Leisure Justice

To date, antidiscrimination law has centered on specific domains widely believed to be most central to human life and democratic participation: education, voting, employment, housing, and public accommodations. The right to vote, the ability to receive an education, and the capacity to obtain shelter and employment are essential to human survival, particularly within a market economy. But while voting, education, employment, housing, and travel might be necessary for human survival and democratic participation, they are not sufficient for human flourishing. People need more than an education, a steady job, a roof over their heads, and the right to vote—they need things in their lives that will bring them joy and satisfaction. They need time and space for recreation, for play, or even merely for relaxation. In short, they need leisure. It is an obligation of a just polity to provide leisure opportunities for its citizens. If a polity is obligated to ensure that its citizens have the capacity for leisure, then it is obligated to do so in an equitable and nondiscriminatory manner. The availability of leisure should not vary on the basis of race, gender, or disability any more than the right to vote or the right to an education. It is past time to begin considering the question of leisure justice: Are all citizens able to access sufficient opportunities for leisure, and can they do so on a nondiscriminatory basis? This Article provides the first systematic account of leisure law—the wide array of legal doctrines that structure Americans’ access to leisure opportunities and the distribution of those opportunities. Leisure intersects with a surprising array of legal fields, from foundational areas such as constitutional law, tort law, property law, and criminal law to specialized domains like employment law, civil rights law, administrative law, and intellectual property law.