By Bob Needham
Michigan Law

This summer, more than 150 Michigan Law alumni and friends gathered in Berlin for the European Alumni Reunion. 

They are some of the more than 1,400 Michigan Law graduates who live outside of the United States, in more than 80 countries. Held every five years, the European Alumni Reunion is an opportunity for alumni far from Ann Arbor to enjoy the spirit of camaraderie and intellectual discussion that permeate reunions in the Law Quad. 

Along with food and fellowship, reunion attendees participated in an engaging and thought-provoking slate of programmed talks and discussions, including a panel on the judiciary’s role in protecting democracy, a public interview with Professor Emeritus Bruno Simma, and a discussion of the international legal order. 

“In a time of changing international views of the United States, it was particularly great to gather our European family together to reaffirm our global connections,” said Eric C. Christiansen, the Law School’s assistant dean for international affairs. “Bringing together superstars from global legal practice, the highest echelons of foreign judiciaries, and the most prestigious academic institutions in the world was a testament to the breadth of Michigan Law’s enduring global engagement.”

Here are a few takeaways from the speakers at the reunion’s keynote events:

Protecting Democracy in Populist Times: Views from the Judiciary Across Europe

Professor Daniel Halberstam, the Eric Stein Collegiate Professor of Law and director of the Law School’s European Legal Studies Program, moderated a panel discussion that examined some of the greatest challenges the judiciary faces today. 

Panelists were Susanne Baer, LLM ’93, former justice on Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court and an L. Bates Lea Global Law Professor at Michigan Law; the Hon. Tamara Perišin, a Fulbright Scholar at Michigan Law from 2005 to 2006 and a judge on the Court of Justice of the European Union; the Hon. Siniša Rodin, LLM ’92, a judge on the Court of Justice of the European Union; and Justice Goran Selanec, LLM ’02, SJD ’12, a judge on the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia.

Baer, on dangers to courts and judges

“The judges of the International Criminal Court would tell you scary stories of how their life has changed personally, professionally, on every level. Not only human rights defenders but also judges are targeted. Therefore, I want to call on you. You can do something. You are needed right now—as ‘friends of the court.’ Courts are in a very difficult position to defend themselves; they need you. So please stand up for courts.”

Rodin, on managing rights in the Court of Justice

“Rights rarely come in absolute form. Most rights have to be balanced against each other. So how do we do that? There are two main levers that we can pull. One is values; the other is proportionality. Values determine which rights will have precedent over other rights or other public interest. …But at the end of the day, it comes down to judicial balancing.”

Perišin, on democracy’s biggest challenge

“The challenge is explaining that if a democracy wants to maintain itself and not slip into autocracy, then one needs to go back to the basics: division of power between branches of government. Courts perform an essential role as a part of these checks and balances. All over the globe, we see a narrative that rule of law and democracy are in opposition to one another, but they’re not; one cannot function without the other.”

Selanec, on faith in the courts

“When people lose trust in their institutions, you can fix it. You can regain trust. …It’s a much more profound trouble when people lose faith. You cannot regain faith. If people lose faith in the constitutional democracy—in the key aspects, key institutions, key mechanisms of that construct—they’re not coming back easily, or they’re not coming back ever. If people do not have faith in their institutions, it’s a very challenging thing for judges.”

Bruno Simma in Conversation with Steven Ratner

Professor Steven Ratner, the Bruno Simma Collegiate Professor of Law, conducted a public interview with his professorial namesake. 
Simma, a Michigan Law professor emeritus, is a former judge at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and co-founder and editor of the European Journal of International Law, among many other accomplishments. Dean Neel Sukhatme, the David A. Breach Dean of Law, introduced the conversation and noted Simma’s far-reaching influence on the study and practice of international law.

Simma, on teaching at Michigan Law 

“Regarding research and, particularly, teaching, Michigan turned out to be a great love story for me. After having worked as a professor in Munich for 15 years, I found myself immersed in a lot of bureaucratic stuff. And then my time at Michigan brought me back to the almost erotic relationship to international law and its teaching that I had at the very outset of my academic career, even though Michigan students were considerably more challenging than those in Munich. When I look back at my time in Ann Arbor, my feeling is that the Law School gave me more than I could give to it. I learned a lot. It was a wonderful time.”

Simma, on the most impactful decision he participated in at the ICJ

“The most important case with regard to an impact on international law was probably the genocide case versus Serbia, namely because I think that was the case that really formed and gave firm contours to the ICJ concept of genocide—the concept that the international court is pursuing up to today. In order for a genocide to be committed, for instance, it would not be enough if you say, ‘I hate everybody blonde, and I’m going to kill as many of them as possible.’ It’s not enough. There has to be that special intent to eradicate the entire group.”

The International Legal Order in the 21st Century

Professor Kristina Daugirdas, the Francis A. Allen Collegiate Professor of Law, moderated a panel of three international scholars, each an L. Bates Lea Global Law Professor at Michigan Law. 

They discussed how international law and international institutions have been changing and will continue to change. 

Panelists were Christine Chinkin, an emerita professor of international law at the London School of Economics and Political Science; J. Christopher McCrudden, a professor of human rights and equality law at Queen’s University Belfast and a practicing barrister-at-law with Blackstone Chambers; and Anne Peters, director at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law in Heidelberg, Germany.

Peters, on the current state of international law

“We have had three external shocks in three years: the Russian invasion into Ukraine on 24 February, 2022; then the Hamas massacre in October 2023, followed by an extreme warfare; and third, the election of [Donald] Trump as U.S. president. …[The shocks aren’t] only the use of force; it’s the rules of international humanitarian laws, international economic law, environmental and climate law, human rights law, even taxation law. All branches are affected, and there is a shocking silence from states not responding to violations.”

Chinkin, on lessons from the past in international law

“The first lesson is that change was most readily generated when there was strong civil society advocacy, lobbying, and campaigning. I look particularly at feminist activism. Through the suffragette movement, through the peace movement, through other major movements, women have lobbied together. This links to the second lesson: Progress has not been inevitable and can be readily and easily reversed.”

McCrudden, on the future of international law

“We have international agreements that are enforceable through some institutional mechanism. That’s the theory…if we undermine [this enforcement], then the incentive for anybody to actually agree to these commitments in the first place becomes much more problematic. …If your understanding of international law is purely transactional—we obey when it suits us, and we don’t obey when it doesn’t—then why would anybody enter into these agreements?”