Essay for the In-Print Symposium on <i>The Myth of Moral Justice</i>

Stuart Scheingold responds to Thane Rosenbaum's The Myth of Moral Justice, agreeing with the aspiration to infuse law with moral imagination but critiquing Rosenbaum's oversight of existing moral energy within the legal profession, particularly through cause lawyering. Scheingold argues that Rosenbaum's approach is overly simplistic, failing to account for institutional obstacles and the contested nature of moral discourse, which can lead to conflict rather than harmony. He emphasizes that while moral advocacy, as seen in cause lawyering, can drive positive change, it also faces significant challenges and backlash.