Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Social actors’ ability to navigate multiple—and at times contradictory—institutions is essential to the well-being of contemporary diverse societies. For immigrants, the process and outcome of this negotiation shape the trajectories of their integration. Through in-depth interviews, participant observations, and the analysis of written and online materials, this paper studies Muslim immigrants’ experiences of, responses to, and negotiations with the coexistence of American and Islamic laws in the U.S. The data show that legal pluralism (LP) in the modern Metropole has given way to new and novel understandings and practices of LP: the “right to the law” and the “cosmopolitization of the legal field.” Also, whether and how Muslim immigrants negotiate American and Islamic laws is deeply rooted in and critically engaged with the prevailing discussions of equality, pluralism, inclusion, and citizenship. The findings of the study demonstrate that the American Muslim community has developed multiple creative responses to the challenges of LP, and these responses are constantly evolving and readapting through redefinition of acceptable practices, reordering of authoritative voices within the community, creative legal interpretations, and hybridization of the coexisting laws. Thus, the idiosyncrasies of LP in the modern Metropole have created simultaneous drives for adjustment and preservation.
Gulseren Kozak-Isik (Tue,) studied this question.