Content area
Abstract
The reinvigoration of "rule of law" and "legal reform" campaigns in transitional and developing countries is often shown as compelling evidence that democratic systems of governance will increasingly rely on the mediation of legal professionals. Drawing from several strains of social theory, – with a special emphasis on the sociology of professions and moderate versions of new institutionalism – as well as from a comparative and international research enterprise involving the U.S. and Latin America, this dissertation examines and contrasts specific manifestations of this story of (or aspiration about) lawyers' participation in structures of governance. The focus is on the institutionalization across the Americas of a style of legal practice that is often seen in the U.S. context as an expression of the alleged potency of law and lawyers in democratizing systems of governance: "public interest law". Considering "styles", "kinds" or "sectors" of legal practice as amalgams of "labels", "practices", and "meanings", this research has encountered differences in the ways U.S. and L.A. lawyers have structured "public interest law", while also unveiling factors driving such differentiation in the rich histories of professional and political development in the studied contexts. The findings speak to a variety of theories about institutional development in times of globalization, such as theories of convergence, institutional isomorphism, and field constitution.
