How is law made worthless to the marginalized? Drawing on ethnographic observations in Paris and New York City, I establish a typology of devaluation practices in deportation hearings. I analyze how informal court practices devalue court actors, the hearing, and the law itself. Despite different levels of formal protections for migrants, deportation adjudication is pared down and devalued in both cities. This devaluation, however, followed distinct logics. New York hearings were characterized by a utilitarian law logic, where process and ritualistic elements deemed inessential were shed, leaving a stripped-down core focused on case processing. The minimal protections available to migrants were weakened further. By contrast, hollow law emerged in Parisian hearings, where everyday court practices eroded the more generous protections granted to migrants through formal law. While analyses of immigration adjudication have focused on decision-making, determinants of legal outcomes, and the interpretation of formal criteria, I instead conceptualize the courtroom as a space where value is actively unmade through informal practices, drawing on insights from the sociology of valuation and evaluation.

中文翻译：

---

空洞的法律和功利主义的法律：纽约和巴黎驱逐听证会的贬值

法律如何对边缘化群体变得毫无价值？根据巴黎和纽约市的民族志观察，我建立了驱逐听证会上贬值做法的类型。我分析了非正式的法庭实践如何贬低法庭行为者、听证会和法律本身的价值。尽管对移民的正式保护程度不同，但两个城市的驱逐裁决都被削弱和贬低。然而，这种贬值遵循不同的逻辑。纽约听证会的特点是功利主义法律逻辑，被认为无关紧要的程序和仪式元素被抛弃，留下专注于案件处理的精简核心。移民所能获得的最低限度的保护进一步被削弱。相比之下，空洞的法律这种现象出现在巴黎的听证会上，法庭的日常做法削弱了通过正式法律给予移民的更慷慨的保护。虽然对移民裁决的分析主要集中在决策、法律结果的决定因素以及对正式标准的解释上，但我借鉴价值社会学的见解，将法庭概念化为一个通过非正式实践主动创造价值的空间。评估。