 Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Scheingold SA. 1974. The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy, and Political Change New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  65. Scheppele KL. 2000. The constitutional basis of Hungarian conservatism Special Report. East. Eur. Const. Rev. 9:51
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Scheppele KL. 2018. Autocratic legalism. Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 85:2545–84
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Scheppele KL 2019a. The legal complex and lawyers-in-chief. The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice: Studies Inspired by the Work of Malcolm Feeley R Greenspan, H Aviram 361–84 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Scheppele KL. 2019b. The opportunism of populists and the defense of constitutional liberalism. Ger. Law J. 20:3314–31
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Scheppele KL. 2020. Weaponizing the post office. Verfassungsblog. Aug. 16. https://verfassungsblog.de/weaponizing-the-post-office/
  70. Shields S. 2021. Domesticating neoliberalism: ‘domification’ and the contradictions of the populist countermovement in Poland. Eur.-Asia Stud 73:1622–40
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Snyder T. 2018. The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America New York: Tim Duggan Books
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Southworth A. 2004. Conservative lawyers and the contest over the meaning of public interest law. UCLA Law Rev 52:41223–78
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Southworth A. 2008. Lawyers of the Right: Professionalizing the Conservative Coalition Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  74. Teles SM. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  75. Teles SM. 2009. Transformative bureaucracy: Reagan's lawyers and the dynamics of political investment. Stud. Am. Political Dev. 23:161–83
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Teubner G. 1993. Law as an Autopoietic System Oxford, UK: Blackwell
  77. Trubek DM, Alviar Garcia H, Coutinho DR, Santos A, eds. 2013. Law and the New Developmental State: The Brazilian Experience in Latin American Context Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  78. Unger RM. 1976. Law in Modern Society: Toward a Criticism of Social Theory New York: Free
  79. Unger RM. 1986. The Critical Legal Studies Movement Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  80. Vieira OV. 2021. Populismo autoritário: entre a resiliência e a regressão constitutional (dois anos de Bolsonaro). See Vieira et al. 2021. In press
  81. Vieira OV, Pimenta RM, de Sa e Silva F, Machado MRA, eds. 2021. Infralegalismo autoritário: erosão e resistência institucional no Brasil (2018–2021) São Paulo/Washington, DC: FGV Univ. Press/Woodrow Wilson Cent. Int. Scholars. In press
  82. Waldner D, Lust E 2018. Unwelcome change: coming to terms with democratic backsliding. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 21:93–113
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Zakaria F. 1997. The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Aff 76:622–43
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110921-105921
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110921-105921
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error