Social scientists in recent decades have devoted considerable attention to analyzing the role of law, lawyers, and litigation in movements for social reform. Some work has provided a generally optimistic view about the accessibility of courts to minority interests and disadvantaged groups within society. Other scholarship has presented a more pessimistic perspective regarding the utility of litigation for advancing progressive social change. Those with this view note the many instances of unsuccessful reform litigation. They maintain that optimistic assessments of judicial action on behalf of long disadvantaged groups often reflect a naive faith in what is called the "myth of rights"..that is, the myth that all victims are assured their day in court and that judicially affirmed rights are self implementing instruments of social change removed from the constraints of politics and power. This study seeks to move beyond this debate about the role of law in social change by systematically examining the role of law, lawyers, and litigation in recent political struggles over the implementation of comparable worth wage policies. The core of the project consists of six case studies of pay equity campaigns over the last decade. The primary data will be derived from semi.structured interviews and questionnaires that focus on perceptions of events, political motivations, and strategic understandings among lawyers, union activists, feminist leaders, and officials in government and industry in comparable worth political struggles. Two general hypotheses guide the research: (1) that litigation and legal rights discourse about entitlements to equal treatment are a catalyst for mobilization of an active political constituency, and (2) that litigation, whether successful or not, has been a pivotal resource in leveraging policy change. The study addresses central questions in sociolegal theory. The research goes beyond previous studies in legal mobilization by examining the tactics of using law, the role of precedents and legal decisions in shaping tactics, and the indirect effects of law separate and apart from winning court cases. Mobilization and the law are seen as interactive elements ultimately embracing citizens and activists who are not involved in law suits and eventually changing the discourse of lawyers and judges who are. By identifying variations in comparable worth experiences and different ways in which social movements might use or be limited by the concept of rights, this research offers the unique prospect of providing empirical data that is essential for assessing the critique of rights and the policy of rights advocacy more generally. The study should also illuminate the complex influence of law in political arenas outside of courtrooms from which more adequate theories about the role of law in society can be constructed.
