SMNR: Sovereignty in Political Theory and Law

• Semester: Spring 2025
• Course ID: 397S
• Credit Hours: 3
• Unique: 29800

Description

"Sovereignty" is perhaps the most pervasive, and contentious, issue both in political theory and in law.  University of Michigan law political theorist and law professor Don Herzog, for example, has suggegsted that the concept itself be retired, to "rest in peace," inasmuc, he argues, that contemporary realities are so different from the assumptions operative at the turn of the 17th century, when the idea of sovereignty was initially developed.  But, in fact, one cannot understand the major Western religions without paying attention to the importance of "divine sovereignty."  We will therefore begin with Abraham's acceptance of God's command to kill his son Isaac.  The course will definitely be grounded in various approaches to "sovereignty" throughout Western history.  The limitation to the "West" reflects my own lack of relevant knowledge rather than a well-founded belief that the West is exceptional in developing concepts of sovereigty.

We will also look carefully at the transformation from "divine sovereignty'--as in the "divine right of kings" and other rulers--into what I regard as the most important single political notion of hte past 400 years, the idea of popular sovereignty.  What are some of the meanings of the term, and attendant complications?  If "the people" are sovereign, for example, we must decide who is part of the relevant community of "the people" rather than "outsiders." Some outsiders may be defined as living outside of some territorial demaraction.  But even some people living"inside territorial boundaries" may nonetheless be viewed as outside the "sovereignt people."  Think, for example, of members of Indigenous Nations or enslaved persons, or resident aliens, especially if they are undocumented.  Many are treated as not truly part of the relevant legal community, with few, if any, rights that that community is "bound to respect."  But even if we can agree on who comprises "the people," there is still the question as to whether there are any genine limits on the power of the "soverereign community." How, if at all, does one deal with the idea of "limited sovereignty," or is that a contradiction in terms? Are there transcendent norms that limit "sovereign power," and is that true of God or only of "popular" sovereigns?

We will pay suitable attention to cases of the United States Supreme Court, but you should know that a primary point will be that they almost always beg the central theoretical questions posed by "sovereignty" as a political concept.  Justice Thomas, for example, has been rightly critical of some of the use of "sovereignty" language with regard to the autonomy of Indigenous Nations.  The status of Puerto Rico has also raised some complicated questions for those trying to make sense of the term "sovereignty."  We will also pay some attention to contemporary international law and its ramifications for the idea of sovereignty.  Can one, for example, at the same time support a strong theory of "American" (or any other national) sovereignty as well as the notion of "international" human rights or a "duty. protect" the "inrnal" victims of a paticulr regime's discrimination or tyranny?  

Depanding on the enrollment, I'll certainly be open to alternatives in the work requied and gradding.  I do not conceive of this as a semina, but should anyone wish to write a "seminar paper" in lieu of an examination, that can probalby be arranged.  Similarly, I might well ask you to write short "response" papers to the assigned readings as part of the required workload.