This paper examines the tension between law's opportunity to deliver social transformation and the normative limitations that shape its effectiveness as a tool of social struggle. The role of law's normative limitations on legal mobilisation strategies, or the effect of entrenched social interests on permissible legal claims, has not been properly conceptualised in legal mobilisation scholarship. In response, this paper presents a conceptual framework that comprehends the opportunity and limitation of legal mobilisation as caught in the tension between the interpretive opportunity to redetermine legal meaning and the normative deficit inherent to this task. By re-engaging with the theoretical underpinnings of legal mobilisation, we will evaluate the potential for certain types of social transformation using law and revisit the rationale for strategic legal action. We will bring together our conceptual treatment of legal mobilisation with a sobering analysis of the Argentinian factory recuperation movement's mobilisation of legal demands. The movement's relative success in confronting the legal system's commitment to private property rights and winning protections for worker co-operatives presents an opportunity to learn about the effective potential of legal strategy and the extent to which it can be used to confront the normative commitments of a legal system.

本文探讨了法律实现社会转型的机会与塑造其作为社会斗争工具的有效性的规范限制之间的紧张关系。法律规范性限制对法律动员策略的作用，或根深蒂固的社会利益对允许的法律主张的影响，在法律动员学界尚未得到适当的概念化。作为回应，本文提出了一个概念框架，该框架理解法律动员的机会和限制，因为它陷入了重新确定法律意义的解释机会与该任务固有的规范缺陷之间的紧张关系。通过重新参与法律动员的理论基础，战略性法律行动。我们将把我们对法律动员的概念处理与对阿根廷工厂恢复运动对法律要求的动员的清醒分析结合起来。该运动在对抗法律制度对私有财产权的承诺和赢得对工人合作社的保护方面的相对成功提供了一个机会，可以了解法律战略的有效潜力以及在多大程度上可以用来对抗国家的规范性承诺。法制。