Making a Case against the Courts

How will Americans know that their Supreme Court is truly Scott decision of 1857, that dedicated to interpreting the Constitution as the Founding Fa- the Supreme Court cannot thers would wish? Attorney, activist, and author Phyllis Schlafly, be allowed to set the law. A.M. ’45, offered some guidelines while discussing “The Culture “Activist” judges who see War in the Courts” on October 15 as part of the 2007-2008 the Constitution as a “living Phyllis Dean’s Lecture Series at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced document” have used that Schlafly Study. Homeowners won’t face seizure of their property by mu- claim incrementally to take nicipalities eagerly seeking to increase the local tax base, she away the supremacy of the people, she charged. Thus the Fifth said. “Unborn babies” will be entitled to protection under the Amendment prohibition against governmental seizure of private Fourteenth Amendment, while gun-control laws and federal property except for public “use” was sufficiently diluted by a 50- funding of K-12 education will be abandoned.And public-school year-old judicial wording shift to public “purpose” that in 2005 a students will spend more time saying prayers than learning how Supreme Court majority could allow New London, Connecticut, to use a condom. to seize homes to make way for a business venture that might A polished, impeccably prepared speaker, Schlafly provided a generate more taxes. She provided similar examples, in her torrent of legal references, snappy comments, and vivid anec- speech and in reply to subsequent questions, covering other dotes to make her case to an audience of roughly 150, including areas of concern to her: parental rights, pornography, religious Radcliffe’s interim dean, Higgins professor of natural sciences freedom, and homosexuality. Her comments on the latter Barbara J. Grosz, and former dean, Harvard president Drew prompted a small group of people to walk out. Faust.The presentation drew on research and arguments Schlafly Schlafly argued that the nation needs judges for the same rea- has amassed in 41 years of writing a monthly newsletter and 35 son baseball needs umpires—jurists who call the balls and strikes, years of leading the Eagle Forum, a national organization of “citi- but don’t change the rules of the game. She praised Justice zens who participate in public policymaking as volunteers” (see Clarence Thomas for setting the proper example, and said citi- “Two Women,Two Histories,” November-December 2007, page zens must strive for judicial appointees who represent the ideal 29). She began by invoking Hamilton and Lincoln—the former’s expressed almost 800 years ago in the Magna Carta, a forerunner view that the courts would be the least dangerous branch of of the Constitution: individuals who “know the law of the realm government because Congress holds all legislative power and as- and are minded to keep it well.” (Video coverage of the lecture signs their jurisdictions, and the latter’s assertion, after the Dred appears at www.radcliffe.edu/events/lectures/2007_schlafly.php.)

1989 and has a certain fondness for his doc- portance of this kind of funding…at a time of the project. There is no direction by the toral alma mater, but had not previously when the federal government is really in company on the project.” Indeed, the terms worked with the University because, he the doldrums” in terms of support for sci- of these deals di≠er significantly from cor- says bluntly, “Harvard has long had a repu- entific research, Hyman says. porate partnerships some other universi- tation as one of the most di∞cult institu- He says he has not encountered the resis- ties have signed—notably, Berkeley’s tions in the country to work with.” tance he expected from the faculty. “I was agreements with BP and Novartis. The No- That is changing. The dollar value of in- told when I got here that I would meet a vartis agreement, reached in 1998 and al- dustry-sponsored research at Harvard in- firestorm of protest about having a more ready concluded, gave the drug company creased by 70 percent from 2006 to 2007 aggressive technology-transfer o∞ce,” veto power over the university’s ability to alone, and there is more to come. In another Hyman says. Instead, he says, “I’m getting a patent the findings of research the com- recently announced deal, the multinational di≠erent kind of complaint. ...I’ve heard pany funded, and the first rights to negoti- chemical company BASF will support 10 from some venture capitalists that Isaac ate on any patents coming out of the uni- postdoctoral fellows and inject $20 million drives too hard a bargain on Harvard’s side. versity’s department of plant and during five years into labs at the School of I can live with complaints like that.” microbial biology—whether or not the Engineering and Applied Sciences. Merck The University’s agreements with in- company funded the underlying research. has agreed to fund basic research in six dustry have passed muster because Har- The BP agreement, which is new, involves programs at the Medical School. Such col- vard has been extremely judicious in the proprietary labs on university property. laborations will grow more common as the way it structured them, Kohlberg says. As Kohlberg also aims to make Harvard a University’s historic ambivalence toward with the Vertex deal, he says, “All the pro- leader in what is called “socially responsible corporate funding of scientific research di- jects are faculty-initiated. They are not licensing”—enabling the developing world minishes and as trends in federal funding contract research. There is no limitation to benefit from innovative research. This is necessitate them. “I can’t overstress the im- on the public dissemination of the results where it becomes clearly apparent that con-

Photograph by Tony Rinaldo Harvard Magazine 61