A Harvard Law School Lecture Series
DEMOCRACY
DEMOCRACY was a Harvard Law School Lecture Series co-hosted by Guy Uriel-Charles, Ruth Greenwood, Lawrence Lessig, and Nicholas Stephanopoulos.
This six-part series of panel discussions brought together 1,732 individuals— scholars, lawmakers, activists, and the HLS community members—to discuss and debate the most pressing issues facing American democracy.
The Democracy Speaker Series
Agenda & Speakers
Session #1: Democracy in Peril [Watch Video]
Monday, Sept. 20, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
American democracy is in a precarious position. A peaceful transition of power -- a basic democratic prerequisite -- failed to occur in January 2021. Across the country, legislatures have enacted an unprecedented number of laws that restrict access to the ballot box, such as cutting the number of days of early voting, restricting the drop-off locations for absentee ballots, and even banning the provision of food or water to people waiting in line to vote. Yet there are countervailing trends too. Some states are adopting bold policies designed to expand the franchise. And, though it has been silent on questions of electoral rules in recent years, the House of Representatives has re-entered the fray and passed two massive election reform bills, one addressing a vast array of topics, the other focused on racial discrimination in voting. What does the future hold for American democracy? Are we trapped in a vicious cycle of increasing polarization and decreasing legitimacy? Or will we find a way to run elections that are -- and are seen to be -- free and fair?
Featuring Congressman John Sarbanes (D-MD), Journalist Evan Osnos (The New Yorker) , and
Esosa Osa (Fair Fight)
Moderated by Professor Nicholas Stephanopoulos
Session #2: The Future of the Voting Rights Act [Watch Video]
Monday, Oct. 25, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, which some commentators have called the crown jewel of the Second Reconstruction, is in peril. In the 2013 case of Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court enjoined the application of one important provision of the statute while sidelining another important part of the Act. Just this past term, in Brnovich v. DNC, the Supreme Court narrowed applied Section 2 of the VRA against a challenge by plaintiffs who claimed that a set of state laws impeded their right to vote free from racial discrimination. This was the first time since the passage of the Act that the Court interpreted Section 2 with respect to a right to vote claim, as opposed to a vote dilution claim. In the meantime, Congress has been unable and unwilling to pass legislation that would respond to these decisions. The questions of race, representation, and political participation raised by the VRA are as pressing as ever. But the future of the VRAis as uncertain as it has ever been. Is the VRA sufficiently robust to respond to the plethora of proposed legislation across that seem to undermine the right to vote free from racial discrimination? Will Congress be able to shore up the parts of the VRA that have been damaged through judicial interpretation and modernize the statute for the 21st century? If the VRA is unable to address our current voting problems, are there other options that voting rights activists can use to protect the right to vote?
Featuring Jessie Amunson (Jenner & Block), Samuel Spital (NAACP LDF), and Bert Rein (Wiley Rein LLP).
Moderated by Professor Guy-Uriel Charles
Session #3: Social Media and Democracy [Watch Video]
Monday, Nov. 15, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
In the last few years, politicians, activists, academics, among many others, have become increasingly concerned about the role of social media in American democracy. The concerns are myriad. They include dis- and misinformation, increased polarization, the absence of a shared epistemic framework, and hate speech — amplified by business models that benefit from this pathologies. For lawyers and legal academics, an important inquiry is whether law can be at all useful in addressing the threats that social media pose to democracy. Are social media companies capable of effective self-regulation? What role should governments play in regulating social media companies? What role — given the constraints of the First Amendment — can governments play? Is this the new normal or can we expect a new and better equilibrium as we adjust to the promise and peril of social media’s ubiquitous and arguably necessary role in our politics?
Featuring Nate Persily (Stanford Law), Jamal Greene (Columbia Law), and Tristan Harris (Center for Humane Technology)
Moderated by Professor Lawrence Lessig
Session #4: Are ballot initiatives good for democracy? [Watch Video]
Monday, Feb. 7, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
In the last five years, dozens of pro-democracy ballot initiatives won, seemingly against all the odds, including enfranchising some 1.4 million formerly incarcerated people in Florida, and delivering independent, citizen-led, redistricting commissions in a number of states. The voices of the people were, ostensibly, heard. Yet, it was just over ten years ago that marriage equality proponents sought to overturn Prop 8 (which won a majority of votes in California) through the Courts, rather than at the ballot box. With more and more groups proposing and sponsoring pro-democracy ballot initiatives, we ask: are ballot initiatives actually good for democracy?
Featuring Katie Fahey (The People), Adav Noti (Campaign Legal Center), and Chris Melody Fields Figueredo (BISC).
Moderated by Professor Guy-Uriel Charles
Session #5: Living with money in politics [Watch video]
Monday, Mar. 21, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
The Supreme Court continues to strike down regulation after regulation of money in politics, so much so that any attempts to prevent the influence of big money over election outcomes can at times seem hopeless. In this session we ask what can be done, even in the face of a hostile Supreme Court, to prevent money from corrupting our democracy? Rather than restricting political speech, would a focus on reducing corrupting dependence be more effective, both practically and constitutionally? Has the Supreme Court truly ruled all techniques off the table?
Featuring Jane Mayer (New Yorker), Bradley Smith (Capital Law), Jake Grumbach (University of Washington).
Moderated by Professor Lawrence Lessig
Session #6: Gerrymandering (Watch Video]
Monday, Apr. 18, 2021 12:45 PM - 1:45 PM
The decennial redistricting process is in full swing. Every district map in America must be redrawn this year. Almost every district map, it sometimes seems, will end up in litigation. The driver of much of this activity is gerrymandering: the drawing of district lines for partisan advantage. This is the first redistricting cycle in forty years in which there is not even a theoretical possibility that federal courts will intervene to curb gerrymandering. Advances in mapping technology also combine with changes in voter behavior to make gerrymandering more potent than ever. We will ask key attorneys from the Republican and Democratic parties just how gerrymandered we should expect the next decade of electoral maps to be.