By ADAM COHEN
<SNIP> "Judge Judy" seems like a caricature of judging, more concerned with putting litigants in their place than with weighing evidence and legal doctrine. But many legal sociologists would argue that
putting people in their place - or exerting "social control" -
is to some degree
what law is all about. Few real-life judges refer to litigants, as Judge Judy does, as "you idiot," inform them bluntly "there is something wrong with you," or end a legal proceeding by telling one of the parties that it would be a bad idea for her to have children. But
the reason Judge Judy's show resonates so strongly is that she has an uncanny ability to act out justice-as-social-control in its rawest form.
It has been widely accepted, as early as the legal realism movement of the 1920's, that
law is about a lot more than just the neutral application of rules to facts. In an influential 1976 book, "The Behavior of Law," Donald Black, a University of Virginia social sciences professor, argued that
much of what occurs in the legal system can be explained by the relative social status of the participants. One of the universal truths he has observed is that
law moves more easily down social hierarchies than up. It is far easier for a rich man to get a policeman to arrest a poor man in the street, for example, than the other way around.
Professor Black also contends that
certain kinds of people "attract" law to themselves. The poor, the culturally marginal and social deviants of all types are more likely to attract bad legal outcomes - to be arrested, to be convicted, to lose civil lawsuits - when they do the same things as more socially favored people. In a typical piece of Blackian fieldwork, researchers in the early 1970's sent two groups into a store to shoplift, some dressed as "hippies," with long hair and dirty blue jeans, and others who looked more conventional. Not surprisingly, customers in the store turned the hippies in far more often than the "straights," and with much more enthusiasm.
In an interview, Professor Black could not recall having seen "Judge Judy," which is a shame, since it is the perfect text for his theories. He has written that
judges are at their most unforgiving when there is a large gap in social status between them and the parties who appear before them. Judge Judy is able to carry on the way she does because her litigants almost invariably have a multitude of low-status markers: they are unemployed, they have criminal records, they speak poorly. It would be a completely different show if the parties were wealthy. As things stand now, the lower a party's apparent status, the harsher Judge Judy is free to be. On a recent show, when a witness opened her mouth to reveal missing front teeth, it was all but inevitable that she would be yelled at to sit back down and say nothing. <SNIP>
It is hardly surprising that "Judge Judy" is so popular. People like to see social hierarchies reinforced, and people who violate social norms "taught responsibility" or otherwise punished. Humiliation is also a traditional crowd pleaser, and an important part of virtually every reality show on television. The real problem with "Judge Judy" is not that it is worse than most reality TV, which it is not. It is that for an audience that runs well into the millions every week, it is blurring the line between justice and social bullying.
More at
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/09/opinion/09sun3.html In Rethugnican-dominated America, it's all 'who you are' and 'who you know', in life, on the job, and in the so-called legal system... And everything's run by half-wit Rethugnican bullies, from the Bu$h administration to big business to the legal system...