Bucholski and Murphy on Kinder und Kueche: Women, Marriage, and Children in Nazi Germany

Lara Bucholski, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, and Christopher Murphy, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law, have published Kinder und Küche: Women, Marriage, and Children in Nazi Germany as Max Planck Lawcast, Episode 22. Here is the abstract.

During the years that it was in power, the Nazi regime made far-reaching changes to German civil law, especially family law. Marriage was understood as a societal 'service', children were deemed to be the nation's 'most precious asset', and mothers were idolized as the backbone of society. In today's Lawcast episode, Lara Bucholski details how these civil law changes serve as proof that law is rarely truly neutral as seen by the fact that the value-based jurisprudence of the Nazi regime influenced and modified existing law to its advantage. Thus, although law may be drafted with great precision, significant power remains with those who apply it.

Download the essay from SSRN at the link. Listen on: Max Planck Law, Spotify or Apple. For more Max Planck Lawcasts: https://law.mpg.de/lawcast/

Ollikainen-Read and Murphy on Law as a Means of Communicating Colonial Control in India: Max Planck Lawcast, Episode 8 @maxplancklaw @mpilhlt

Erica Ollikainen-Read, Max Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal Theory, and Christopher Murphy, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law, have published Law as a Means of Communicating Colonial Control in India, as Max Planck Lawcast, Episode 8. Here is the abstract.

In this episode of the Lawcast, Erica Ollikainen-Read explains to Christopher Murphy that the British Empire was not just shipping, merchants, soldiers, cannon, and conquest. Rather, some of the most long-lasting parts of the British Empire are the ideas, laws, and symbols which Britain transplanted to their colonies, some of which remain to this day. One such case in point is India, where the British colonial presence and the nature of Britain’s priorities shifted over time. By viewing the law from the perspective of communication, we can see how colonial legal culture and the way in which it was used as a tool for control in India also changed

. Listen on: Spotify and Apple. For more Max Planck Lawcasts: https://law.mpg.de/lawcast/.

Hooton and Murphy on Provincial Poor Laws and Pauper Auctions: The Elizabethan Welfare System in Colonial Canada Max Planck Lawcast, Episode 3 @maxplancklaw @mpilhlt

Victoria Hooton, Max Planck Institute for Legal History and Legal Theory, and Christopher Murphy, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law, have published Provincial Poor Laws and Pauper Auctions: The Elizabethan Welfare System in Colonial Canada Max Planck Lawcast, Episode 3. Here is the abstract.

In this episode Christopher Murphy travels back in time with Victoria Hooton to discuss the regulation of poverty in England and Wales in the early 17th century, with a specific focus on the 1601 Act for the Relief of the Poor. The Act reflected the prevailing moral sensibilities of the time, regarding who the worthy and the unworthy poor were and where the boundaries of welfare responsibility were to be drawn. After providing an overview of the legislation, the focus turns to the implementation of this welfare system in the Canadian provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick during the mid-18th and 19th century.

Download the piece from SSRN at the link. Link to the Max Planck Lawcast here.

Litman, Murray, and Shaw on A Podcast of One's Own @LeahLitman @ProfMMurray @kateashaw1

Leah M. Litman, University of Michigan School of Law, Melissa Murray, New York School of Law, and Katherine Shaw, Cardozo Law School, have published A Podcast of One's Own at 28 Mich. J. Gender & L. 51 (2021). Here is the abstract.

In this short Essay, we discuss the lack of racial and gender diversity on and around the Supreme Court. As we note, the ranks of the Court’s Justices and its clerks historically have been dominated by white men. But this homogeneity is not limited to the Court’s members or its clerks. As we explain, much of the Court’s broader ecosystem suffers from this same lack of diversity. The advocates who argue before the Court are primarily white men; the experts cited in the Court’s opinions, as well as the experts on whom Court commentators rely in interpreting those opinions, are often white men; and the commentators who translate the Court’s work for the public are also largely white men. We suggest this lack of diversity has consequences both for the Court’s work and for the public’s understanding of the Court. We also identify some of the factors that contribute to the lack of diversity in the Court’s ecosystem, including unduly narrow conceptions of expertise and a rigid insistence on particular notions of neutrality. We also note and discuss our own modest efforts to disrupt these dynamics with Strict Scrutiny, our podcast about the Supreme Court and the legal culture that surrounds it. To be sure, a podcast, by itself, will not dismantle the institutional factors that we have identified in this Essay. Nevertheless, we maintain that our efforts to use the podcast as a platform for surfacing these institutional dynamics, while simultaneously cultivating a more diverse cadre of Supreme Court experts and commentators, is a step in the right direction.

Download the essay at the link.