Thursday, 15 May 2014

Legal Academia 2.0: New and Old Models of Academic Engagement and Influence

Quite a bit away from our usual fare, but my paper for the upcoming Symposium on the Nadon Reference draws on my experiences in the online world. Here is the abstract for Legal Academia 2.0:
Across the country, legal and political aficionados hunched over their keyboards waiting for the announcement. Some were genuinely surprised by the decision. The leader of the country had staked a great deal of political capital on a legal argument that was rejected by a majority of the Supreme Court. It was a decision that rocked the legal establishment and forced a rethink of the fundamentals of constitutional law. And yet, for those in the know, the decision was not a surprise at all. Serious flaws in the government’s legal arguments had been flagged long ago. A key aspect of the reasoning was drawn from an academic article posted in an online database. For those who had followed the case on blogs and social media, the decision was predictable, though no less monumental for that.

I am writing, of course, about National Federation of Businesses v. Sebelius, the case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld President Obama’s landmark healthcare reform against a constitutional challenge. But I could have been writing about Reference re Supreme Court Act, ss. 5 and 6, the case in which the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that Marc Nadon, Prime Minister Harper’s nominee to fill its vacant seat, was ineligible. Both the Obamacare case and l’affaire Nadon have much in common. Apart from their political importance, they both highlight the new means that legal academics can use to engage with the wider community.

In this short essay, prepared for a symposium on l'affaire Nadon I will contrast the old and new models of academic engagement, by particular reference to Obamacare and l’affaire Nadon. The lessons are straightforward. Whether concerned to increase their influence or mindful of the need to check it, academics should pay attention to the online world. The same goes for other actors in the wider community: judges, law clerks, lawyers, litigants, journalists, politicians, political staffers, and lay people.
This is a thinkpiece, so comments are especially welcome. Download it here.

1 comment:

  1. You can see the same phenomenon, and if anything much more dramatically, in the econoblogosphere.

    Just a couple of examples - the catch by a master's student of a spreadsheet error in the Reinhart-Rogoff paper on government debt and growth, and the tireless promotion by Scott Sumner of an esoteric model of monetary policy - nominal GDP targeting - to the point where approving noises are made by governor of the Bank of England, among others.