Judicial production of racial injustice in Taiwo V. Olaigbe: Decolonising the incomplete story on race and contracting
By: Zokaityte, Asta and Mbioh, Will Robinson
.
Material type: 
BookPublisher: Social & Legal Studies Description: 33(4), Aug, 2024: p.556-581.Subject(s): Decolonial judging, Race discrimination, Racial contracting, Law, Racial Justice, Decolonial Judgment, Immigration Status, Race Discrimination, Judicial Reasoning, Legal Doctrine, Racialisation, Freedom of Contract, Racial Contracting, Human Rights, Equality, Oppression, Domination
In:
Social & Legal StudiesSummary: This article critically examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Taiwo, a landmark case on racial justice where claims of race discrimination by two domestic migrant workers were rejected on the grounds that immigration status is distinct from race. Using Taiwo as a case study, the paper argues for decolonising judicial decision-making through three propositions: (a) challenging racial bias in judicial reasoning and legal doctrine; (b) interrogating legal frameworks as sites of racial oppression and inequality; and (c) accounting for contextual diversity in experiences of racialisation, avoiding essentialist categories of discrimination. By retelling the stories in Taiwo, the article challenges the dominant race equality paradigm and exposes the multi-layered ways in which racialisation operates across socio-cultural contexts. It further opens the possibility of an epistemic shift away from the liberal paradigm of “freedom of contract” toward an analysis of racial contracting shaped by structures of oppression and domination.
In Taiwo, one of the most recent landmark cases on racial justice, the Supreme Court rejected race discrimination claims of two domestic migrant workers, ruling that discrimination on the basis of ‘immigration status’ should not be equated to discrimination on the basis of ‘race’. This article presents an argument for decolonising judicial decision-making, using Taiwo as an example to reimagine a much more favourable outcome for victims of racial injustice. This argument is explored through three propositions for decolonial judgment: (a) challenging racial bias in judicial reasoning and legal doctrine; (b) challenging legal frameworks as sites of racial oppression and inequality; and (c) accounting for contextual diversity of experiences of racialisation, avoiding essentialist arguments and categories of racial discrimination. Drawing on these, the article retells the stories in Taiwo to challenge the dominant, traditional race equality paradigm and expose the varied and multi-layered ways in which people are racialised differently across historical and socio-cultural contexts and communities. It also opens the potential for an epistemic shift away from the liberal paradigm of ‘freedom of contract’ and towards the analysis of racial contracting that is co-constituted by multi-layered and context-situated structures of oppression and domination.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09646639231205275
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Vol info | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Articles
|
Indian Institute of Public Administration | 33(4), Aug, 2024: p.556-581 | Available | AR133203 |
This article critically examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Taiwo, a landmark case on racial justice where claims of race discrimination by two domestic migrant workers were rejected on the grounds that immigration status is distinct from race. Using Taiwo as a case study, the paper argues for decolonising judicial decision-making through three propositions: (a) challenging racial bias in judicial reasoning and legal doctrine; (b) interrogating legal frameworks as sites of racial oppression and inequality; and (c) accounting for contextual diversity in experiences of racialisation, avoiding essentialist categories of discrimination. By retelling the stories in Taiwo, the article challenges the dominant race equality paradigm and exposes the multi-layered ways in which racialisation operates across socio-cultural contexts. It further opens the possibility of an epistemic shift away from the liberal paradigm of “freedom of contract” toward an analysis of racial contracting shaped by structures of oppression and domination.
In Taiwo, one of the most recent landmark cases on racial justice, the Supreme Court rejected race discrimination claims of two domestic migrant workers, ruling that discrimination on the basis of ‘immigration status’ should not be equated to discrimination on the basis of ‘race’. This article presents an argument for decolonising judicial decision-making, using Taiwo as an example to reimagine a much more favourable outcome for victims of racial injustice. This argument is explored through three propositions for decolonial judgment: (a) challenging racial bias in judicial reasoning and legal doctrine; (b) challenging legal frameworks as sites of racial oppression and inequality; and (c) accounting for contextual diversity of experiences of racialisation, avoiding essentialist arguments and categories of racial discrimination. Drawing on these, the article retells the stories in Taiwo to challenge the dominant, traditional race equality paradigm and expose the varied and multi-layered ways in which people are racialised differently across historical and socio-cultural contexts and communities. It also opens the potential for an epistemic shift away from the liberal paradigm of ‘freedom of contract’ and towards the analysis of racial contracting that is co-constituted by multi-layered and context-situated structures of oppression and domination.- Reproduced
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09646639231205275
There are no comments for this item.