Social & Legal Studies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marchetti, E.
Right arrow Articles by Ransley, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Social & Legal Studies, Vol. 14, No. 4, 533-552 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0964663905057659

Unconscious Racism: Scrutinizing Judicial Reasoning in 'Stolen Generation' Cases

Elena Marchetti

Griffith University, Australia

Janet Ransley

Griffith University, Australia

Like other western legal systems, Australian law is based on notions of the rule of law, justice and equality. Legal formalistic ideology would have us believe that as long as the law as it appears 'on the books' is applied equally for all, justice will prevail. For Indigenous Australian people, formal equality means that their claims for land, compensation and the recognition of their culture must be assessed through the eyes of white judges in white courts. Even when those judges strive to apply the law equally, they will inevitably be applying Eurocentric beliefs and values. In two recent significant cases concerning Indigenous claims for their removal from their families as children, those beliefs and values have tended to invalidate not only the legal claims themselves, but also aspects of the Indigenous culture. This article argues that the formal application of legal principles to these claims by Australian courts and judges leads to the exclusion of Indigenous narratives, which ultimately can be construed as evidence of unconscious racism. Charles Lawrence's cultural meaning test is used to critique the reasoning of the judges in two leading Australian cases concerning the 'stolen generation' and to expose the unconscious racism that still exists in the Australian liberal legal system.

Key Words: Cubillo case • cultural meaning test • Indigenous Australians • Kruger case • stolen generation • unconscious racism


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?