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

  • Government Speech and the Establishment Clause (Part 1)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel two examines the extent to which the government can control school curricula and restrict the work of law school clinics. This is the 2nd panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Government Speech and the Establishment Clause (Part 2)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel two examines the extent to which the government can control school curricula and restrict the work of law school clinics. This is the 2nd panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Can Government Compel Speech by Designating it as its Own? (Part 2)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel three examines the extent to which the government can compel speech by denominating the speech as its own. This is the third panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Can Government Compel Speech by Designating it as its Own? (Part 1)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel three examines the extent to which the government can compel speech by denominating the speech as its own. This is the third panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • East Cleveland: A City in Transition

    Tue, Dec 21, 2010
    The City of East Cleveland initially received 2.2 million dollars of federal funds as part of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. With this and other funds, dilapidated homes have been demolished and other homes rehabilitated. What does this mean for the residents of a city that is in the first stages of economic redevelopment? This program brings together two people from the East Cleveland Mayor’s Office: Anthony Houston, Program Manager for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, and Mansell Baker, Assistant to the Mayor’s Chief of Staff. An additional voice in the conversation is Fannie Hall, a resident of East Cleveland who has lived in the same East Cleveland home for 49 years. With these different perspectives, listen to how economic redevelopment measures are shaping a city in transition.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • SnickerFritz: Engaging the Community with Art

    Mon, May 24, 2010
    This program discusses the SnickerFritz Cultural Arts Workshop for the Art, Inc which is a non-profit organization founded by master artist and sculptor Edward E. Parker to provide various programs that engage people in the arts for social development. Over the last 27 years Parker has developed the EEP Creative Arts Complex, which houses several businesses including his SnickerFritz Arts Gallery. His training and formal studies extend as far as Africa and Ecuador, and his art has been featured and commissioned across the country by many outstanding universities and organizations. Additionally this program discusses the SnickerFritz Community Time Capsule Project which is an important Art and Community History initiative that documents the fast changing landscape of various local landmarks, businesses, institutions and residential neighborhoods in the City of East Cleveland. Each project partner contributes a piece of memorabilia (i.e. photographs, newspapers, magazine articles, oral histories, student research reports on the history of the city etc.) The preservation of these capsule submissions further documents the History of East Cleveland and provides a valuable community history lesson for current and future generations. The time capsule is scheduled to be reopened in 2020. Program participants are Edward Parker, Owner of the EEP Creative Arts Complex, home of Snickerfritz Art Gallery and Art Studio and The Snickerfritz Cultural Workshop for the Arts, Inc. Rhonda Williams, Faculty member in the History Department at Case Western Reserve University and Director of the Social Justice Alliance/Initiative. Gladys Haddad, Host of Regionally Speaking. Nancy Nolan-Jones, Project Director, Snickerfritz Community Time Capsule Project
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Conflict Resolution and the Good Friday Peace Agreements (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

  • 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

  • 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.
    Civil Rights Movement Series
    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
Load More