Stone's lecture traced historical crises and their impact on civil liberties during times of war. The talk was one of many that took place over the weekend as part of the colloquium called "Imagining a Constitution for the 21st Century."
Associate Professor of LJST Martha Umphrey delivered the welcome address and William Nelson Cromwell Professor of LJST and Professor of Political Science Austin Sarat introduced the speaker and served as moderator of Session I.
Stone's lecture presented a relationship between past reactions to war and the nation's ability to learn from the effects of historical crises. "Civil liberties have been repeatedly restricted during times of war," said Stone. "After the fact, we ask how we could have fallen into the same pattern. We want to avoid continuing to fall into that pattern."
Stone claimed that government officials are justified in treating the Constitution differently during wartime and peacetime. He consequently did not favor the creation of a new Constitution or an "emergency" Constitution to favor these wartime conditions.
According to Stone, it is a challenge to determine the course of action in times of crises, such as war. Stone elaborated, stating that individuals may have a hard time making wise decisions and face temptations to overreact.
He discussed the pressures of war and how the need for security will have a direct impact on civil liberties. "Executive and legislative powers will protect power that will undertake and short circuit our liberties. My security and your liberty will be traded off," said Stone. "We do learn from lessons of our own history, and it is important to do this more self-consciously and struggle to do so."
Sarat discussed his reaction to Stone's historical presentation of past American wars, crises and states of political emergency. "I thought it was a terrific talk which located contemporary concerns about civil liberties and national security in a comprehensive framework," he said. "His talk provided a wonderful overview of the historical tension between civil liberties and national security."
According to Sarat, there were two central lessons to the lecture. "One was a lesson of continuity. Many of the problems and issues we face today have been addressed in earlier eras," he said. "The second was a lesson of change. Stone made a compelling claim that responses to situations of danger are somewhat different today than they have been in other eras. He is optimistic about the capacity of the American political and legal systems to learn from past mistakes."
Sarat explained, however, that he saw history as being more repetitive than Stone's presentation. "I'm not sure I am as optimistic as Professor Stone about America's capacity to learn and change. I see more repetition than I think he does," said Sarat.
"Historical knowledge of the sort Professor Stone offered is essential to any imagining of a future that has integrity," Umphrey said, reacting to Stone's talk.
Sarat also discussed his thoughts on what College students may have gained from attending the colloquium on the Constitution. "I think that students sometimes do not put the problems of the present in a broad historical context," Sarat said. "I hope that Professor Stone's lecture provided students with information about the past that would be useful to them in understanding today's challenges."
Felice Ling '10 explained why she decided to attend the event. "Professor Sarat from my [First-Year] Seminar Class, Secrets and Lies, asked his students to go. I've always had an interest in the Constitution, so I decided to go. And, of course, I had the chance to eat dinner outside of Val," said Ling.
Ling agreed with Stone's argument concerning the flexible nature of the Constitution and its ability to shift with the changing times. "Stone's presentation revealed a continued trust in the current Constitution. I agree with him-there's absolutely no need to draft a new Constitution since the current one is flexible enough to change with the times.
"However, in regards to the misuse of executive power, Congress and the Judiciary need to put more pressure on the White House to stay within legal, Constitutional bounds."
Ling also commented on the turnout at the event. "I was surprised by the number of students who showed up at the colloquium. Back in high school, only a few extremely politically-oriented students would have shown up to an optional event like this one. Here, all the extra seats were filled up," she said.
The Colloquium on the Constitution and the Imagining of America continued on Saturday.
Other guest speakers included Director of the Center for American Progress John Podesta, Kathleen Sullivan, professor of law at Stanford Law School, Director of the Alliance for Justice Nan Aron and Jeffrey Rosen, professor of law at George Washington University School of Law.