Using court documents as data: opportunities and challenges for sociolegal scholarship

Though the use of court documents as data is widespread within US sociolegal scholarship, their use remains surprisingly undertheorized as a methodological practice. This article, therefore, asks, what differentiates court materials from other forms of documentary data, and how do these attributes impact claimsmaking in law and society scholarship? Drawing on varied empirical examples from existing scholarship, we uncover five distinctive attributes: their multitemporality, their dialogic nature, the multiple truths they house, their multivocality, and their social productivity. Considering these attributes, we argue that court documents unite our diverse field of scholarship in two important ways. First, as an essential output of the legal system, they are arguably “our” data, shaping law and society as we know it today. Second, they both reify and obscure the power dynamics that make social inequality so durable, helping inequality appear “just.” Despite their underexploited promise for theory-building in sociolegal research, we also discuss the practical, epistemic, and ethical pitfalls to their use. Ultimately, ignoring these rich yet complex documents is to our field’s analytic peril.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law & Society Review
Published
2025-06-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/lsr.2025.30
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Legal Education and Practice Innovations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
47.95

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using court documents as data: opportunities and challenges for sociolegal scholarship

Anya Degenshein, Camilo Arturo Leslie
3 citations
Law & Society Review
Legal Education and Practice Innovations
47.95
article

Using court documents as data: opportunities and challenges for sociolegal scholarship

Anya Degenshein, Camilo Arturo Leslie
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Though the use of court documents as data is widespread within US sociolegal scholarship, their use remains surprisingly undertheorized as a methodological practice. This article, therefore, asks, what differentiates court materials from other forms of documentary data, and how do these attributes impact claimsmaking in law and society scholarship? Drawing on varied empirical examples from existing scholarship, we uncover five distinctive attributes: their multitemporality, their dialogic nature, the multiple truths they house, their multivocality, and their social productivity. Considering these attributes, we argue that court documents unite our diverse field of scholarship in two important ways. First, as an essential output of the legal system, they are arguably “our” data, shaping law and society as we know it today. Second, they both reify and obscure the power dynamics that make social inequality so durable, helping inequality appear “just.” Despite their underexploited promise for theory-building in sociolegal research, we also discuss the practical, epistemic, and ethical pitfalls to their use. Ultimately, ignoring these rich yet complex documents is to our field’s analytic peril.

Law & Society ReviewVol. 59(3)
Marquette University (US), Tulane University (US)
Northwestern University, Marquette University
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Legal Education and Practice Innovations
47.95
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.