Governmental influence over rights consciousness: public perceptions of the COVID‐19 lockdown

Abstract A focus on rights consciousness has become a mainstay of the socio‐legal study of law in everyday life. Such research, much of it critical in orientation, generally uses people's sense of grievance as its starting point. The consequent risk is that we elide rights consciousness with a sense of injustice. This article argues that there is merit for critical studies of legal consciousness in keeping these two things separate, and that this represents a dimension of the critical approach to rights consciousness that is largely missing from the field. We present a study of rights consciousness in relation to the imposition of lockdown in the United Kingdom during the early stage of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We show that, despite regarding lockdown as a violation of basic rights, most people did not feel a sense of grievance. Furthermore, rights consciousness was influenced by a range of factors distinct from political orientation, most of which were within the sphere of governmental influence. In this way, governmental power was constitutive of the public's rights consciousness. Further exploration and assessment of when, where, and how this might occur should be part of the critical project of legal consciousness research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Law and Society
Published
2024-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jols.12498
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.23
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Governmental influence over rights consciousness: public perceptions of the COVID‐19 lockdown

Jed Meers, Andrew Jones, Simon Halliday, Joe Tomlinson
1 citations
Journal of Law and Society
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
2.23
article

Governmental influence over rights consciousness: public perceptions of the COVID‐19 lockdown

Jed Meers, Andrew Jones, Simon Halliday, Joe Tomlinson
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract A focus on rights consciousness has become a mainstay of the socio‐legal study of law in everyday life. Such research, much of it critical in orientation, generally uses people's sense of grievance as its starting point. The consequent risk is that we elide rights consciousness with a sense of injustice. This article argues that there is merit for critical studies of legal consciousness in keeping these two things separate, and that this represents a dimension of the critical approach to rights consciousness that is largely missing from the field. We present a study of rights consciousness in relation to the imposition of lockdown in the United Kingdom during the early stage of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We show that, despite regarding lockdown as a violation of basic rights, most people did not feel a sense of grievance. Furthermore, rights consciousness was influenced by a range of factors distinct from political orientation, most of which were within the sphere of governmental influence. In this way, governmental power was constitutive of the public's rights consciousness. Further exploration and assessment of when, where, and how this might occur should be part of the critical project of legal consciousness research.

Journal of Law and SocietyVol. 51(S1)
University of Strathclyde (GB), Cogent (United Kingdom) (GB), Deleted Institution, University of York (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Populism, Right-Wing Movements
2.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.