Abstract This article investigates how Danish academics participate in, interpret, and reproduce debates on the legal and normative regulation of Muslims in Denmark since the early 2000s. Through a thematic analysis of journal articles and public dissemination outputs authored by Danish researchers, it explores the social production of legal knowledge and scholars’ positioning in relation to mainstream Islamophobic discourse. The study finds that positionality statements are largely absent or superficial, while identity‐prejudicial stereotypes, pre‐emptive silencing, and epistemic objectification are widespread. Academic accounts frequently omit Islamophobia as an analytical concept, which marginalizes the lived experiences of Muslims and obscures the religious and racial dynamics of law. Consequently, the findings suggest that Danish academic discourse systemically distorts the collective understanding of laws and regulations affecting Muslims by perpetuating testimonial and hermeneutical injustices.
SOFIE AALTONEN (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: