ILNews

  • Home

Women's rights expert to speak at Valpo

IL Staff
March 20, 2008
Keywords
Law Schools, Valparaiso University School of Law
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Women's rights around the world will be the topic of the 25th Annual Edward A. Seegers Lecture, "Women's Status, Men's States," March 28 at Valparaiso University School of Law.

The lecture will feature Catharine A. MacKinnon, Elizabeth A. Long Professor of Law at University of Michigan Law School. She will address the masculinity of states as an element of international politics, while examining the status of women in the international system. MacKinnon suggests that international approaches to women's rights offer distinctive promise for addressing inequality of the sexes.

With a specialty in sex-equality issues in international and constitutional law, she works with Equality Now, which promotes international sex-equality rights for women. MacKinnon pioneered the legal claim for sexual harassment, and with Andrea Dworkin created ordinances recognizing pornography as a civil rights violation.

Representing Bosnian women survivors of Serbian genocidal sexual atrocities, she won with co-counsel a damage award of $745 million in August 2000 in Kadic v. Karadzic, which first recognized rape as an act of genocide.

MacKinnon holds a B.A. from Smith College, a J.D. from Yale Law School, and a Ph.D. in political science from Yale. She has taught at Yale, Chicago, Harvard, Osgoode Hall, Stanford, Basel (Switzerland), and Columbia; spent a year at the Institute for Advanced Study; and practices and consults nationally and internationally.

One of the most widely cited legal scholars in the English language, her scholarly books include "Are Women Human?" (2006); "Women's Lives, Men's Laws" (2005); "Sex Equality" (2001); "Only Words" (1993); and "Toward a Feminist Theory of the State" (1989).

The lecture will be from 4 to 5 p.m. at the law school's Tabor Auditorium in Wesemann Hall, 656 S. Greenwich St., Valparaiso. A reception will follow from 5 to 6 p.m. in the Duesenberg Commons. The lecture is open to the public and free of charge.

The lecture is named in honor of the late Edward A. Seegers, a Chicago attorney who supported the school, including contributions for scholarships and buildings. He also endowed a law school professorship in honor of his parents.

For more information, contact Lisa Todd at (219) 465-7893, (888) 825-7652, or lisa.todd@valpo.edu.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer

  1. Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.

  2. they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.

  3. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  4. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  5. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

ADVERTISEMENT