Annual Nathaniel L. Nathanson Memorial Lecture Series

Since the rise of revealed religion, the relation between civil and religious authority has been a central question. In modernity, religious authority has often been seen in individual terms, as the conscience of the believer. In a constitutional democracy such as ours, how can we deal with the conflict between the aims of public law and the demands of individual conscience, which may require non-compliance or resistance? Galston will explore some of the ways in which this conflict plays out in jurisprudence and public policy.

Post rejects the traditional analogy between academic freedom and individual First Amendment rights. He denies that the university constitutes a simple "marketplace of ideas." He instead argues that the constitutional concept of academic freedom ultimately derives from the constitutional value of democratic competence, which refers to the creation and dissemination of knowledge necessary for the maintenance of democratic self-determination.

Locating America’s educational landmark decision in global contexts calls for tracing the influence of Cold War politics on the decision and identifying its relevance and irrelevance to issues of segregated schooling in other nations. Harvard Law School Dean Martha Minow will present insights from such a study and discuss the promise and limitations of law-led school reform and its relative power over universal human rights norms, local doctrine and politics.

Greenawalt discussed the nature of reasoning about basic moral, political, and constitutional issues, the relevance of relying on religious perspectives in addressing the religion clauses and the defensibility of justifications. He also discussed the legal standards that rely on multiple considerations and the wisdom of judges deferring to the political branches in this domain of constitutional law.

Pulitzer Prize winning author Jack Rakove discusses the currently fashionable “public meaning” theory of constitutional interpretation which suggests that the best way to reconstruct the original meaning of the Constitution is to imagine how a somewhat neutral but informed and literate observer would have read the language of the constitutional text. For more information about this event, go to law.sandiego.edu/nathanson25.