The legal sub-project focuses on the investigation of the legal framework that formally determines the possibilities of those affected by racism via legal foundations (such as the German Basic Law or the General Equal Treatment Act) and their judicial interpretation.

This is to be achieved by analyzing judgments on cases in which racism was negotiated in legal databases, in particular juris. The judgments will then be evaluated by means of dogmatic reconstruction, methods of critical analysis of the law, and normatively on the basis of the counseling perspective.

In the first phase (2021/2022), the focus of the "Law" project was on systematically recording the relevant legal norms as interpreted by German courts. The legal case analysis concentrated on clarifying which definitions of racism and racial discrimination German courts apply in their judgments and how these relate to European and international law.

What has been lacking in research on law and racism to date is a systematic examination of the prevailing understandings of racism in case law that not only focuses on individual norms, but also investigates how courts deal with the issue of racism across all areas of law and instances. For this reason, a comprehensive monitoring of case law is carried out in the legal sub-project.

There is also a lack of connection between research that deals with racial discrimination and its prohibition in substantive law, on the one hand, and research that investigates institutional and structural barriers to access in the legal system itself, on the other. The extremely exciting Access to Justice project at the Berlin Social Science Center (WZB), with which cooperation is being sought within the DeZIM research community, to which the WZB belongs, is investigating financial access barriers in particular. However, the extent to which the interpretation of substantive law itself can represent a barrier to access is not being researched. For this reason, the results of the monitoring of case law are evaluated together with the advice sub-project in order to identify the links between substantive interpretation and application of the law on the one hand and structural barriers to accessing the law on the other with the help of the knowledge gained from the practical experience of those involved in the field of advice.

• Analysis of the (officially) institutionalized possibilities that people affected by racism have to defend themselves against racism - in particular through legal action.

Examine which forms of racism are not taken into account here

• Identify structural obstacles for people affected by racism to defend themselves through institutional channels

The law sub-project focuses on searching legal databases, in particular juris, for judgments on cases in which racism was negotiated and evaluating these judgments by means of dogmatic reconstruction, methods of critical analysis of the law and normatively on the basis of the advisory perspective.

By means of a keyword search within a database covering all areas of law, jurisdictions and instances, judgments that are relevant to the research question are filtered out. These are reconstructed dogmatically, i.e. they are classified in existing jurisprudential and legal-practical discourses in accordance with the logic of the law using the usual legal methods of interpretation (wording, systematics, history of origin, telos). The method of dogmatic reconstruction is supplemented by various methods of critical analysis of the law. The latter goes back to the Critical Legal Studies movement characterized by deconstruction and critical discourse analysis, from which various strands of Critical Race Theory have also emerged. What the methods of critical analysis of law used in the "Law" sub-project have in common is that, beyond the inherent legal logic of the arguments contained in the judgments, they ask which patterns of argumentation emerge, how these patterns produce and reproduce contradictions and on which unspoken assumptions widespread patterns of argumentation are based. The legal argumentation patterns analyzed in this way are evaluated in normative terms using the perspectives and learning processes developed in racism-critical counselling work, which are traced and researched in the sub-project "Counselling structures".

In a second step, the results from both sub-modules will be triangulated in collaboration and evaluated and expanded in greater depth in focus groups. The focus groups will therefore bring together experts from various fields of work - both from the judiciary and civil society counseling actors - to discuss the results and discuss political consequences.

So far, the first step has been to systematically take stock of the relevant legal norms and the field of counseling.

The legal case analysis, which focused on clarifying which definitions of racism and racial discrimination German courts use as a basis for their judgments and how these relate to European and international law, made it possible to substantiate, with the help of systematic database research, what has already been established in legal research critical of racism on the basis of individual examples from case law and conceptual-historical research:
The understanding of racism in German courts is strongly characterized by an equation with right-wing extremism and National Socialism and it is generally assumed that racism requires intentional action. It was also shown that the practice of German courts often falls back on biologistic notions of "race" and that those affected who defend themselves against racist discrimination or even just name it must fear sanctions such as losing their job or criminal proceedings for insulting others. These findings were flanked by a critical analysis of the "objective third party" or "objective observer" argument (González Hauck 2022). According to the results of the analysis based on critical whiteness research (Eggers et al 2020) and (Black) feminist epistemology (Collins 1999; Harding 1992; Haraway 1988), this figure of argumentation systematically devalues perspectives that have experienced racism in the German legal system.

What significance do the research findings have for practice?

The first stocktaking showed that there is a gap between the claim to create an effective state-institutionalized way to combat racism with the law and supporting advisory structures on the one hand and the reality faced by those affected and the advisory structures on the other.

The combination of the two sub-modules clearly showed how legal language is used tactically and strategically and what differences can be observed in the law in practice in terms of time and place. With regard to advisory structures, this also revealed a complex relationship with the law, in which the work of the advisory organizations is always embedded in broader political work. This aspect will be explored in greater depth in 2023.

The project has been running since October 2021.