Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
NARROW
Format
Journal
Article Type
Date
Availability
1-1 of 1
ROBERT WESTLEY
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Journal:
Representations
Representations (2005) 92 (1): 81–116.
Published: 01 November 2005
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this article the author discusses the procedural hurdles erected by courts to limit litigation of Black reparations claims based on slavery. By examining the policy justifications that underlie the procedural doctrines, the author challenges the view that the current impasse in Black reparations litigation is a matter of doctrinal limits rather than a matter of social devaluation of the litigants. Basing his argument on a review of nineteenth-century restitution cases involving wrongful enslavement, the author posits that the continued refusal by courts to hear Black reparations claims on the merits reflects a millenarian process of subordination and social devaluation of people of African descent.