The Centrist Case Against Current (Conservative) Arbitration Law

Ware, Stephen J.

Journal: Florida Law Review

Volume: 68

First Page: 1227

Year: 2016

Bluebook Citation: 68 FLA. L. REV. 1227 (2016)

Author: Stephen J. J. Ware: all 27 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

1
Citing decision
Most recently cited by1
  • 2026Sierra Lugo v. Sunrun PR Operations, LLC Y Otros

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

In The Politics of Arbitration Law and Centrist Proposals for Reform, I explained how issues surrounding consumer and other adhesive arbitration agreements became divisive along predictable political lines (progressives vs. conservatives) and proposed an intermediate (or centrist) position to resolve those issues. However, The Politics of Arbitration Law did not argue the case for my proposals. It left those arguments for this Article, which makes the case against current (conservative) arbitration law, and a third article, which will make the case against progressive proposals to reform arbitration law. In other words, this Article stands out from the many other articles critiquing current arbitration law because this Article’s critique comes from a centrist, rather than progressive, perspective.

For that reason, this Article’s critique may be more likely than progressive critiques to gain traction with lawmakers.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.