What matters to you.
Sign Out
Play Live Radio
0:00
0:00
NEXT UP:
 
Top

Forum Network

Free online lectures: Explore a world of ideas

Funding provided by:
formallogo-blue.png

Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, improves people’s lives through preeminent research, education and creative endeavor: innovation and discovery in scholarship that capitalizes on the power of collaboration; learning that is active, creative and continuous; and promotion of an inclusive culture of global citizenship.

http://www.case.edu

  • Conflict Resolution and the Good Friday Peace Agreements (Part 2)

    Fri, Oct 15, 2010
    Panelists focus on the dynamics of moving toward peace over time from various “points of view,” the (mostly Catholic) Irish Republican paramilitary opposition and the broader, Irish Nationalist community as well as the (mostly Protestant) Loyalist paramilitary along with the broader Unionist community, and, finally and hopefully – the Irish government perspective. The speakers discuss the unfolding dynamics of the conflict’s end and movement toward peace in light of their own experiences or analyses, the focus will account for how different groups’ goals, reasoning, and (in)ability to overcome any internal divisions affected the prospects of peace and of drawing violent parties into mainstream political institutions. Such a focus will help to reveal and highlight the dynamics of dissention within groups that have been conventionally treated as monolithic political actors, as well as how these internal divisions affected the broader conflict between groups that played out more openly over time. These divisions are particularly and acutely salient to both Northern Irish and Irish politics today, with the recent decomissioning of Loyalist groups, the first security force member killings in more than a decade (by Republican ‘dissidents’), the growing number of Republicans and Nationalists becoming disillusioned with Sinn Fein’s ability to effectively negotiate its agenda through Stormont, and the scandal that threatens First Minister Robinson’s position – and therefore the Executive itself. Finally, each speaker discusses how the case of the conflict in Northern Ireland can help us to understand conflict and the chances for peace elsewhere, with panel member(s) expanding on this issue. The aim of the event is to understand and learn from the end of a real-life conflict, including how various points of view were accommodated, while achieving peace and reconciliation. The goal of that understanding is to examine how lawyers might apply similar methods to the practice of law, including negotiations among individuals or groups, arbitration, mediation and other circumstances.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Good Friday Peace Agreement: History of the Troubles (Part 2)

    Fri, Oct 15, 2010
    Panelists focus on the dynamics of moving toward peace over time from various “points of view,” the (mostly Catholic) Irish Republican paramilitary opposition and the broader, Irish Nationalist community as well as the (mostly Protestant) Loyalist paramilitary along with the broader Unionist community, and, finally and hopefully – the Irish government perspective. The speakers discuss the unfolding dynamics of the conflict’s end and movement toward peace in light of their own experiences or analyses, the focus will account for how different groups’ goals, reasoning, and (in)ability to overcome any internal divisions affected the prospects of peace and of drawing violent parties into mainstream political institutions. Such a focus will help to reveal and highlight the dynamics of dissention within groups that have been conventionally treated as monolithic political actors, as well as how these internal divisions affected the broader conflict between groups that played out more openly over time. These divisions are particularly and acutely salient to both Northern Irish and Irish politics today, with the recent decomissioning of Loyalist groups, the first security force member killings in more than a decade (by Republican ‘dissidents’), the growing number of Republicans and Nationalists becoming disillusioned with Sinn Fein’s ability to effectively negotiate its agenda through Stormont, and the scandal that threatens First Minister Robinson’s position – and therefore the Executive itself. Finally, each speaker discusses how the case of the conflict in Northern Ireland can help us to understand conflict and the chances for peace elsewhere, with panel member(s) expanding on this issue. The aim of the event is to understand and learn from the end of a real-life conflict, including how various points of view were accommodated, while achieving peace and reconciliation. The goal of that understanding is to examine how lawyers might apply similar methods to the practice of law, including negotiations among individuals or groups, arbitration, mediation and other circumstances.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Good Friday Peace Agreement: History of the Troubles (Part 1)

    Fri, Oct 15, 2010
    Panelists focus on the dynamics of moving toward peace over time from various “points of view,” the (mostly Catholic) Irish Republican paramilitary opposition and the broader, Irish Nationalist community as well as the (mostly Protestant) Loyalist paramilitary along with the broader Unionist community, and, finally and hopefully – the Irish government perspective. The speakers discuss the unfolding dynamics of the conflict’s end and movement toward peace in light of their own experiences or analyses, the focus will account for how different groups’ goals, reasoning, and (in)ability to overcome any internal divisions affected the prospects of peace and of drawing violent parties into mainstream political institutions. Such a focus will help to reveal and highlight the dynamics of dissention within groups that have been conventionally treated as monolithic political actors, as well as how these internal divisions affected the broader conflict between groups that played out more openly over time. These divisions are particularly and acutely salient to both Northern Irish and Irish politics today, with the recent decomissioning of Loyalist groups, the first security force member killings in more than a decade (by Republican ‘dissidents’), the growing number of Republicans and Nationalists becoming disillusioned with Sinn Fein’s ability to effectively negotiate its agenda through Stormont, and the scandal that threatens First Minister Robinson’s position – and therefore the Executive itself. Finally, each speaker discusses how the case of the conflict in Northern Ireland can help us to understand conflict and the chances for peace elsewhere, with panel member(s) expanding on this issue. The aim of the event is to understand and learn from the end of a real-life conflict, including how various points of view were accommodated, while achieving peace and reconciliation. The goal of that understanding is to examine how lawyers might apply similar methods to the practice of law, including negotiations among individuals or groups, arbitration, mediation and other circumstances.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Affirmative Action as Government Speech: The Court and Colorblindness

    Mon, Oct 4, 2010
    Supreme Court affirmative action cases can be divided into two categories. First are those cases in which race-conscious government action provides a material benefit or preference to members of a minority group (e.g., Adarand and Grutter). Second are those cases where the government takes race-conscious action without causing any concrete disadvantage to non-minorities (e.g., Shaw v. Reno, Parents Involved). Under the Courts current Equal Protection doctrine, both categories of cases are presumptively unconstitutional because they both violate the principle of colorblindness. The colorblindness doctrine is best understood as implicitly holding that non-disadvantaging affirmative action constitutes an expressive harm. This program expands upon the existing scholarship by arguing that functionally, the Court has come to view race-conscious, non-disadvantaging government action as a form of prohibited government speech. In essence, the Court has decided that when the government takes such action, it is sending an unconstitutional message that race still matters in our society. Under the government speech doctrine, however, the government is free to express its own message provided it does not restrict or compel private speech. The fact that members of the Court disagree with this message does not make it unconstitutional.
    Forum Network
    Civil Rights Movement Series
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Why We Play: Sports, Drugs, and Meanings

    Tue, Oct 5, 2010
    **Dr. Thomas H. Murray** takes on issues of fairness and justice. He asks what constitutes fairness in sport and why we even need seemingly arbitrary limits on equipment and other rules. He looks at social policy ideas like harm reduction strategies in drug policy; reflections on liberty, paternalism, and public health; off-label and non-therapeutic drug use, including use supervised or promoted by physicians. Controversies over elite athletes using anabolic steroids, growth hormone, and other performance enhancing drugs largely overlooks three crucial issues. First is athletic competition, the forces that press athletes to consider using drugs, and the nearly universal desire among athletes for a level playing field. Second is the far larger community of amateur athletes including tens of millions of young people. Third are a set of disputes over the meanings of key concepts in sport: What is a level playing field and is it achievable or even desirable? And, finally, what makes sport worthwhile, a meaningful human endeavor: In other words, _why do we play_?
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University
  • Rwanda.jpg

    Legal Infrastructure Enhancement and Economic Development in Africa

    Thu, Nov 4, 2010
    Mr. Munyantwali focuses on how enhanced legal infrastructure can be a useful tool in promoting African economic development. Currently, Africa’s legal and judicial institutions, while improving, still need strengthening to cope with the demands of Africa's rapid economic development and effective participation in the global economy. Many legal and judicial institutions on the African continent are hampered by archaic practices, such as non existent or outdated court reports, the hand recording of court decisions, the lack of or limited application of alternate modes of dispute resolution, and rampant court corruption. When coupled with other functional inadequacies, such prevailing factors render many jurisdictions unattractive for investment. Local and foreign investors are drawn to investment destinations characterized by functioning courts and speedy adjudication of disputes rooted in a reasonably predicable jurisprudential normative framework. Many commentators have observed that to reverse this trend requires the political will to establish institutions that adhere to the aforementioned norms and symbolize adherence to basic rule of law principles - such as a functioning judiciary, predicable and well-drafted laws, solid legal and judicial institutions and well trained legal professionals. To the casual western observer this might be taken for granted and presumably easy to establish, but these are serious challenges in many African and emerging global economies. Many of the problems are rooted in undemocratic and former command economies that are rapidly adopting capitalistic norms driven by a dominant private sector. The discussion offers a range of possible solutions towards a regime underscored by a solid legal infrastructure.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Consequences of Kampala: The U.S. and the International Criminal Court

    Thu, Nov 11, 2010
    Donald Ferencz, executive director of the Planethood Foundation, and Case Western Reserve University School of Law Professor Michael Scharf participated as NGO (non-governmental organization) delegates at the International Criminal Court Assembly of States Parties Review Conference in Kampala, Uganda in June 2010. At the Review Conference in Kampala, the 3,000 delegates agreed to a complicated formula to amend the International Court's Statute to add the crime of aggression to its jurisdiction. The formula had its origins in part in a 2008 Experts Meeting that Mr. Ferencz and Prof. Scharf co-sponsored at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, "The ICC and the Crime of Aggression." Mr. Ferencz and Prof. Scharf explain the negotiating history and meaning of the "Crime of Aggression" Amendment to the ICC's Statute, and describe its likely consequences for the United States and its allies.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • The Post-9/11 Evolution of Detention Law and Policy

    Thu, Oct 28, 2010
    Nine years removed from the 9/11 attacks, we remain bogged down in debate regarding the proper role, if any, for military detention in relation to terrorism. Some are calling for legislation to define more specifically who may be detained. Others object that this question should be left to the judiciary to resolve in the Guantanamo habeas cases, and that legislation might actually worsen the situation. Professor Chesney discusses who has the better argument, and whether any of this matters beyond Guantanamo.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University