Three presenters were selected from Call for Papers.
The recent (and ongoing) economic upheaval in the United States and elsewhere highlight the extent to which individual well-being is connected to actions and actors beyond individual control. American legal history is marked by contestation between our society’s assumption of individual capacity and sovereign autonomy and legal and policy commitments that recognize the limits of such capacity. Efforts to protect the public have often been derided as contrary to the values of individualism and anti-paternalism within American law and society. The ideological commitment to individual capacity has underwritten certain legal determinations that fail to take into account the fragility of individual (or national) well-being, whether in the due process context or in international law.
Even where vulnerability is recognized in American law, it is often recognized as an exceptional state of affairs—bestowed upon children or the aged. Moreover, the recognition of vulnerability is often denied certain classes of persons based on race or class, as in the case of the treatment of minority juvenile offenders, or particular victims of domestic violence. Can vulnerability be understood as the ordinary state of affairs? Can humanistic inquiries aid in the law’s capacity to take vulnerability (both individual and global) seriously in a society committed to the freedom and autonomy of the individual? This panel will take up these issues in wide-ranging areas, included, but not limited to, race, class, age, ethnicity, geography, affectional orientation, disability, foreign affairs, and national security. Methodological approaches include, but are not limited to, historical, philosophical, literary, theological, and critical.
Business Meeting at Program Conclusion.