Dianne Otto
There is no doubt that Professor Dianne Otto is a giant of legal scholarship, a foundational figure in feminist international law, and a pioneering scholar of queer theory in international law. But more important than all of these achievements is that she is a woman of great integrity, fierce passion, and abundant hope and joy who has been an inspiration and role model to so many scholars who have come after her. I consider myself extremely lucky to be one of those scholars. Continue reading >>
Crisis and Legal Scholarship
References to crisis abound. Since the 2008 financial crash and with the popularisation of the term “polycrisis” after the COVID-19 pandemic, the idea that we live in times of crises shapes public opinion, political discourse, and academic debates. A review of posts published on Verfassungsblog between January and July 2025 reveals an average of 15 posts per month mentioning some kind of crisis. Crisis is certainly a catchword, and these are hard to resist. But the pervasiveness of this term can also tell us something about the kind of knowledge produced by legal scholarship. Continue reading >>“Wavering Between Hope and Despair”
Reflections From Within German International Law Scholarship Continue reading >>
Facing Up: Impact-Motivated Research Endangers not only Truth, but also Justice
All (but one) responses to my reflections on the ethics of activism as scholars in this blog symposium have been thoughtful, engaged, and charitable. For them, I am very grateful. If my rule-consequentialist worries have any truth to them, we should worry more rather than less about having the relevant motivation I castigate. When the moral stakes are higher (such as in vast areas of the Global South), one has to be even more careful about not making moral mistakes. The debate is not about whether one should be moral (by definition, we should be). It is about what is the most effective means in which the constitutional studies academy can contribute to a more just world.
Continue reading >>
Why Academic Ivory Towerism Can’t Be The Answer
At a time in which a worrying number of risks conspire to threaten the end of democracy and humanity – from climate change to uncontrolled new technologies –, to confine the remit of the legal scholar to the narrow boundaries of academic purity appears ahistorical at best, irresponsible at worst. Continue reading >>What’s wrong with good “scholactivism”?
There is a fine line between suspicion based on the nature of the motivation (seeking direct material change), and the substance of the motivation (commitment to a particular normative position). Once the “scholactivist” label gets thrown around, it may be hard to maintain that distinction. And it is to normative positions which advocate new ideas or change – including those that are reflective or well-considered – to which the label is most likely to attach.
Continue reading >>Scholactivism and Academic Self-Awareness
In the past decade, the U.K. has seen the overwhelming influence of the populist right. It manifests most famously in the Brexit process, but also in continuous calls for a reversal of liberal constitutionalism. Notably this process is bolstered by a group of scholars, many of whom were in my own faculty at Oxford, who serve as legitimation of government policy and spur its development. Importantly, though clearly highly effective ‘scholactivists’, these scholars would never describe themselves as such. We need to follow the money, we need to follow its route to power and to understand the role the academy plays in legitimating and building these ideological (and often religious) positions. Continue reading >>‘Activism’ Is Not the Problem
My claim and critique of Khaitan’s position is that constitutional law scholars must produce actual answers to questions of legality, constitutionality or feasibility. Scholars may differ in whether or not they start their inquiry with a ‘material outcome’ as their hypothesis but the quality of work by both ‘activist’ and ‘non-activist’ scholars is to be assessed on the basis of the outcome and their academic integrity. Continue reading >>More and Better
Tarunabh Khaitan’s editorial comment in ICON on the perils of letting activist inclinations influence one’s scholarship, resulting in an unsavoury “scholactivism” blend, is thought-provoking. Professor Khaitan calls for rigorous adherence to the ethical demands of a search for truth in our research, even as we might, he suggests, become or remain activists for causes we believe in a range of other activities. In my view, however, Professor Khaitan’s critique misses the mark. He is asking too much of individuals and not enough of institutions. Continue reading >>
Integrity and Independence
Professor Khaitan has written a powerful analysis and defense of the role of scholars in pursuing knowledge; he raises many more important issues than I have space to address here. I write in full agreement with several of the attitudes towards scholarly work that Khaitan emphasizes, especially the need for independence of judgment and an openness to revision, but find his “scholactivism” category too broadly conceptualized. Universities and their scholars must focus primarily on knowledge – its production, preservation, and dissemination – but good scholarship can be directed to material change in the world as well as to changes in understanding. Continue reading >>