arbiter
JournalsAccount

The Legality Trap: Legal Co-optation Under Authoritarianism

Yueduan Wang

American Journal of Comparative Law2025https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avae037article
ABDC A
Weight
0.37

Abstract

In democracies, legal advocacy is known to channel social movements into narrower, less radical paths. However, the extent and conditions under which law co-opts social movements in nondemocratic contexts remain less clear, particularly given the constraints of underdeveloped legal systems and the frequent blending of legal and nonlegal mobilization tactics among societal actors. This Article examines environmental legal mobilization in China as a case study, illustrating how a discriminatory legal opportunity structure—where the judiciary provides a powerful platform for advocacy, yet access and affordability are limited to those demonstrating state-aligned behaviors—serves as an effective mechanism of co-optation under authoritarianism. By permitting environmental NGOs to engage in public interest litigation while tightly regulating their legal standing and financial resources, the party-state has led NGOs to self-moderate their goals and tactics, deepen their fiscal and political dependence on the party-state, and foster divisions among advocacy groups. This Article underscores the nuanced interplay between authoritarian legality and social movements, demonstrating how legal opportunity structures can be strategically engineered to limit the transformative potential of these groups.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avae037

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{yueduan2025,
  title        = {{The Legality Trap: Legal Co-optation Under Authoritarianism}},
  author       = {Yueduan Wang},
  journal      = {American Journal of Comparative Law},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avae037},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Legality Trap: Legal Co-optation Under Authoritarianism

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.