Publication Date

Fall 1992

Journal

Cardozo Studies in Law and Literature

Abstract

The article critiques the optimism of new legal rhetoricians, arguing that rhetoric in law historically serves to exclude non-conforming voices and reinforce existing power structures. While acknowledging the historical insights of Peter Goodrich, the author questions whether post-modern rhetoric must adhere to these precedents and challenges James Boyd White's belief in rhetoric's ability to build inclusive communities. The article suggests that rhetoric reflects existing power dynamics rather than challenging them, using the Miranda warning as an example of how formalistic language can mask ethical divides. It concludes by emphasizing the need to consider how rhetoric can positively serve justice in a contemporary context.

Volume

4

Issue

2

First Page

237

Last Page

242

Publisher

Routledge

Disciplines

Jurisprudence | Law | Law and Politics

Download

Share

COinS