Editors' Comment

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12283
• Published date: 01 September 2017
• Date: 01 September 2017

Editors’ Comment

How do legal and state practices play out in their home terri-

tory, in various arenas and sites, how do these practices travel,

and how do they trail individuals as people travel, by choice or

not? The articles in this issue provide insights into this range of

related questions about law and society. The pieces consider law

on the ground as state power isolates and shifts individuals, they

look at law in how people access legal advice or develop trust in

legal institutions, and they study law in elite legal practices in

courts. The contributions cover a lot of territory—geographic,

social, and conceptual. Together, the articles in this issue present

an eclectic yet representative and engaging journey through

some top law and society scholarship.

Fittingly, the question of legal travel and international reach

is explicit in Valerie Hans’s 2016 Presidential Address as it

reflects on juries and the Collaborative Research Network of jury

scholars. Four commentators provide critical context for this

piece. Mary Rose points out in her response to Hans that,

although the jury is iconic in the American legal system, trials

have been decreasing as a way of resolving disputes. Indeed,

increasingly people within the United States sign agreements to

keep critical disputes out of the courts. And, processing people

accused of crimes would collapse if everyone insisted on their

right to trial rather than simply pleading guilty. The belief in the

institution of the jury belies the reality of disputes and of the

courtroom. Yet, the icon persists powerfully, contributing to an

image of an American legal system that promises drama through

conflict and wise resolution via democratic participation. The

complexity and power of the jury in both our legal imagination

and practice are reason enough to study how the jury travels.

The idea of juries serves different purposes within individual

political and legal systems, as those who respond to Hans explain.

Justifications for the institution of the jury pull on the importance

to democracy of lay participation in the justice system.

Law & Society Review, Volume 51, Number 3 (2017)

V

C2017 Law and Society Association. All rights reserved.

469