The scholarly benefits
of cross-fertilization between legal and empirical analytical methods are
well-documented and widely presumed. Less well-developed are theory and
practice regarding connections between empirical methodology and legal
advocacy. The moderators of this discussion will propose, in a forthcoming
paper, that familiarity with social science research methods is critical to the
advocacy work of lawyers and, therefore, should occupy a prominent place in law
schools’ experiential curricula. To probe this assertion, the moderators will
facilitate a roundtable-style dialogue in which five panelists representing
diverse perspectives respond to three critical questions: What is the spectrum of
ways lawyers can use social science on behalf of clients (and what are the associated
spectrum of skills we should teach law students)? What are the inherent
tensions between the lawyer’s role and the role of the social scientist (and
what are methods for minimizing these tensions)? What contributions to our
institutions’ larger academic missions can be made by law schools and their
clinics when we build bridges between legal advocacy and social science? To
conclude, the session will explore how skills associated with lawyers’ use of
empirical research can figure into securing justice for disempowered
constituencies in this “post-fact” era.