Lucie E. White

Bio: Lucie E. White is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Law and economics & Rhetorical question. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 1 publications receiving 155 citations.

When Is Lockdown Justified?

Abstract: How could the initial, drastic decisions to implement “lockdowns” to control the spread of Covid-19 infections be justifiable, when they were made on the basis of such uncertain evidence? We defend the imposition of lockdowns in some countries by, first, looking at the evidence that undergirded the decision (focusing particularly on the decision-making process in the United Kingdom); second, arguing that this provided sufficient grounds to restrict liberty, given the circumstances; and third, defending the use of poorly empirically constrained epidemiological models as tools that can legitimately guide public policy.

birds uncertainty concerning institutional rules and concerning private information

Abstract: . Like Austin’s “performatives”, some models are used not merely to represent, but also to change their targets in various ways. This paper argues that Austin’s analysis can inform model evaluation: if models are evaluated with respect to whether they are adequate for particular purposes (Parker 2020), and if performativity can in some cases be regarded as a model purpose (a proposition that is defended, using mechanism design as an example), it follows that these models can be evaluated with respect to their “felicity”, i.e. whether their use has achieved this purpose. Finally, I respond to epistemic and ethical concerns that might block this conclusion.

Subversive stories and hegemonic tales: toward a sociology of narrative

Abstract: Les AA. s'efforcent d'elaborer une sociologie de la narration. La narration est un acte social, un discours social qui depend pour sa production comme pour sa reception de normes qui definissent le lieu, le moment et la maniere par laquelle il doit etre formule. Elle est donc un discours situationnel qui depend du contexte et de l'organisation de son elaboration en ce qui concerne son effet politique. Les AA. s'attachent plus particulierement a l'etude des variables qui conditionnent soit un discours qui reproduit les relations de pouvoir soit un discours subversif

Employee silence: Quiescence and acquiescence as responses to perceived injustice

Abstract: Although employee silence is pervasive in organizations, its study has been neglected for a variety of reasons, including the assumption that it is a unitary concept meaning little more than inactive endorsement. We review disparate literatures to reveal additional meanings and conceptual complexities related to silence to stimulate its study in work organizations. We develop the concept of employee silence and introduce two attendant forms (i.e. quiescence and acquiescence) along with their behavioral, affective, and cognitive components. We also offer a model that explains why some mistreated employees become silent, how some break their silence, and what organizational contexts produce and reinforce employee silence. Implications of the model for human resource management as well as for future research are discussed.

After legal consciousness

Abstract: ▪ Abstract Legal consciousness as a theoretical concept and topic of empirical research developed to address issues of legal hegemony, particularly how the law sustains its institutional power despite a persistent gap between the law on the books and the law in action. Why do people acquiesce to a legal system that, despite its promises of equal treatment, systematically reproduces inequality? Recent studies have both broadened and narrowed the concept's reach, while sacrificing much of the concept's critical edge and theoretical utility. Rather than explaining how the different experiences of law become synthesized into a set of circulating schemas and habits, the literature tracks what particular individuals think and do. Because the relationships among consciousness and processes of ideology and hegemony often go unexplained, legal consciousness as an analytic concept is domesticated within what appear to be policy projects: making specific laws work better for particular groups or interests.

Situating legal consciousness: Experiences and attitudes of ordinary citizens about law and street harassment

Abstract: The legal consciousness of ordinary citizens concerning offensive public speech is a phenomenon whose legal status has been vigorously debated, but which has received little empirical analysis. Drawing on observations in public spaces in three northern California communities and in-depth interviews with 100 subjects recruited from these public locations, I analyze variation across race and gender groups in experiences with offensive public speech and attitudes about how such speech should be dealt with by law. Among these respondents, white women and people of color are far more likely than white men to report being the targets of offensive public speech. However, white women and people of color are not significantly more likely than white men to favor its legal regulation. Respondents generally oppose the legal regulation of offensive public speech, but they employ different discourses to explain why. Subjects' own words suggest four relatively distinct paradigms that emphasize the First Amendment, autonomy, impracticality, and distrust of authority. Members of different racial and gender groups tend to use different discourses. These differences suggest that the legal consciousness of ordinary citizens is not a unitary phenomenon, but must be situated in relation to particular types of laws, particular social hierarchies, and the experiences of different groups with the law. "[H]ey white bitch, come suck my dick!"1 "I hate women; they're all sluts."2 "Monkey for a dollar!"3 "You fucking people need to go back where you came from, I'm sick of this, you come over here and think you can take everything away from us."4 I. Introduction When one experiences remarks such as these in a public place, law may be the last thing that comes to mind. However, ideas about law, both conscious and unconscious, shape how people make sense of such interactions, what types of speech they consider problematic, and what remedies or responses they believe are possible. Examining the links between people's experiences with street harassment and their attitudes about its legal regulation can shed light on the roots and consequences of the "legal consciousness" of different social groups. In this article I analyze the legal consciousness of ordinary citizens by examining how experiences with and legal attitudes toward offensive public speech vary by race, gender, and class. I find that white women and people of color experience dramatically higher levels of offensive public speech and that these experiences significantly affect their daily lives. Yet experiencing harms from offensive public speech does not translate into supporting its legal regulation. Subjects offer a variety of reasons to justify their opposition to the legal regulation of such speech. Members of different racial and gender groups articulate distinctive discourses about offensive public speech and the law that invoke various and competing schemas regarding law. These understandings reflect their prior experiences with the law and their attitudes about the prospects for social change through law. This variation suggests that an explicit comparison of particular legal phenomenon across categories of race, gender, and class provide a more nuanced understanding of legal consciousness. II. Prior Approaches to Offensive Public Speech Racist and sexist speech generate much debate about the proper balance between freedom of speech and protection of historically disadvantaged groups from verbal abuse. First Amendment absolutists argue that speech cannot and should not be legally restricted (Post 1991). Critical race theorists argue that racist speech results in substantial harms for its victims (Matsuda 1993), perpetuates inequality, and must therefore be legally limited to realize the equality guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment (Lawrence 1990). Cultural theorists contemplate how the performative aspects of speech translate into harms (Butler 1997). …

Social Citizenship and Workfare in the United States and Western Europe: The Paradox of Inclusion

Abstract: Acknowledgements 1. Introduction 2. The American Welfare Reform: 'Ending welfare as we know it': The 'undeserving poor' 'Ending welfare as we know it' The 'work first' strategy The low-wage labor market The work experience of welfare recipients The attitudes of welfare recipients The decline in the welfare rolls and poverty The future Recommendations to make welfare really work Social citizenship in the US Some lessons from the American experience that might be applicable to Western Europe 3. The European welfare states: social citizenship in the golden age The challenge of unemployment The impact on labor Vulnerable groups: the socially excluded Poverty Right, center and left - questioning the welfare state The 'third way': from status to contract 4. Workfare in western Europe: the United Kingdom Ireland Sweden Norway Denmark The Netherlands France Germany Risks for the socially excluded 5. Social Europe: alternatives? Conclusions? Solutions? Part A. Social Europe: convergence vs. path-dependent Negative vs. positive integration Part B. Reform at the national level Part C. Those who remain.