Here is the press release from the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies regarding today’s appearance by W&L Law Professor Russell Miller:
AICGS, the Goethe-Institut’s Mapping Democracy Series, the German Embassy-Cultural Division, and the Robert Bosch Foundation Alumni Association are pleased to host Donald Kommers and Russell Miller, co-authors of The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany (2012), for a panel discussion on “The Constitutional Framework for German Democracy.” The event will take place at 6:30pm on Thursday, April 11, 2013, at the Goethe-Institut, 812 Seventh St, NW.
This new edition, with its extensive treatment of the German law of democracy, comes at an appropriate time, shortly before Germany’s federal elections in the fall. In this discussion the authors will explore the constitutional facets of electoral processes in Germany as well as the broader notion of democracy in the Constitutional Court’s decisions. The book, an English-language commentary on German constitutional law, also features translations of more than 100 decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court. In her foreword to the latest edition, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg calls the book “a masterful text.”
Prof. Donald Kommers is a Joseph and Elizabeth Robbie Professor of Political Science and Concurrent Professor of Law Emeritus at Notre Dame University Law School. He is the author of over 100 major articles and books and his next book, Germany’s Constitutional Odyssey, is expected to be published in early 2014. Prof. Kommers earned his B.A. in philosophy and English literature from the Catholic University of America and his advanced degrees (M.A. and Ph.D.) in political science from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he also studied law.
Prof. Russell Miller is a Professor of Law at Washington and Lee University School of Law. He has been a guest professor in Germany and a frequent Research Visitor at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and Public International Law in Heidelberg. He was a 2009/2010 Fulbright Senior Research Fellow to Germany. Alongside books in the fields of comparative law, international law, and U.S. constitutional law, Prof. Miller has published articles and commentary in the American Journal of International Law, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Indiana Law Journal, Journal of National Security Law, Journal of Comparative Law, and Washington & Lee Law Review. Prof. Miller graduated with a B.A. in English literature from Washington State University and his J.D. and M.A. in English literature from Duke University. He also received an LL.M. from Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in 2002.
You are invited to a presentation by Dr. Christopher Whelan a Visiting Professor of Law at Washington and Lee. The recipient of a doctorate and a law degree from the London School of Econmics, he is a member of the Faculty of Law at the University of Oxford. Since 2005, he has served as as a Visitng Professor (for one semester each school year) at W&L’s School of Law. During his academic career, Dr. Whelan has lectured and taught at, inter alia, the University of Texas, and the University of California, Berkeley.
TOPIC: “The Eurozone Crisis: Who is to Blame?”
DATE: Thursday, March 28, 2013.
TIME: 12: Noon.
PLACE: The Marshall Foundation, VMI Parade, Lexington.
LUNCH: Participants are invited to an informal brown-bag lunch after the program. The Marshall Foundation will provide drinks.
It is not necessary to RSVP, but questions and comments concerning the program can be directed to William Dawson at 464-4486. His e-mail address is: email@example.com.
All are welcome.
The University of Sydney in Australia is hosting a conference entitled The Scope and Limits of Religious Freedom in Australia. W&L Law Professor Robin Fretwell Wilson is the featured guest speaker. Check out the conference announcement here, which provides additional details. It will be held on Thursday, March 15, 2013.
Professor Robin Fretwell Wilson is the Class of 1958 Law Alumni Professor of Law. A specialist in Family Law and Health Law, her research and teaching interests also include Insurance and Biomedical Ethics. Professor Wilson is the editor of four volumes: Health Law and Bioethics: Cases in Context (with Sandra Johnson, Joan Krause and Richard Savor, 2009); Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008) (with Douglas Laycock and Anthony A. Picarello);Reconceiving the Family: Critique on the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution (Cambridge University Press, 2006); and the Handbook of Children, Culture & Violence(Sage Publications, 2006) (with Nancy Dowd & Dorothy G. Singer). Her articles have appeared in the Cornell Law Review, theEmory Law Journal, the North Carolina Law Review, and the San Diego Law Review, as well as in numerous peer-reviewed journals.
A symposium considering the troubled legacy of Hermann Kantorowicz’s Kampf and the struggle to free law from formalism is underway at Washington & Lee University School of Law. After a wonderful welcome from our new Dean, Nora Demleitner, the first panel focused on the intellectual history of Kampf (translation available as The Battle for Legal Science). The second panel, which will discuss “Free Law” in German Jurisprudence, is now in progress. It will feature remarks by symposium organizer and German Constitutional Law expert, Russell Miller. Professor Catherine M.A. McCauliff is currently presenting her paper.
To visit the German Law Journal, a sponsor of this symposium, go to http://www.germanlawjournal.com. More information about the symposium is available at http://law.wlu.edu/lawcenter/page.asp?pageid=1448.
In the fourth installment of the Spring 2012 Faculty Workshop Series, sponsored by the Frances Lewis Law Center, Professor Matthew Lister, Visiting Assistant Professor at Villanova School of Law, came to speak last week about his paper, Guest-Worker Programs: A Discussion and Partial Defense.
In the paper, Professor Lister argues that a well-crafted guest-worker program is both compatible with liberal principles of justice and likely to form an important part of a sensible immigration policy for the near future. He addresses many of the controversial aspects of guest-worker programs, including how the high potential for abuse seen in earlier programs can be avoided. The paper thus recommends using a well-crafted guest-worker program over restricted borders or nearly open borders as alternatives.
Many thanks to Professor Lister for visiting W&L and sharing his paper with the faculty.
In the third installment of the Spring 2012 Faculty Workshop Series, sponsored by the Frances Lewis Law Center, Professor Richard Albert, Assistant Professor of Law at Boston College, came to speak last week about his paper, Our Amoral Constitution.
In the paper, Professor Albert argues that the United States Constitution has no inherent morality associated with it. He draws from text, theory, history, and political practice to argue that the moral code of the United States Constitution is amoral. The paper illustrates that the Constitution entrenches no final judgment as to right or wrong, good or evil, virtuous or vicious, and that this suggest that the American constitutional tradition is oriented towards process, rather than content. To this end, Prof. Albert argues that there are no limitations, for better or for worse, on what may be amended via Article V, granting the blessing of legitimacy any amendment that successfully navigates the procedural strictures enshrined in the text of the Constitution.
Many thanks to Professor Albert for visiting W&L and sharing his paper with the faculty.
Professor Christopher M. Bruner, Associate Professor of Law, recently participated in the Aspen Institute’s roundtable program, “Rethinking ‘Shareholder Value’ and the Purpose(s) of the Firm” at the NYU-Stern School of Business. The dialogue between business and legal scholars, as well as business executives, was a continuation of a discussion started in late September last year at the Aspen Institute.
The purpose of the dialogue was to discuss the purpose of the corporate firm and the role of “shareholder value” in corporate governance and evaluation of firm performance. The group addressed key questions that have profound consequences for both corporations and the long-term health of society. The representatives also discussed how broader conceptions of purpose influence how we think about leadership, strategy and accountability in business.
You can see the list of participants and agenda for the roundtable here.
In the third installment of the Spring 2012 Faculty Workshop Series, sponsored by the Frances Lewis Law Center, Professor john a. powell (lower case), formerly of the Moritz College of Law at The Ohio State University and presently the Director of the Haas Diversity Research Center and Robert D. Haas Chancellor’s Chair in Equity and Inclusion at the University of California, Berkeley, came to speak last Monday about his recent paper, Beyond Public/Private: Understanding Excessive Corporate Prerogative.
Professor powell makes the argument, in its simplest form, that the expansion and exercise of corporate power coincides with and makes concomitant disempowerment of people of color. Historically, he observes that the Lochner era, which defined and expanded corporate prerogatives, was the same era as Jim Crow, which narrowed the meaning and reach of civil rights. He asserts that the public/private distinction that has been used to establish many of these prerogatives, is flawed. The paper argues that there are four domains: public, private, non-public/non-private, and corporate. Thus, the exercise of excessive corporate prerogative is not only a threat to the public sphere, but the private sphere and the non-public/non-private as well. Ultimately, Prof. powell argues that we cannot achieve racial justice, economic justice, protection of our environment, or enjoy a strong democracy unless we have a realignment of corporations.
Many thanks to Professor powell for visiting W&L and sharing his paper with the faculty.
In the second installment of the Spring 2012 Faculty Workshop Series, sponsored by the Frances Lewis Law Center, Professor David Skeel, the S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, came to speak Monday about the draft of his article, States of Bankruptcy.
The paper discusses the possibility of allowing states to file for bankruptcy. In the article, Professor Skeel makes a case for the creation of a bankruptcy structure for individual states. He outlines that most of the traditional benefits from a bankruptcy framework would potentially exist for states, as well. Such benefits include establishing a more coherent priority structure for state obligations, providing additional restructuring tools, and helping to more equitably distribute the sacrifice of bankruptcy among creditors. Professor Skeel then addresses many of the principal concerns, including the constitutionality of a state bankruptcy and the potential for severley damaging credit ratings bondholder trust. Ultimately, Prof. Skeel concludes that bankruptcy would significantly improve on the existing strategies for dealing with a state’s financial collapse.
Many thanks to Professor Skeel for visiting W&L and sharing his paper with the faculty.
In the first installment of the Spring 2012 Faculty Workshop Series, sponsored by the Frances Lewis Law Center, Professor Tara L. Grove, Assistant Professor of Law at William & Mary Law School, came to speak Friday about the draft of her article, The Exceptions Clause as a Structural Safeguard.
The Exceptions Clause of the Constitution, which provides that the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction is subject to “such Exceptions, and … such Regulations as the Congress shall make,” has long been viewed as a threat to the Court’s central constitutional function: establishing definitive and uniform rules of federal law. In the article, Professor Grove argues that the clause has been fundamentally misunderstood. Indeed, she argues that Congress has a strong incentive to use its control over federal jurisdiction to promote the Court’s role in settling disputed federal questions. When the Court’s docket grew unmanageable, Congress used the Exceptions Clause to replace the Court’s mandatory review with discretionary review. Prof. Grove asserts that Congress has used its power to safeguard the Supreme Court’s essential role in the constitutional scheme rather than undermine it.
Many thanks to Professor Grove for visiting W&L and sharing her paper with the faculty.