Thursday, August 15, 2019
Call for Papers – Friday, September 20 Deadline
The Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network
Seeks submissions for the
Law and Society Association Annual Meeting
May 28-31, 2020 in Denver, Colorado
Submission link: https://form.jotform.com/91827795835172
Dear friends and colleagues:
We invite you to submit a paper for a panel to be sponsored by the Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research Network at the 2020 Law and Society Annual Meeting in Denver. The Feminist Legal Theory CRN brings together law and society scholars across a range of fields who are interested in feminist legal theory. Information about the Law and Society meeting is available at https://www.lawandsociety.org/index.html.
We will give preference to individual paper proposals over proposals for panels that are pre-formed. One of the goals of the Feminist Legal Theory CRN is to encourage scholars to engage with the diverse work of others across the academy. Any proposals for a fully-formed panel should address specifically the efforts that the panel organizers have made to ensure diversity among presenters, including race, gender, sexual orientation and gender identity; diversity in the institutions of presenters’ affiliation and/or primary training; diversity among positions in the academy such as senior vs. junior scholars, tenured vs. non-tenured participants, doctrinal vs. non-doctrinal faculty.
This year’s meeting invites us to explore “Rule and Resistance.” We are especially interested in proposals that explore the application of feminist legal theory to this theme, broadly construed. We are also interested in papers that will permit us to collaborate with other CRNs, such as the Critical Research on Race and the Law CRN. We welcome multidisciplinary paper proposals and proposals from scholars from all parts of the world.
Our goal is to stimulate focused discussion of papers on which scholars are currently working rather than to seek fully-formed panels. Thus, while you may submit papers that are closer to publication, we are particularly eager to receive proposals for works-in-progress that are at an earlier stage and will benefit from the discussion that the panels will provide. We strongly encourage applications from junior scholars and graduate students – as well as people who are new to feminist legal theory.
The Planning Committee will assign individual papers to panels of four presenters, based on subject matter. Each paper presentation should run roughly 10 to 15 minutes to allow ample time for discussion. We will also assign a chair, and one or two commentators/discussants for each panel, to provide feedback on the papers and promote discussion.
In addition to traditional panels, we are open to proposals in the other formats that the LSA allows, including Author Meets Reader, Salon, or Roundtable sessions. If you have an idea that you think would work well in one of these formats, please also use the submission form above. Organizers of these types of sessions should address in their proposal the same diversity criteria listed above.
Finally–and new this year–the FLT CRN welcomes submissions for roundtables on how to incorporate feminist principles into both teaching methods (pedagogical strategies as well as classroom practices) and course coverage across subject areas. Sessions could potentially address topics such as: (1) what feminist teaching can look like and (2) how to deal with the unique challenges of teaching in a hostile or indifferent environment to feminism. Preference will be given to proposals that involve materials or demonstrations.
Please also note that LSA rules limit each participant to a single conference appearance as a paper panelist or as a roundtable participant.
As a condition of participating as part of a program sponsored by the CRN, we also ask that you agree to serve as a chair and/or commentator/discussant for another panel or participant. We will of course take into account expertise and topic preferences to the degree possible.
Chairs are responsible for the primary organization of the panel. Chairs will develop a 100 to 250 word description for the session and submit the session proposal to LSA before the November 6 LSA deadline. This will ensure that other participants accepted by the CRN can submit their proposal to LSA, using the panel number assigned by the CRN. The Chair may also serve as the Discussant for the panel, or there may be a separate Discussant. Where possible, we will attempt to assign two Discussants to each paper panel. Discussants read the two to three papers assigned to them and prepare a short commentary to offer feedback and serve as a basis for discussion among the panelist and audience members as well as (to the extent relevant) identify ways that the papers relate to one another.
If you would like to present a paper as part of a CRN panel, please make your submission here https://form.jotform.com/91827795835172. The submission form will ask you to provide:
- A 500 word abstract or summary of your paper;
- Your paper’s title
- Your name and institutional affiliation;
- Number of years you have been in teaching/working as a grad student; and
- A list of your areas of interest and expertise within feminist legal theory.
Please note that for Author Meets Reader, Salon, or Roundtable sessions, organizers should provide a 500-word summary of the topic and the contributions they expect the proposed participants to make.
If you need to contact the CRN Planning Committee, please do so via firstname.lastname@example.org. (Please do not send submissions to individual committee members.)
Please submit all proposals by Friday, September 20, 2019. Late proposals may not be considered for inclusion. This schedule will permit us to organize panels and submit them prior to the LSA’s deadline of November 6. In the past, we have accommodated as many panelists as possible, but have been unable to accept all proposals. If we are unable to accept your proposal for the CRN, we will notify you by early November so that you can submit an independent proposal to LSA.
We hope you’ll join us in Denver to share and discuss the scholarship in which we are all engaged and connect with others doing work on feminist legal theory.
Finally, please make sure to sign up for the Feminist Legal Theory Collaborative Research page on TWEN, as that is our primary platform for communication about the CRN’s activities. If your primary academic affiliation is outside a U.S.-based law school, please contact Bridget Crawford (email@example.com), and she will arrange for you to have access to TWEN, if you provide your institutional email account. The CRN welcomes participants from all parts of the academy.
2020 LSA Feminist Legal Theory CRN Planning Committee
Naomi Cahn (co-chair)
Bridget Crawford (co-chair)
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
Center for Applied Feminism, Univ. of Baltimore, Video Recordings from Applied Feminism and #MeToo (April 2019)
The center co-sponsored with the UB Law Review the 11th Feminist Legal Theory Conference: Applied Feminism and #MeToo. The conference mixed activism and scholarship focusing on sexual harassment and gender-based violence law. Sixteen scholars and practitioners presented papers concerning a wide array of legal topics, from sexual assaults during police searches to the credibility of survivors in courtrooms.
The keynote speaker was Debra Katz, the lawyer who represented Christine Blasey Ford during the confirmation hearings for now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh. In addition, hotel workers from a union presented about being sexually harassed and their campaign to end such treatment in hotels. Center members continued to work with UB law students and the Reproductive Justice Inside coalition to create model policies for reproductive health care and menstrual hygiene product access for Maryland correctional facilities.
The Center on Applied Feminism at the University of Baltimore School of Law seeks paper proposals for the Twelfth Feminist Legal Theory Conference. We hope you will join us for this exciting conference on April 2 and 3, 2020. The theme is Privacy. As always, the conference focuses on the intersection of gender and race, class, gender identity, ability, and other personal identities. We are excited that Dr. Leana Wen, President and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, has agreed to serve as our Keynote.
We are at a critical time for a broad range of privacy issues. State level abortion bans have put a spotlight on the importance of decisional privacy to women’s equality. Across America, advocates are fighting for reproductive justice and strategizing to preserve long-settled rights. At the same time, our informational privacy is increasingly precarious. Data brokers, app designers, and social media platforms are gathering and selling personal data in highly gendered ways. As a result, women have been targeted with predatory marketing, intentionally excluded from job opportunities, and subject to menstrual tracking by marketers and employers. In online spaces, women have been objectified, cyber-stalked, and subject to revenge porn. With regard to physical privacy, the structural intersectionality of over-policing and mass incarceration impacts women of color and other women. And while a man’s home may be his castle, low-income women are expected to allow government agents into their homes – and to turn over reams of other personal information -- as a condition of receiving state support. In addition, families of all forms are navigating the space of constitutionally-protected family privacy in relation to legal parentage, marriage and cohabitation, and child welfare systems.
We seek submissions of papers that focus on the topic of Applied Feminism and Privacy. We will interrogate multiple aspects of privacy, including its physical, decisional, informational, and family dimensions. This conference aims to explore the following questions: Is privacy dead, as often claimed? If so, what does this mean for women? How can privacy reinforce or challenge existing inequalities? How has feminist legal theory wrestled with privacy and what lessons can we draw from past debates? What advocacy will best advance privacy protections that benefit women? How do emerging forms of surveillance impact women? Can intersectional perspectives on privacy lead to greater justice? Who defines the “right to privacy” and what do those understandings mean for women? How is privacy related to other values, such as autonomy, anti-subordination, vulnerability, justice, and equality?
We welcome proposals that consider these questions and any other related questions from a variety of substantive disciplines and perspectives. The Center’s conference will serve as a forum for scholars, practitioners, and activists to share ideas about applied feminism, focusing on connections between theory and practice to effectuate social change. The conference will be open to the public.
To submit a paper proposal, by Friday, November 1, 2019, please complete this form and include your 500 word abstract: https://forms.gle/k4EPNLaYmEvo4KHUA
We will notify presenters of selected papers by early December. About half the presenter slots will be reserved for authors who commit to publishing in the annual symposium volume of the University of Baltimore Law Review, our co-sponsor for this conference. Thus, the form requests that you indicate if you are interested in publishing in the University of Baltimore Law Review's symposium issue. Authors who are interested in publishing in the Law Review will be strongly considered for publication. The decision about publication rests solely with the Law Review editors, who will communicate separately with the authors. For all presenters, working drafts of papers will be due no later than March 20, 2020. Presenters are responsible for their own travel costs; the conference will provide a discounted hotel rate as well as meals.
We look forward to your submissions. If you have further questions, please contact Prof. Margaret Johnson at firstname.lastname@example.org. For additional information about the conference, please visit law.ubalt.edu/caf.
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Register Now Center for Constitutional Law Conference on the 19th Amendment at 100: From the Vote to Gender Equality
Register now for the upcoming conference sponsored by the Center for Constitutional Law at Akron: The 19th Amendment at 100: From the Vote to Gender Equality
The conference examines both historic and legal contexts, exploring the advocacy for the 19th Amendment as well as residual legal problems with voting and women's public role continuing up to present day. It explores issues of history, politics, voting, and public participation and the way in which gender was implicated in all.
Check out the terrific list of speakers here featuring law scholars and historians.
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
The AALS Section on Legal History is pleased to announce a call for papers for its section program, which will be held during the 2020 AALS Annual Meeting in Washington, DC. The program is entitled “A Century of Women’s Suffrage.”
2020 marks one hundred years since the 19th Amendment was ratified, ushering in the last century of women’s suffrage in the United States. This program will bring together scholars writing on the history of women’s suffrage, broadly construed. Submissions should relate to any aspect of women’s suffrage, including exploring the suffrage movement that culminated in the 19th Amendment, addressing how the 19th Amendment affected political parties or politics in the subsequent century, and comparing the women’s suffrage movement to analogous social movements.
Eligibility and Submission Requirements: This Call for Papers is open to all faculty members from AALS member schools. Submissions should not exceed 30,000 words, including footnotes. You may submit a CV as well, but are not required to do so.
Submission Process: To be considered for participation as a panelist, please email a copy of your submission to Evan Zoldan at email@example.com by July 31, 2019. Participants selected by the Legal History section executive committee will be notified by September 1, 2019.
Questions: If you have any questions about the panel, please contact Evan Zoldan at firstname.lastname@example.org. A link to the CFP can be found on the AALS website, here: https://am.aals.org/proposals/section-calls-for-papers/
Tuesday, June 11, 2019
A message from the organizers of the Feminist Legal Theory Critical Research Network:
Dear Feminist Legal Theory CRN members,
First, thank you for a fabulous annual meeting! Our twenty-two panels were an enormous success, generating tremendous interest and engagement. The submission cycle for 2020 will come before we know it, so we need volunteers to plan the CRN panels for the LSA annual meeting in Denver in 2020. If you are interested in helping to plan next year’s meeting, please sign up here by Friday, June 7th.
Second, we write to follow up on the evening of action. As you know, we converted the CRN’s social event into a brainstorming session to explore what we can do – as CRN members – in our scholarship, teaching, and advocacy to further gender equality generally and especially in light of the Supreme Court’s current make-up. There was a lot of energy and enthusiasm, and we generated many terrific ideas (see below) for each track: scholarship, teaching, and advocacy. Our next step is that we need volunteers to (1) play a leadership role for each track, and (2) serve on the committee for each track. Our goal is for each committee to develop an action plan for achieving some of the ideas we identified. Each committee will work separately and then present the action plan at a gathering that will coincide with the AALS annual meeting, in D.C. in January. If you are interested in either leading or participating in these efforts, please use this sign-up sheet and respond by Friday, June 7th.
Finally, Susan Hazeldean volunteered (thank you, Susan!) to reactivate our TWEN site. We will use this for all CRN communications from now on. More information to come soon.
Tuesday, April 30, 2019
Registration Open: Second Annual Women’s Leadership in Academia Conference: July 18-19, 2019
Registration is open for the second annual conference on Women’s Leadership in Academia, to be held at UVA Law School on July 18-19, 2019. The conference is an event of the Women’s Leadership Initiative, which was developed with the goal of advancing women professors, librarians and clinicians in leadership positions in the legal academy. Conference programming is focused on building skills and providing tools and information that are directly applicable to women aspiring to be leaders in legal education. The conference will address the unique perspectives and challenges of women and provide programming that will be useful to developing leaders. Along with panels and workshops, the conference will feature CV review and advising with recruiters. Travel scholarships are available. Early bird registration is open through May 31, and regular registration continues until the conference reaches full capacity. More information is available here. For questions, please contact Leslie Kendrick at email@example.com.
Call for Panel Proposals
We are currently accepting proposals for panels on issues relating to women in legal academia for the second annual Women’s Leadership in Academia Conference, to be held at UVA Law School on July 18-19, 2019. The conference will address the unique perspectives and challenges of women and provide programming that will be useful to developing leaders. Conference programming is focused on building skills and providing tools and information that are directly applicable to women aspiring to be leaders in legal education. Proposals should include a panel title, description, and proposed panelists. Selected panels will be notified by May 15, and panelists’ conference registration and travel costs will be covered. More information on the conference, including a link to provide panel proposals, is available here. Proposals are due by May 1, 2019. For questions, please contact Leslie Kendrick at firstname.lastname@example.org
Tuesday, March 5, 2019
By Women. For Women.
This conference provides career guidance and professional development growth to women attorneys and other professionals at all stages of their careers and brings together powerful decisionmakers from Massachusetts, Alaska, Canada, California, Illinois, New York, Washington, DC, and beyond.
We emphasize practical, useful information to take away from the full day's programming to further develop your career.
- Top-notch panels, breakout sessions and speed mentoring with high level practitioners.
- Learn how to position yourself to take the leap into a power role and be inspired by our expert panelists as they touch on topics such as civil rights, pay equity, economic and social justice, and best practices for advocacy.
- Network, network, network – whether you want to advance where you are or move to a new opportunity, this is a great space to network for that next step
CEO, Champion Women
Advocacy for Girls and Women in Sports
Nancy Hogshead-Makar is an Olympic champion, a civil rights lawyer, and CEO of Champion Women, a non-profit providing legal advocacy for girls and women in sports. Focus areas include equal play, such as traditional Title IX compliance in athletic departments, sexual harassment, abuse and assault, as well as employment, pregnancy and LGBT discrimination within sport.
In December, the American Bar Association (ABA) included Nancy Hogshead-Makar in its ABA Lawyers Who Inspired Us in 2018 list.
FEATURED GUESTS INCLUDE:
Debra S. Katz
Partner, Katz, Marshall & Banks
Kristen M. Gibbons Feden
Associate, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young
Kristen Gibbons Feden is an associate in the Philadelphia office of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, where she concentrates her practice on general and complex commercial litigation, employment discrimination, SEC enforcement, internal investigations, Title IX compliance and corporate compliance. Prior to joining Stradley Ronon, Kristen was Assistant District Attorney in the Trials Division of the Montgomery County District Attorney’s Office. Her most notable case was Commonwealth v. William H. Cosby, where she played a critical role in the first trial, which resulted in a hung jury, and the second trial where a conviction was attained. In September 2018, Kristen was honored with a Leadership Award by the Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC). Past VRLC Leadership Awardees include: Gloria Steinem, Professor Anita Hill, Congresswoman-elect Ayanna Pressley, MA Attorney General Martha Coakley and actress and activist Ashley Judd.
Monday, February 18, 2019
11th Feminist Legal Theory Conference: Applied Feminism and #MeToo, University of Baltimore School of Law
We are happy to announce the Eleventh Feminist Legal Theory Conference sponsored by The University of Baltimore School of Law's Center on Applied Feminism and The University of Baltimore Law Review. The theme of this year's conference is Applied Feminism and #MeToo and it will be held at the University of Baltimore School of Law in Baltimore, MD, on April 11 and 12, 2019. The conference will focus on the #MeToo social movement, and its impact and limitations nationally and internationally. The conference will examine emerging proposals to change institutions where gender-based harassment and assault occur, are investigated, or are adjudicated, such as workplaces, universities, and courts. The conference will also explore and offer reforms regarding critical issues such as credibility discounting, survivor trauma, anger, contrition, restorative approaches for accountability, and the lack of visibility for all persons subjected to gender-based harassment and assault, such as those who are of color, immigrant, young, involved in the criminal justice system, and male or a gender minority.
Conference Opening Remarks
Margaret E. Johnson, Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center on
Applied Feminism, University of Baltimore School of Law
9:15-10:45 a.m. Panel I: Exploring Comparative Perspectives on #MeToo
Moderator: Nienke Grossman, Professor of Law, University of Baltimore
School of Law
Indigenizing The #Me Too Campaign: A South African Perspective ,
Penelope Andrews, Sabbatical Scholar, Columbia Law School,
Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law, New York Law School
#MeToo and the Pursuit of Women’s International Human Rights,
Benedetta Faedi Duramy, Professor of Law & Associate Dean for Faculty
Scholarship, Golden Gate University School of Law
Recognizing Rage Surrounding the #MeToo Movement and Differing
Approaches to Address It, Johanna Gusman, Visiting Research
Scholar, Georgetown University Legal Center
Misdirection and Misogyny: Political Deployment of "Women's
Issues" to Justify Nativist Goals, Dina Francesca Haynes,
Professor of Law, New England Law
11-12:30 p.m. Panel II: Interrogating Intersectional Identities of #MeToo
Moderator: Elizabeth Keyes, Associate Professor of Law, University of
Baltimore School of Law
Immigrant Women in the Shadow of the #MeToo Movement, Nicole
Hallett, Assistant Clinical Professor of Law, University at Buffalo School
There Are No Outsiders Here: Rethinking Intersectionality as
Hegemonic Discourse in the Age of #MeToo, Teri McMurtry-Chubb,
Professor of Law, Mercer University Law School
Applying Lessons from #MeToo to Abusive Policing, Josephine Ross,
Professor of Law, University School of Law
#WhoAmI? Harm & Remedy for Youth of the #MeToo Era,
Charisa Smith, Associate Professor, City University of New York
School of Law
12:30-2:00 p.m. Lunch Program (12th Floor)
Keynote Speaker: Debra Katz, Founding Partner, Katz, Marshall &
2-3:30 p.m. Panel III: Tackling #MeToo Inside and Outside the Courtroom
Moderator: Shanta Trivedi, Clinical Teaching Fellow, University of Baltimore
School of Law
Third Generation Discrimination Part II: An Empirical Analysis of
Judicial Decision Making, Catherine Dunham, Professor of Law, Elon
University School of Law and Chris Leupold, Associate Professor of
Psychology and Faculty Fellow for Law and Leadership, Elon University
School of Law
#MeToo: The Path from Credibility Discounting to Systemic Change,
Deborah Epstein, Professor of Law and Co-Director, Domestic Violence
Clinic, Georgetown University Law Center
#MeToo, Sexual Harassment and Accountability: Considering the Role
of Restorative Approaches, Julie Goldscheid, Professor of Law,
CUNY Law School
Restorative Justice through Administrative Law: Male Military Sexual
Assault and the Veterans Administration, Elizabeth Tarloski, Staff
Attorney/Adjunct Professor, William and Mary Law School-Lewis B. Puller Jr.,
Veterans Benefits Clinic
3:45 -5:15 p.m. Panel IV: Exploring #MeToo Relational Dynamics in the Workplace
Moderator: Zina Makar, Clinical Teaching Fellow, University of Baltimore
School of Law
Sorry Not Sorry, Jamie Abrams, Associate Professor, University of
Louisville Brandeis School of Law
Peer Retaliation in the Post #MeToo Era, Deborah Brake, Professor of
Law and Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, University
of Pittsburgh School of Law
#SororityToo: Breaking the Code of Silence about Relationship
Violence in Collegiate Greek Life, Tanya Cooper, Director, Restoration
and Justice Clinic; Assistant Clinical Professor of Law, Pepperdine
University School of Law
Rethinking Institutional Response to Sexual Harassment in the Wake
of #MeToo, Joanna Grossman, Ellen K. Solender Endowed Chair in
Women and Law & Professor of Law, SMU Dedman School of Law
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
The Equal Rights Amendment is making a comeback.
Nearly a century since the ERA was first introduced in Congress, and four decades since its unsuccessful ratification campaign, there is revived interest in enshrining the principle of gender equality in our Constitution.
Over the past two years, the Nevada and Illinois state legislatures ratified the ERA by comfortable margins, breathing new life into the proposed amendment. Advocates now believe that achieving the necessary 38 state ratifications is within reach.
What’s in store for the ERA? And how might it advance the fight for gender equality in the U.S. today? These questions are being newly debated across the country—and in a day-long event organized by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law last November, an array of politicians, scholars, legal advocates and activists examined the implications of this modern movement for legal change.***
At the conference, panelists recalled [Martha] Griffith’s tireless efforts at time of extraordinary social change. Cary Franklin, professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, noted that her big push occurred against the backdrop of the Women’s Strike for Equality—“the biggest demonstration for women’s rights since the women’s suffrage movement… [in which] thousands of women across the country organized in cities and made a number of demands about women’s equal citizenship, including education, employment, reproductive rights and child care.”***
NYU School of Law Professor Melissa Murray put it aptly, explaining that gender equality has become “part of the conversations people are having around kitchen tables and with friends about no longer being willing to accept what has been the status quo for so long.” With Arizona, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Virginia all vying to be the lucky 38th state, it’s a good time for the entire nation to reflect on what the long-overdue ratification of the ERA can and should mean for gender equality in the U.S. in the 21st century.
Thomas Jefferson School of Law, 19th Women and the Law Conference: The Way Forward: Gender, LGBTQIA Rights, and Religious Liberties, Feb. 1, 2019
Thomas Jefferson School of Law’s 19 th Annual Women and the Law Conference, The Way Forward: Gender, LGBTQIA Rights, and Religious Liberties, will be held on Friday, February 1, 2019 at Thomas Jefferson School of Law. This conference brings together leading experts and practitioners to discuss critical federal and state legislative, executive, and judicial developments affecting women, the LGBTQIA community, and people concerned about religious liberties. At a time when public discourse about these issues seems irreconcilably polarized, this event will focus on means to resolve these opposing views.
Former EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum will deliver the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lecture. Before her appointment, Commissioner Feldblum was a law professor at Georgetown University Law Center. Feldblum continues in a long line of illustrious speakers who have been honored as the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lecturer, a lecture series Justice Ginsburg generously established for Thomas Jefferson School of Law in 2003.
Other speakers include: Alan Brownstein, Emeritus Professor of Law at UC Davis School of Law; Julie Greenberg, Emeritus Professor of Law at Thomas Jefferson School of Law; Pamuela Halliwell, therapist at the San Diego LGBT Community Center; Shannon Minter, Legal Director at the National Center for Lesbian Rights; Jocelyn Samuels, Executive Director at the Williams Center UCLA School of Law; Maimon Schwarzchild, Law Professor at the University of San Diego School of Law; and Mattheus Stephens, Founding Partner of the Progressive Law Group.
Thursday, January 3, 2019
Thursday, January 3
10:30-12:15 WILE ("Women in Legal Education" Section), co-Sponsoring with the Section on Agricultural and Food Law: Worker Justice in the Food System.
One in six jobs in the U.S. is in the food supply chain, from restaurants, to grocery stores, to food processing, and production. These jobs offer low wages, little job security, and few benefits. In addition, they often include dangerous working conditions. And yet, food system workers are under protected by minimum wage and hour laws, workplace safety laws, and others. This panel will focus on three key issues facing food chain laborers today: sexual harassment, immigration restrictions and enforcement, and occupational health hazards.
Speaker: Jennifer M. Chacon, University of California, Irvine School of Law
Speaker: Joan Flocks, University of Florida Fredric G. Levin College of Law
Speaker: Tanya Kateri Hernandez, Fordham University School of Law
10:30-12:15pm Hot Topics: Narratives about Sexual Harassment & Sexual Violence: #MeToo, the Kavanaugh Allegations & Pending Changes to Title IX Enforcement
Media coverage of the #MeToo movement and allegations that Justice Kavanaugh committed sexual assault fueled public discourse about sexual harassment and sexual violence throughout the past year. Two sets of competing narratives emerged about both the nature of sexual harassment and sexual violence and the appropriate institutional and public responses to disclosures and allegations. One set of narratives focused on survivors’ experiences of trauma, barriers to accessing resources, and inadequate responses following disclosures. The other set of narratives centered on individuals accused of committing sexual harassment or sexual violence, their identification as victims of false allegations, and claims of inadequate due process protections. In this presentation, scholars use the context of campus sexual misconduct and the proposed changes to Title IX guidance to address the wide range of narratives impacting sexual harassment and sexual violence law and policy.
The Section on Civil Rights is co-sponsoring the session, and more information can be found at: https://memberaccess.aals.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?webcode=SesDetails&ses_key=97EB8580-018C-44C4-AD0E-B6D2F72B560F.
1:30 pm - 3:15 pm AALS Discussion Group The Future of Sexual Harassment
This discussion group brings together scholars working on various dimensions of sexual harassment law at work and on campus. To ground the discussion, participants are encouraged to read and respond to the “Open Statement on Sexual Harassment” by Vicki Schultz, recently published in the Stanford Law Review at www.stanfordlawreview.org/metoo-symposium. The ensuing discussion will center on questions including: What is sexual harassment? What causes it? What makes a theory of harassment better or worse? Does harassment differ at work and on campus (and elsewhere), or by race, ethnicity, age, class, sexual orientation, gender non-conformity, or other factors? What can be done, in the law or elsewhere, to prevent and address harassment? How has activism and the law helped or hindered progress, whether historically and today? What are the dangers to be avoided in the future?
Discussion Group Participant: Rachel Arnow-Richman, University of Denver Sturm College of Law
1:30 pm - 3:15 pm American Bar Foundation Program, Women Trailblazers in the Law Oral History Project
The Women Trailblazers Project (WTP) oral history collection is a rich new trove of research materials, now readily accessible to legal academicians, historians and other scholars. The WTP, a collaborative research project of the American Bar Association and the American Bar Foundation, has taken comprehensive, full-life oral histories of over a hundred leading women pioneers in the legal profession nationwide. These senior women lawyers, judges and law professors were chosen for their exceptional career achievements and their contributions to opening opportunities for other women. They entered a male-dominated profession, graduating from law schools in the years ranging from the 1940s to the 1970s, and often faced blatant sex discrimination and a variety of other challenges. The Robert Crown Law Library at Stanford University has created a new website dedicated to displaying the WTP collection of oral histories and related materials.
Speaker: Barbara A. Babcock, Stanford Law School
6:00 pm - 7:30 pm Women in Academic Leadership in Reception, Hosted by the University of Georgia School of Law
Friday, January 4
8:30 am - 10:15 am AALS Hot Topic Program, Religious Exemptions and Harm to Third Parties
Should the government be able to provide religious exemptions when they result in harm to third-parties? This question is particularly weighty at this moment in American history when religious exemptions have perhaps never been more controversial. In light of recent Supreme Court cases like Hobby Lobby and Masterpiece Cakeshop, some scholars have advanced new theories that would place strict limits on government’s ability to grant religious exemptions that result in harm (or externalities) to third parties who do not benefit from that religious practice. This program will explore the historical, theoretical, normative, and doctrinal arguments for and against a rule that would prohibit religious exemptions that result in more than de minimis harm to identifiable third parties.
8:30-10:15 Building Bridges with Shared Experiences: The Women in Legal Education Oral History Project. Business meeting will be held at the end of the session.
For the past four to five years, a small group of Women in Legal Education Section Members, led by Professor Marie Failinger (Mitchell Hamline School of Law), have been recording oral histories of the women in the legal academy. The Oral History Project’s goal is to gather the stories of as many women in the academy as possible to develop a robust library of histories that can be used for research, study, or enjoyment. More than 40 women have been interviewed as of January 2018. In this session, panelists will explain the Oral History Project and share thoughts, reactions, and experiences, as we show clips from the Oral History Project about decisions that led women into the legal academy, often at a time where there were few women on law faculties.
9:00am to 12:15pm AALS Socioeconomics Panel, co-sponsored by WILE Section, Gender, Race and Competition in the New Economy
Anti-discrimination law took hold during an era in which “good jobs” involved “narrow portals of entry” into secure career ladders. The predominant economic theory of discrimination at the time suggested that different treatment involved employment and consumer “tastes” or dislike of other groups. Today’s economy has dismantled the secure employment and predictable career ladders of mid-century America. In the process, inequality has grown, and the dominance of white (and in some cases Asian) men has increased in the upper reaches of the economy. Indeed, while the gendered wage gap has narrowed overall, the gap has increased for college graduates since the early nineties. This panel will consider how to understand the redefinition of “good jobs” in a networked economy, the new remade terms of competition among employees, and the implications for gender and racial diversity.
The socioeconomics section will start at 9 with a brief intro. We will get underway at 9:15 and run until 12:15, with two panels and a break in between..
The first panel will run from 9:15 to 10:40. That session will focus more on the corporate side of the topic and will address proposals for employee ownership, the importance of big data, and the relationship between diversity and corporate governance. The panelists will be: Lisa Fairfax, Josephine Nelson, Frank Pasquale, and Steve Ramirez.
The second panel will address the relationships between the corporate developments and employment discrimination law and the question of whether employment discrimination is -- or should be -- designed to deal with these developments. This panel will begin at 10:50 and run until 12:15. The panelists will be: Naomi Cahn, June Carbone, Jessica Clarke, and Mike Selmi.
10:30 am - 12:15 pm AALS Discussion Group, Building Bridges Across Curricular and Status Lines: Gender Inequity throughout the Legal Academy
The goal of the program is to highlight persistent issues of gender inequity in the legal academy that disadvantage all women faculty and students, particularly those of color. In keeping with the conference theme of Building Bridges, panelists are representative of various ABA-categorized faculty, including traditional tenured faculty employed under ABA Standard 405(b), clinical faculty employed under ABA Standard (405(c)), and legal writing faculty subject to ABA Standard 405(d), as well as faculty holding administrative positions. Discussion participants hope to share common experiences and begin a conversation that will continue well beyond the Annual Meeting. Planned areas for discussion include gender inequities inherent in legal scholarship, institutional labor and leadership, perceptions and expectations applicable to female faculty, and hierarchies related to security of position.
Discussion Group Participant: Sahar Aziz, Rutgers Law School
10:30 am - 12:15 pm Criminal Justice, Rape and Sexual Assault in the Era of #MeToo
In 2015, the American Law Institute (ALI) sought to redefine the Model Penal Code’s definition of rape. To date, ALI’s membership has failed to reach consensus. They are not alone in struggling to define the crime of rape. State and federal actors have struggled with questions of how to define rape and how (or even whether) to construct processes around the crime. This panel considers these efforts in the era of the #MeToo movement, which has highlighted the prevalence of workplace sexual harassment, sexual assault, and attitudes that condone and promulgate this behavior. While not all of the behavior #MeToo addresses falls within proposed definitions of rape, the larger social norms the movement challenges nonetheless influence how criminal law defines the crime of rape. This panel will consider how #MeToo has changed the questions that legislators, police officers, practitioners, and scholars ask when considering the crime of rape.
Speaker: Bennett Capers, Brooklyn Law School
Moderator: Jenny E. Carroll, Hugh F. Culverhouse Jr. School of Law at The University of Alabama
Speaker: Erin Collins, The University of Richmond School of Law
Speaker: Cynthia M. Godsoe, Brooklyn Law School
12:15-1:30 Women in Legal Education Luncheon and Presentation of the 2019 Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lifetime Achievement Award to Chancellor Phoebe Haddon. This is a ticketed event; please purchase your ticket in advance.
1:30-3:15 Hot Topic Program: Civil Rights in the Aftermath of the Kavanaugh Hearings and Confirmation.
The Senate Judiciary Committee’s September 27, 2018 hearing concerning Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's allegations that U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh committed assault upon her person proved a watershed political and jurisprudential moment. We have now learned of Justice Kavanaugh’s positions on reproductive freedoms, immigrant rights, presidential power, and female testimonial credibility, which may well transform the protections afforded by the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses and the Civil Rights Act. Furthermore, his performance at the September 27 hearing triggers issues about judicial temperament, ethics, and even the judge’s role as a creator of legal and social truth.
In this Hot Topic Panel, legal scholars will address the ways in which Justice Kavanaugh’s nomination, hearings, and confirmation impact a wide variety of legal domains, including sexual harassment and assault laws, workplace equality, policing, substantive and criminal law, administrative law, the field of judicial ethics, and the standards of proof appropriate for criminal, legal, and political processes. We will also engage the ways in which Justice Kavanaugh’s role in today's political and legal climate intersects with jurisprudence, such as critical legal feminism and the moral theory of epistemic injustice.
1:30-3:15 Co-Sponsoring with the Section on Aging and the Law: The Legal Consequences of Living a Long Life: The Differential Impact on Marginalized Communities.
Thanks to advances in healthcare, people are living longer. Longevity has legal consequences. People can outlive their family, friends, and finances. Longevity has differing impacts on women, people of color, low-income people, and LGBT individuals. Statistically, women make less money than men and they live longer than men. People of color are less financially secure than most Americans. In the United States, approximately 80 percent of long-term care for older people is provided by family members, such as spouses, children, and other relatives. This places an undue financial burden on families and on low-income persons. LGBT individuals may face conscious and unconscious discrimination when seeking long-term care and other assistance, and they have had historically formed different family structures. This panel will explore the intersection of the legal system and longevity, examining systems that are in place or should be in place to help people plan for living longer.
Speaker: Ms. Donohon Abdugafurova, Emory University Islamic Civilizations Studies
Saturday, January 5
10:30 am - 12:15 pm AALS Program, #MeToo - The Courts, The Academy and Law Firms
In the wake of the #MeToo movement, courts, law firms, and the academy are taking a serious look at how they address workplace conduct, including bullying and sexual harassment. Law firms are improving their practices for addressing the complex issues surrounding harassment. The federal judiciary is revising its ethics codes, stepping up training, and revamping its procedures for investigating complaints. Law schools are engaging with their students on this issue like never before. The key challenges remain the significant power disparities and the chilling effect of reporting. Law schools are in a unique position to serve as a bridge between students and the greater legal community to help reduce these risks. This panel will discuss practical and novel ways that law schools can partner with the courts and the legal community to address these issues. This discussion will also include the important voice of someone who has experienced sexual harassment.
Speaker: Ms. Hilarie Bass, American Bar Association
1:30-3:15 Building Bridges: WiLE Networking, Mentoring, and Discussion.
This is a reboot of our Speed Mentoring session. This session will give us an opportunity to have focused discussion as well as more informal discussion about topics that impact all of us and our students and colleagues. The primary discussion topics grew out of the discussion on our Section's Listserv this past fall in the wake of the Kavanaugh hearings. We have four primary goals for this session:
- To address the meaning of the hearings for session participants in their roles as legal academics, lawyers, citizens, and for some, survivors of harassment or assault;
- To reveal challenges the participants faced in occupying those roles and charting a path forward;
- To mentor one another by sharing strategies that enabled the participants to cope with the challenges posed; and
- To provide a forum to network and form alliances in the wake of an event in American political history, which galvanized the country and the legal academy.
Sunday, January 6
8:30 am - 10:15 am Evidence, Problems of Proof: #MeToo and 'Who Me?'
The #MeToo movement has galvanized women and women's groups to call out, respond to, and challenge pervasive sexual harassment in workplaces as varied as Uber, Hollywood, and Congress. Charges, as well as civil lawsuits are being filed. But what will happen if and when these cases go to trial? Sexual harassment cases are notoriously "he said, she said," situations subject to the interpretations of the "reasonable" or "objective" person, and social standards and mores about what does and does not cross the line. Recent backlash against what constitutes harassment blurs the lines between actionable wrongs, poor judgment, and bad manners. This panel will examine the evidentiary basis for sexual harassment claims, the problems of proof with credibility issues, the evidentiary standards of civil and criminal cases, and the challenges and opportunities for litigants in the courtroom.
Speaker: Mr. Charles Gibbs, McMonagle Perri McHugh Mischak Davis
Monday, June 11, 2018
The University of Georgia School of Law and the Women’s Leadership in Academia initiative is proud to announce that our 2018 summer conference is now open for registration!
Please visit the conference website at http://www.law.uga.edu/womens-leadership-academia-conference to see the schedule, read about supplemental events such as a CV review opportunity and an optional book club, and register to attend! The conference website also has information about travel and available hotel blocks.
The Women’s Leadership in Academia Conference will be held July 19-20, 2018 at the University of Georgia’s School of Law in beautiful Athens, GA. This conference provides substantive leadership programming aimed at advancing women law professors, law librarians, and clinicians in leadership positions in the academy.
Please circulate this announcement widely to your friends and colleagues interested in advancing women in legal education. We hope you will be able to join us!
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Yale School of Architecture, April 6-7, Noncompliant Bodies: Social Equity and Public Space
The discipline of architecture tends to overlook the needs of people who fall outside of white, male, heterosexual, able-bodied norms. This symposium, convened by Joel Sanders and Susan Stryker, will assemble a cross-disciplinary group of designers and scholars to explore the relationship between architecture and the demands for social justice voiced by people who have been marginalized and oppressed on the basis of race, gender and disability. The symposium will examine how designers working in collaboration with experts from related disciplines transform one of three architectural types: restrooms, museums, and urban streets. Our objective will be to propose alternative futures that rethink the relationship between bodies and built environments in ways that better serve the goals of social equity.
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
#MeToo in the Legal Profession
Anita Hill testifying at the confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas was one of the events that shaped my life as a lawyer, a feminist, and a human being. As the country watched this intelligent, competent black woman give her testimony, I saw what it meant to speak truth to power. I understood that power would not pin laurels on you for bravery, but would instead denigrate you and spit on you and tell you to your face that your experience was a lie. I learned that action requires much more than bravery, it requires sacrifice.
I also understood, when Clarence Thomas responded that the proceedings had descended into a high-tech lynching just how heavy weight of intersectional oppression is, and how it is always deployed in the service of protecting power. What white supremacy cannot accomplish, patriarchy will.
At that time, as a young waitress, I had endured my own ration of sexual harassment. But it wasn’t until much later, until I graduated from law school and started to make my way as a young lawyer and experienced a few very sketchy, borderline moments that I think I grasped the depths of what Anita Hill was up against.
Lawyers expect our profession to provide us with a kind of shield. We are powerful, privileged people, even if we are also female or gay or a person of color or all or none of the above. Our identity as a member of the bar provides us with the ability move freely in the halls of power….until we are harassed by someone even more powerful.
The harassers within the legal profession are among the most powerful people on the planet—bar none. When you’re harassed as a lawyer, it’s often by a judge, a legislator, the partner of your firm, the CEO of the company or the big client. A person with unparalleled resources, cultural capital to burn, and ability to use the law as both a shield and a cudgel against you.
We operate in a profession where confidentiality and discretion are paramount, refusing assignments is difficult, and our reputations are our currency. Harassers use and abuse the ethical and social conventions of our profession to prevent victims from speaking out and speaking up. The result? Persistent gender-based inequality among lawyers that seems to have no discernable cause.
Much of the conversation around #MeToo starts to bleed—quite rightly in some cases—into conversation about crimes, about assault, and about a culture of violence. But sexual harassment is also fundamentally an economic issue, one that warps our profession. The cost is not just to the victims, who must figure out how to earn a living, despite the hostile environment they’re operating in. The cost is to all of us. How many of us have not applied for a job, or turned down a plum assignment because taking it would have put us into close contact with someone who either the whisper network or gut instinct said would not be safe? Avoiding sexual harassment shapes our choices, delimiting our options. The language of choice (“You chose to turn down the assignment”; “You choose the less prestigious clerkship”) masks a sick, systemic tolerance for discriminatory behavior. It’s not a leak in the pipeline, it’s the gaping hole.
The #MeToo moment is an opportunity for change, not just in the general law, but in lawyers. There are specific and concrete steps that we can take now to make our workplaces exactly that—places where we work. Where we represent our clients, or draft legislation, or decide cases. Not places where we have to think about our basic safety and security.
In February, a group of us came together to discuss concrete steps for change at #MeToo: Preventing Sexual Harassment in the Legal Workplace (February 19, 2018, American University Washington College of Law), sponsored by the Women and the Law Program at AU. I was inspired by these women and daunted by the amount of work to be done, starting with:
- Llezlie Green Coleman’s call to rethink the use of non-disclosure, confidentiality, and binding arbitration agreements in employment litigation;
- Cara Greene’s assessment that ethical obligations with teeth are needed to reinforce that our profession will not tolerate sexual harassment in any form; and
- Emily Martin’s reminder that of the need for federal legislation to create humane and effective procedures for reporting sexual harassment on the Hill, as well as her call to get involved with Time’sUp.
We also need to lead the change in our own workplaces. Because of the immense cultural and political power wielded by harassers in the legal profession, we have to pay special attention to the even wider power differential for those who work with us, but who are not also lawyers. Court reporters, paralegals, administrative assistants, law clerks, interns, interpreters, bailiffs, correctional officers. If a harasser is willing to risk harassing someone who is in any other context not afraid to sue your ass, how much more complicated is it for someone without our professional badges and power suits to shield them? We, as lawyers, have an especial obligation to the people we work with—to listen and watch and ask and to believe them when they tell us that something is making them uncomfortable—or worse. Because of the power we possess, ours is a heightened obligation to not be complicit.
In the wake of #MeToo, I’ve thought often of Anita Hill and the lessons her experience etched on us. I’m looking for ways to repay the immense debt that I, at least, owe her for speaking out when doing so meant that she walked alone. Working to end harassment in the legal profession—the context in which Clarence Thomas harassed Anita Hill, and the context in which Anita Hill fought back--is the right place to begin.
Monday, March 5, 2018
Subtle, yet pernicious forms of unequal treatment exist wherein women may not experience adverse outcomes that are actionable under anti-discrimination or other laws, but nonetheless may find themselves hindered in their ability to advance and flourish. These myriad behaviors, policies, and practices lead to "Gender Sidelining"—a term recently coined by a group of law professors at California Western—whereby women experience obstacles that the law does not (and arguably should not) proscribe.
The Gender Sidelining Symposium on April 26-27, 2018 will highlight examples of and help us understand the process by which this phenomenon occurs. By bringing together academics and practitioners from a broad range of fields—employment and labor law, business law, criminal law, politics, and beyond—the symposium will take an innovative look at how existing social structures can lead to adverse treatment on the basis of gender when actions may not be motivated by gender-based animus or even by implicit bias.
Monday, February 5, 2018
Cornell International Law Journal, Symposium: Transnational Legal Feminisms: Challenges and Opportunities
This symposium brings together feminist scholars from around the world to discuss, offer, critique or disseminate a vision of transnational legal feminisms and the challenges and opportunities it presents.
In particular, we seek to explore three contemporary developments. First, we are interested in the rise, paths, success and challenges of transnational feminism. The far and wide reach of different feminist legal ideas changed the world wherever they touched.
A second development is the rise and maturation of critique within the feminist movement. Feminism has always been an introspective movement. Yet in recent years, some critical voices about feminist paths of power in the national and transnational sphere gained increased foothold within feminist thought.
A third contemporary development this symposium will explore, is the rise of right wing, populist, mostly conservative, politics, in many different parts of the globe, from center to periphery and back again. We are interested in exploring together the meaning of this political tidal wave to feminist politics, movement and national and transnational advocacy.
Thursday, February 1, 2018
From Associate Dean Usha Rodrigues about the upcoming Women's Leadership in Academia Conference at the University of Georgia, and includes a call for proposals:
We are happy to announce that Georgia Law will be hosting the first annual conference for Women's Leadership in Academia this summer on July 19-20. The conference will emphasize giving attendees concrete skills in areas such as negotiation, as well as building a professional network. Please visit the conference website for more details, and add your contact information in the “conference registration” section if you would like to be contacted as we finalize the details.
We are inviting you not only to attend our conference, but also to help shape it. The conference website contains a call for panel proposals, and we are eager to hear your ideas to further our mission of promoting women leaders.
Tuesday, January 16, 2018
Thomas Jefferson School of Law, Women and the Law Conference 2018: Her Place at the Bargaining Table: Gender, Negotiation and “Risky” Decision-Making
Thomas Jefferson School of Law’s 18th Annual Women and the Law Conference, Her Place at the Bargaining Table: Gender, Negotiation and “Risky” Decision-Making, will be held on Friday, February 9, 2018 at Thomas Jefferson School of Law.
This conference brings together leading experts and practitioners to focus exclusively on issues related to gender and the law to address the issue of women at the bargaining table. How does gender affect the way we approach and manage negotiations in a variety of settings?
Explorations into the enduring wage gap between men and women prompt us to examine this important topic. Despite advances, women on average continue to earn roughly 80 cents for each male dollar earned. In 1960, women earned approximately 64 cents for each male dollar and experts estimate that the gap will likely not close for at least another 40 years...longer for Latina or African American women. What accounts for this gap? Is it explicit sexism, implicit bias, male and female divergent life choices?
Negotiation experts maintain that women’s antipathy to negotiation and risk-taking provides a partial explanation. This year’s topic explores women and decision-making, with particular attention paid to the art and science of bargaining for advantage.
Professor Linda C. Babcock will deliver the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lecture. Babcock
continues in a long line of illustrious speakers who have been honored as the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Lecturer, a lecture series Justice Ginsburg generously established for Thomas Jefferson in 2003.
Wednesday, January 3, 2018
Wednesday, Jan. 3
3:30 pm How to Adapt Your Outreach Efforts, Admissions Process and Law School Community to Ensure Your Culture is Welcoming to Transgender and Gender Fluid Students
Moderator: Jay Austin, University of California, Irvine School of Law
Speakers: Robyn Brammer, Dean of Counseling and Social Sciences, Golden West College
Jeb Butler, Columbia Law School
Barbara J. Cox, California Western School of Law
Blake Liggio, Partner, Goodwin Procter LLP
Shaun Travers, Campus Diversity Director and Director of the
Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, University of California, San Diego
Each year the number of applicants, matriculants, and continuing students who identify as nonbinary, transgender, or perhaps along a wider vontinuum of gendered orientations increases. Has your law school adapted to attract these students? And during their enrollment, what affirming steps can your law school actively engage in to ensure their full participation? This session will bring together a unique group of individuals from the law school community, the legal profession, and undergraduate academic programs to discuss ways that your law school can welcome and support these students. This wide-ranging discussion will include thoughts on application gender questions, the use of preferred names and pronouns in the classroom, and other gender neutral affirming practices and policies.
Thursday, Jan. 4
10:30am AALS Open Source Program – Mainstreaming Feminism
Moderator & Speaker: Brooke D. Coleman, Seattle University School of Law
Anastasia M. Boles, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, William H. Bowen School of Law
Linda A. Malone, William & Mary Law School
Elizabeth Y. McCuskey, University of Toledo College of Law
Elizabeth Porter, University of Washington School of Law
This panel presentation will take on a variety of subjects and examine their feminist implications. The panel will discuss papers involving business law, civil procedure, employment law, federal courts, and health law. The goal of the program is to de-compartmentalize feminism from other strains
of legal scholarship and inquiry by engaging scholars with interests independent of feminism and those with an interest primarily in feminism. What the panelists hope to ultimately achieve is a mainstreaming of feminism. Stated differently, the goal is to begin normalizing the consideration of intersectionality—including, but not limited to, feminism—within traditional legal scholarship to create a scholarly environment where this kind of inquiry is the norm and not just the panel regarding “other.”
Friday, Jan. 5
8:30am Rethinking Campus Response to Sexual Violence: Betsy DeVos, Title IX, and the Continuing Search for Access to Justice
Moderator: Hannah Brenner, California Western School of Law
Mary M. Penrose, Texas A&M University School of Law
Verna Williams, University of Cincinnati College of Law
Cory Rayburn Young, University of Kansas School of Law
Nancy Chi Cantalupo, Barry University Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law
Ben Trachtenberg, University of Missouri School of Law
The Trump Administration recently revised the Title IX process addressing sexual violence on college campuses. These revisions, coupled with a Sixth Circuit decision finding due process protections lacking in a university’s Title IX hearing, underscore the importance of ensuring that both victims and accused receive access to justice following allegations of sexual violence. Against the backdrop of these and other current events, this panel considers strategies for rethinking the response from a legal access to justice perspective. As lawyers and legal academics, this topic is important to us, our students, institutions, and society as we strive to find balance between the rights of victims and accused. The voices on this panel offer diverse viewpoints regarding Title IX’s role in addressing sexual violence. Panelists will discuss necessary protections for those bringing claims of sexual violence to ensure fair resolution that causes limited harm to these individuals and their educational opportunities, and protections for those accused of perpetrating sexual violence, recognizing that consequences may extend far beyond the classroom. We challenge attendees to return to their campuses and respectfully engage one another to find meaningful solutions to an issue that, thus far, has failed to adequately guarantee access to justice for all.
10:30am ALUMNI RELATIONS & DEVELOPMENT TRACK, Engaging Women Graduates – A Donor Discussion
Moderator: Emily Mullin, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Speakers: Michelle Banks, Senior Advisor, BarkerGilmore LLC
Debbie Epstein Henry, DEH Consulting, Speaking, Writing; Bliss Lawyers
We all know that every journey begins with a single step, and this is especially true in the world of advancement. As we think of new ways to inspire and cultivate our donors, it is important first to consider how they would like to engage with the law school. As an example, alumni associations are increasingly engaging alumni through affinity-based programs, including both industry and cultural affinities. Other schools are launching alumnae-specific networks to engage their female graduates in meaningful ways. In this session we will sit down with three law school alumnae leaders for a discussion about engaging women graduates, through programming and philanthropy, and will discuss their journeys from engagement to gift.
5:30pm Women's Leadership in Academia, sponsored by University of Georgia
Reception, panel, and roundtable discussion on advancing women law professors and administrators in leadership positions.
Saturday, Jan. 6
9:00am Women in Legal Education –Whispered Conversations Amplified
Moderator: Kerri L. Stone, Florida International University College of Law
Marina Angel, Temple University, James E. Beasley School of Law
Ann Bartow, University of New Hampshire School of Law
Meera Deo, Thomas Jefferson School of Law
Angela Mae Kupenda, Mississippi College School of Law
Melissa E. Murray, University of California, Berkeley School of Law
Susan Westerberg Prager, Southwestern Law School
This program seeks to take what have traditionally been “whispered conversations” among women in the legal academy and amplify them by conducting them publicly and bringing them into the light. For too long, important issues unique to women in the legal academy have been discussed almost strictly among women who call one another after meetings, drop by one another’s offices, and pull one another aside in the hallways. This program seeks to de-stigmatize and include others in the discussion of issues like integrating feminism into one’s courses or scholarship, combating implicit bias in the classroom, and the unique challenges that women face when doing everything from assuming leadership positions to participating in faculty service and governance. A panel of senior professors, administrative leaders, and scholars who have thought or written about these and other issues attendant to being female in the legal academy will recount experiences, provide insight into the whispered conversations that they have had over the years, and inform a more public discussion that will normalize these issues and seek solutions.
Business meeting Women in Legal Education section at program conclusion.
10:30am Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Issues – Relationships Between Religious Exemptions and Principles of Equality and Inclusion
Moderator: Jack B. Harrison, Northern Kentucky University, Salmon P. Chase College of Law
David B. Cruz, University of Southern California Gould School of Law
Louise Melling, Legal Director, American Civil Liberties Union Center for Liberty
Douglas NeJaime, Yale Law School
Shaakirrah Sanders, University of Idaho College of Law
Kyle C. Velte, Texas Tech University School of Law
U.S. law at all levels contains anti-discrimination provisions, designed to reflect principles of equality and inclusion. At the same time, areas of U.S. law reflect principles of religious accommodation and exemption, that are well ensconced in constitutional law. Yet religious rights and religious exemption laws have had a long history of conflict with anti-discrimination laws. The resolution of these conflicts has traditionally been that religious motivation did not generally provide exemptions from civil rights laws. This resolution, however, appears to be under increasing attack in recent years and the Supreme Court has modified that traditional approach with decisions such as Hosanna-Tabor and Hobby Lobby. This panel will examine these conflicts and explore how U.S. laws should best seek to achieve equality and inclusion for all.
2:15pm Women in Legal Education Luncheon. Ticket price $75 per person.
1:30pm Women in Legal Education – Speed Mentoring
Also, there is a Nursing Parents Room available, a super cool app tracking the conference at Access to Justice, and a Twitter hashtag #AALS2018.