Here is the info, with even more at this link.
2010 Conference of Religiously Affilliated Law Schools
J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University
Room 472
Thursday, March 18, 2010
9:00-9:15 am Introduction
Associate Dean Kif Augustine-Adams, BYU
9:15-10:15 am Plenary Session
H. Reese Hansen, President, Association of American Law Schools and Howard W. Hunter Professor Law, BYU
10:15-10:30 am Break
10:30 am-12:00 pm Panel: The Role of Ministering As Well As Administering in the Law School Community
Scott Cameron, BYU (Chair)
Lindsay P. Watkins, Project Manager, Law School Survey of Student Engagement
Wendy C. Archibald, BYU
12:15-1:30 pm Lunch: Hinckley Alumni Building
Welcome: Dean James Rasband, BYU Law School
1:45-3:15 pm Panel: Sacred Texts Part I: The Role of Sacred Texts and Traditions in Informing Our Understanding and Engagement of Jurisprudence
David Dominguez, BYU (Chair)
John Welch, BYU
Steven Goldberg, Georgetown U.
[Other speaker invited]
3:30-3:45 pm Break
3:45-5:15 pm Panel: Judges, Kings, Prophets, and Lawyers in Biblical and American Perspectives
Samuel Levine, Pepperdine U. (Chair)
Zach Calo, Valparaiso U.: Catholic/Anglican Perspective
David Vlatto, Penn. State U.: Jewish Perspective
Robert Cochran, Pepperdine U.
Mark Graber, U. of Maryland
5:30 pm Box Dinner
5:30 pm Tabernacle Choir Rehearsal in Salt Lake City
6:15 pm Buses depart
8:00 pm Tabernacle Choir Rehearsal
9:45 pm Busses return to Provo
Friday, March 19, 2010
8:15-9:00 am Continental Breakfast, BYU Law School
9:00-10:30 am Plenary Session: Relevant and Reliable Rankings Criteria for Religiously Affiliated Law Schools
David Thomas, BYU
10:30-10:45 am Break
10:45 am-12:15 pm Sacred Texts Part II: Texts, Law and Life
Thomas Folsom, Regent U.: "Disintegrating Norms in Cyberspace: Future Law and the Relevance of Ancient Sacred Texts (Is There a Common Morality for a Global/Tech Era?)"
Collin Mangrum, Creighton: "Religious Text as Authoritative Sources for Legal Reasoning: The Israeli Experience"
Hank Chambers, Richmond: "Biblical Interpretation and Ignoring Text"
12:30-2:00 pm Lunch: Wilkinson Student Center
2:15-4:00 pm Practicing Religion in the Classroom, Court Room, and Marketplace
David Koelsch, U. of Detroit-Mercy: "Promoting Consolation Among Law Students and Attorneys: Incorporating the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola into the Law School Curriculum"
Sherman Cohn, Georgetown U.: "Teaching Jewish Law at Georgetown"
Kristin Gerdy, BYU: "Clients, Empathy, and Compassion: Introducing First-Year Law Students to the ‘Heart’ of Lawyering"
Bill Piatt, St. Mary’s U.: "Catholicism and Constitutional Law: More Than Privacy in the Penumbras"
Rodney Dale Chrisman, Liberty: "Seeking Filthy Lucre: The Historic Christian Teaching on the Goodness of Commercial Activity as the Overarching Purpose of the UCC"
4:00-4:15 pm Break
4:15-5:00 pm Closing Session/Idea Exchange for the Future
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Optional Activity Tour of LDS Humanitarian Services Center Exchange in Salt Lake City
Registration
The cost of the conference is $175.00 per person, which will cover the lunches, dinner and continental breakfast, and the Thursday excursion to Salt Lake City. Guests may attend and participate in the meal and excursion functions for a fee of $75.00. You may register online by clicking here, or you may download a printable PDF, and send it with your check (made out to Brigham Young University Law School) to:
Adrian Selle
Room 405
J. Reuben Clark Law School
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah 84602
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Monday, October 5, 2009
RALS At The AALS!
The Religiously Affiliated Law Schools will be hosting a reception at the AALS Hiring Conference this year. The reception will be held from 7:30 09:00 in the Hoover room, on Thursday, Nov. 5. We hope to see you there!
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
BYU Conference coming together
The 2010 Conference of Religiously Affiliated Law Schools will be at Brigham Young University March 18-19, which is a Thursday/Friday.
The theme will be “Blessing the Lives of Our Students,” and while several panels are still in the planning stages, there will be panels on the Law School Survey of Student Engagement and the role of sacred texts and traditions in our understanding of jurisprudence.
An announcement and a call for papers should be available soon.
The theme will be “Blessing the Lives of Our Students,” and while several panels are still in the planning stages, there will be panels on the Law School Survey of Student Engagement and the role of sacred texts and traditions in our understanding of jurisprudence.
An announcement and a call for papers should be available soon.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Do Rankings Punish Religiously-Affiliated Schools?
It seems possible, given the reputational rankings given some religiously-affiliated schools. See the very good discussion here.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The Charge and Embrace of Discrimination
One thing that is distinctive about religiously-affiliated schools is that we very often discriminate in hiring. Specifically, in diverse ways, we favor members of our faith over those who are not a part of that faith. Within our group, we vary from schools that have almost no religious favoritism in hiring to those who hire only from members of the faith (or those willing to live under its strictures). My own school, Baylor, is probably more towards the restrictive end of this continuum-- our University demands a relatively close inspection of a candidate's faith, and our current law faculty contains no non-Christians.
Critics of this type of discrimination properly point out that it limits the viewpoints a student is exposed to, and may restrict the debate within the faculty.
However, those problems are costs which many institutions are willing to bear in order to retain their denominational identity, foster the views professed by the sponsoring faith, and provide diversity to the larger national discussion on legal issues from a place of moral certainty.
What I wonder at times is how intentional all this is-- that is, are we sure we are getting the benefits that would justify the costs?
Critics of this type of discrimination properly point out that it limits the viewpoints a student is exposed to, and may restrict the debate within the faculty.
However, those problems are costs which many institutions are willing to bear in order to retain their denominational identity, foster the views professed by the sponsoring faith, and provide diversity to the larger national discussion on legal issues from a place of moral certainty.
What I wonder at times is how intentional all this is-- that is, are we sure we are getting the benefits that would justify the costs?
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Throwing Bombs
As I read legal scholarship these days, I see many pieces analyzing doctrines, tracing historical developments, seeking adjustments to parts of rules or laws, and suggesting new "perspectives," but very few that broadly attack a law or practice as fundamentally unjust. We have many exceptional analysts and commentators, but few bomb-throwers, and those that exist often are outside the core of elite institutions.
It could be that we are fortunate enough to live in a nation without unjust laws, but I doubt that many of us would truly agree with that statement. Given that most of us would agree that there are unjust laws, why are we not more focused on attacking them? I suspect that at least two factors dampen the excitement for overarching reform within legal scholarship.
First, we do live in a society where the laws are the product of a democratic process. Thus, if we identify a law as unjust, we are suggesting either a flaw in the process or that the majority of people in our nation are not only wrong about something, but at some level that they are fundamentally, morally wrong. Understandably, we are reluctant to attack our democracy or our fellow citizens.
Second, to call a law unjust requires a position from which to determine justice as a moral position. Legal philosophers discuss this in depth, but generally not in connection to a live issue, while the rest of us are often uncomfortable with the ideas of positivism or natural law, and certainly loath to connect a contemporary debate to either.
It does seem to me that many of the worthwhile challenges to unjust law is coming from those speaking from a position of faith. It could be that this is a particular strength of ours, and one that we should consciously encourage amongst our members, while acknowledging that there will likely be divergent views about which laws are unjust and for what reason.
-- Mark Osler
It could be that we are fortunate enough to live in a nation without unjust laws, but I doubt that many of us would truly agree with that statement. Given that most of us would agree that there are unjust laws, why are we not more focused on attacking them? I suspect that at least two factors dampen the excitement for overarching reform within legal scholarship.
First, we do live in a society where the laws are the product of a democratic process. Thus, if we identify a law as unjust, we are suggesting either a flaw in the process or that the majority of people in our nation are not only wrong about something, but at some level that they are fundamentally, morally wrong. Understandably, we are reluctant to attack our democracy or our fellow citizens.
Second, to call a law unjust requires a position from which to determine justice as a moral position. Legal philosophers discuss this in depth, but generally not in connection to a live issue, while the rest of us are often uncomfortable with the ideas of positivism or natural law, and certainly loath to connect a contemporary debate to either.
It does seem to me that many of the worthwhile challenges to unjust law is coming from those speaking from a position of faith. It could be that this is a particular strength of ours, and one that we should consciously encourage amongst our members, while acknowledging that there will likely be divergent views about which laws are unjust and for what reason.
-- Mark Osler
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Gearing up for AALS
Under the leadership of our own John Garvey of BC, the January AALS meeting sounds great. The theme is "institutional pluralism," and a part of that theme is the range of schools which includes the 49 religiously-affiliated law programs.
There can be little doubt among those of us active in RALS that we offer something different than state or other private schools, and that there is also great diversity even among our own ranks. One feature of our conferences I always find fascinating is the different answers we come to on questions we agree to be important. Those conversations are one good reason to keep our schools and our organization strong, vital, and engaged with the rest of the legal academy.
There can be little doubt among those of us active in RALS that we offer something different than state or other private schools, and that there is also great diversity even among our own ranks. One feature of our conferences I always find fascinating is the different answers we come to on questions we agree to be important. Those conversations are one good reason to keep our schools and our organization strong, vital, and engaged with the rest of the legal academy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
