Traditional approaches to philosophy of law and legal analysis are limited tools when legal advocates seek to effect actual change for marginalized communities. This dissertation identifies the limitations of these tools by virtue of their entrenched relationships with Western colonial thought. In response, this dissertation contributes to the discipline of philosophy by offering an interdisciplinary, anti-colonial, community-based approach to legal advocacy issues called Engaged Philosophy of Law and Policy. This dissertation offers an account of engaged philosophy of law and policy by showing what this approach can do rather than articulating a particular theory of engaged philosophy of law and policy. Because legal advocacy issues are context-dependent and community-based, a uniform theory of engaged philosophy of law and policy is untenable at best and harmful at worst. Therefore, this dissertation presents three distinct papers, each of which articulates a specific legal advocacy issue identified by marginalized communities. This dissertation shows how engaged philosophy of law and policy can offer clarity and concrete strategies that do not entrench oppressive logics and outcomes. The three issues are reproductive and LGBTQIA+ rights in the wake of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization; racial discrimination in wrongful convictions for sexual violence; and the staying power of the Insular Cases that maintain colonial rule over U.S. territories. By identifying the shortcomings in current scholarship on these issues, followed by alternative strategies that avoid such pitfalls, this dissertation demonstrates the utility of contributing engaged philosophy of law and policy to the discipline.
Read
