Email
Message to Students (forwarded to faculty and staff)
September
11, 2001
11:15
p.m.
Dear Michigan Law Students,
For some of us, we see
connections among the material we teach in the classroom, the tragedy of today,
and different events that might unfold in the days and weeks to come. Such faculty may try to find ways to
explore those connections in class.
Others of us feel that
the most appropriate thing for us to do as an intellectual community is to
re-engage in the study that has brought us together in the first place. Such faculty, feeling that doing so
will signal our unwillingness to be defeated by terrorism, may try to find ways
to resume coursework as smoothly as possible.
Still other faculty
members do not feel ready to return to a dispassionately analytic mode of
engagement either with coursework
or with the current situation.
They may choose to use their class time for more informal and
wide-ranging discussion.
Each of us will find a
mode of classroom activity that we feel comfortable with. At the same time, I want to emphasize
that all of us appreciate that you, our students, are experiencing a set
of responses every bit as varied as our own. And we, as well as the staff, are all committed to being as
supportive as possible of each of you, as you find your own paths through the
next few days.
Under the circumstances, I have the following recommendations to offer:
1. Please
try to go to your classes tomorrow, and to participate to the extent that you
feel comfortable. If you do not
feel able to attend, please work with your classmates, your professors, and
Deans Baum and Johnson to find out what you missed.
2. If
you are so inclined, please join me and other faculty and staff in the Law
Quadrangle, in front of the steps to the Reading Room, for a moment of silence
at 12:30 p.m. on Wednesday.
3. For
now, we will continue to use the Lawyers Club Lounge as a central gathering and
information place. We will provide
refreshments throughout the day.
Please feel free to come by, whether to talk, to listen, or simply to
sit. As we all struggle to make
meaning of what we have experienced, I do believe that we can do it better in
concert than we can alone.
The most common
reaction I heard in my conversations with others today was the same reaction
that overwhelmed me: a sense of
helplessness and a wish to find something meaningful to do in response. We will continue to explore such
possibilities and to share them as we learn of them. For example, today the Ann Arbor location of the American
Red Cross was overwhelmed with offers to donate blood. But we have been advised that the need
for donations will continue for weeks to come, and we will be organizing ways
for members of the Law School community to donate.
I welcome your
thoughts and suggestions.
Jeffrey S. Lehman
Dean
Oral
Statement at Community Moment of Silence
September
12, 2001
12:30
p.m.
We each have
experienced the tragedy of the past 28 hours in our own ways.
We each have our own
personal connections to New York and Washington.
We each have our own
personal style of coping with sadness and pain.
None of us can offer a
universal vocabulary to understand what has happened.
And yet … We have all
shared something. Our emotions
have been touched in very personal, very individual ways. But not in isolation. We are all living these days here, in
some important sense as part of a
family. When we look away from the
television or the computer monitor, we see each other.
We are sharing a
profound sadness. And we are
sharing a struggle to figure out how to appropriately integrate yesterday’s
events into our lives for today and tomorrow and beyond.
Hence, this moment of
silence. It is intended to serve
four purposes:
· It
is above all intended to show our common sympathy for the victims of the attacks,
and for their loved ones.
· It
is intended to show support for each other as we find ourselves within this
community of sorrow and hope.
· It
is intended to recognize the fact that we are experiencing emotions that are
not reducible to words.
· It
is intended to show unity.
We will now begin two
minutes of shared silence.
-----------------
Email
Message to Alumni
September
13, 2001
10:55
a.m.
Dear Member of the Classes of 1976, 1981, 1986,
1991, and 1996,
Jeffrey S. Lehman
Dean
Email
Message to Students, Staff, and Faculty
September
14, 2001
12:00
noon
Dean
Email
Message to Alumni
September
17, 2001
4:23
p.m.
Jeffrey S. Lehman
Dean
Oral
Introduction of Panel Discussion
September
21, 2001
3:30
p.m.
Like
billions of people around the world, members of this Law School community
needed to reach out to one another in sympathy. We extended ourselves emotionally and intellectually,
struggling to understand and to support one another. Over and over, I saw students and staff and faculty
transcending the boundaries of their own experiences, helping others to move
forward.
That
process of emotional engagement is not complete. We have not yet finished our grieving. We are still contending with new and
different fears and suspicions, some of which carry the insidious potential to
divide us from one another. We are
still searching for ways as a community to nurture our emotions and our souls,
to show courage, to show solidarity, to show unity.
As
part of that process, but also apart from it, we are beginning to engage the
aftermath of last week’s tragedy with more than just our hearts. We are drawing upon the unique
resources of a university, to make the kind of contributions that these very
special institutions can make.
The
university occupies a sacred space within American society. It is a space that is defined by the
unity of two distinctive values:
the value of searching inquiry and the value of civil discourse.
The
value of searching inquiry calls upon us to ask questions, to gather
data, to analyze skeptically, to speculate creatively, and then to question
again. We believe that it is good
to wonder, to doubt, and to feel uncertain. We believe that it is good to be always ready to change
one’s mind.
The
value of civil discourse calls upon us to deal gently with one
another. We believe that
disagreement, passionate disagreement, is healthy. We believe that it is also healthy to remember that, at our
cores, we are all vulnerable. And
so we structure our arguments to provide subtle emotional support for the
people with whom we are arguing, in order that, collectively, we may pursue the
value of searching inquiry most effectively.
This
afternoon, four distinguished panelists have, on very short notice, volunteered
to help show us how we might draw strength from these values as we explore
questions of pressing global significance. They are giving us the opportunity to see how intellectual
responses can provide an invaluable context for our emotions. How reason can serve to support
passion, and how reflection can serve to deepen conviction.
Today
we gather to ask, “What can the field of international law teach us about the
world’s current predicament? What
guidance can it offer us as we consider our next steps?”
The
attacks of September 11 were, at one level, a challenge to fundamental ideals
cherished by people around the world.
Perhaps, on the one hand, the murderers believed it appropriate to
sentence their victims to a vigilante death sentence as punishment for their
supposed complicity in some collective American guilt. Perhaps, on the other hand, the
murderers believed it appropriate to express their hatred through the
deliberate massacre of innocents.
Either
way, the challenge to our fundamental ideals must be answered and it must be
answered articulately. But, as
many have observed, we must find an answer that affirms our own ideals rather
than ratifying the terrorists’ perspectives. Everyone from Rudy Giuliani to Kofi Annan to Michael Walzer
has noted the profound challenge of responding to terrorism in ways that do not
“do the terrorists’ work for them.”
Within
a law school, we have the opportunity to contribute to the global effort to
meet that challenge. And a vitally
useful starting place is for us to consider what international law teaches us
about how best to frame an effective answer to terrorism.
To
help us with that task today, we have four distinguished panelists.
Karima
Benoune is a Visiting Professor at the Law School this year. She has previously worked with a range
of non-governmental human rights organizations, most recently as Legal
Adviser for Amnesty International in London, where her responsibilities
included work on torture, on women's human rights and on human rights in armed
conflict.
Robert
Howse is a Professor of Law at the Law School. He came to Michigan from the University of Toronto Law
School in 1999. His research has
concerned a wide range of issues in international law, and legal and political
philosophy, including issues of international trade, globalization, and labor
rights.
Bruno
Simma is an Affiliated Overseas Professor at the Law School, and is Professor
of International Law and European Community Law and Director of the Institute
of International Law at the University of Munich. He is also a member of the
International Law Commission of the United Nations and is a designated expert
for conflict-prevention activities for the Secretary General of the United
Nations.
Eric Stein is the Hessel E. Yntema Professor Emeritus of Law at the Law School. Before embarking on his distinguished academic career, he served in the U.S. State Department and was advisor to the American delegation to the UN General Assembly. He is Honorary Vice President of the American Society of International Law and the author of numerous books and articles on international law, European Union law, and comparative law.