Yes, and then the CLS scholars and the CRT writers had a huge falling out years ago and went their own ways. CLS was originally a model for writing the scholarship but that was a long time ago. Matsudo for example writes about "hate speech." Her most famous book is "Words That Wound." CLS writers & CRT writers did originally talk a lot; they worked at the same law schools. CRT has gone its own way of development now because it is no longer a law discipline exclusively. Many of the best CRT analysts do not work in legal education or education at all. I could give you the names of the CRT academics who have remained connected to both (there are CRT writers who are pro-Marxism for example) but that's not necessary. And Derrick Bell, who I knew personally, and who lectured in a class I took, is not a Marxist and never embraced any economic model to solve these issues of built in inequality. He did not even use the term, "Critical Race Theory." He mostly wrote about why the Brown decision did not fix America's problems with respect to race. Kimberle Crenshaw is also a writer who goes here own way. The main thing CRT academics have in common is they do analyze American history and institutional structures through the prism of race because it is impossible not to do so if you are being honest with history and the present. Those critical of this approach just want to declare society - "color blind" - without actually dismantling the institutions that have caused most of the problems we have today.