The text is structured as follows: In the first section, we compare liberal legalism and distributive analysis as two different ways of looking at law in the broad sense of the word.
Liberal legalism and distributive analysis constitute two trends in the conceptualization of what and how law is.
Distributive analysis offers an alternative understanding of law, according to which: (i) there is no opposition between law and society or between law and economy.
For distributive analysis, the rule of law does not determine the results of the questions about norms because (i) law is indeterminate and does not have a fixed meaning; (ii) the stabilization of determinate interpretations of the law depend on power scenarios that are contingent for the law; (iii) the results of legal investigations depend more on factors that are external to the law than that what liberal legalism is prepared to accept (Alviar & Jaramillo, 2012; Duncan Kennedy, 1998).
He argues against an individual rights framework, and encourages scholars and activists to pay attention to "impact rather than intent," employing a distributive analysis
that attends to disciplinary and biopolitical forms of power.