Stability and Justice Xander Davies '26L writes about the German Law Journal's trip to Berlin for the Rule of Law Academy.

By Xander Davies '26L
March 24, 2025

At its core, the Rule of Law Academy functions as a program to bring together students from a variety of legal traditions to answer one simple question: how should we govern ourselves to foster stability without sacrificing justice?

With the leadership of Professors Alexander Thiele, Franziska Rinke, and Russ Miller, we discussed several alternatives for how governance could take place. The rule by power would revolve on a bad actor’s ability to maintain his status via coercion and fear. The rule by charisma would depend on one’s ability to persuade others. In both systems, the problem is obvious: when governance depends on the whims of humans, laws become unpredictable. Thus, the Rule of Law becomes a necessary component of a stable society.

This realization would frame our discussion of the Rule of Law over the next week. Our discussions were intensive, with often upwards of 100 pages of reading per day. We started by debating the merits of the Rule of Law as a procedural concept. The aim of this version for the Rule of Law was to make all law apply generally, so that no one person was above or could be singled out by the law. As our discussion continued, we examined scenarios through which this purely procedural version of the Rule of Law could lead to horrifying consequences. Our visit to the Stasi Museum served as a powerful example of how this particular conception of the Rule of Law was hijacked by the government of communist East Germany and turned into a tool of fear and coercion against the German people. Over the next few sessions, we continued to grapple with the possible uses and misuses of a purely formalistic understanding of the Rule of Law.

We spoke to several guest speakers to answer this question. Notably, former German Constitutional Court Justice, Prof. Dr. Andreas Paulus, talked to us about the integral rule of stare decisis in administering the law, both in Germany and the United States. Dr. Thu Nguyen, a Policy Fellow for EU Institutions and Democracy at the Jacques Delors Centre, spoke to us about the Rule of Law crisis in Poland. Through the lens of Poland’s case, we considered the often-fragile nature of democracy, and looked at how the Rule of Law can preserve democracy, but also potentially conflict with fundamental democratic ideals.

Aside from the highly prestigious speakers, we toured the city and witnessed Berlin’s thriving democracy in a post authoritarian regime. Powerful images across the Berlin wall were a testament to the desperation of the oppressed to break free. We also had the privilege of visiting the Bundestag—Germany’s parliament. We were escorted by one of the staffers to a member of parliament. The graffiti on the walls, by both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers, spoke of the joy and pride they felt for liberating Berlin from the tyrannical grip of the Nazis.

We ended the week by dividing into three groups of six and giving presentations on three competing visions of what the Rule of Law should mean. The economist’s perspective treats the Rule of Law as a tool for achieving prosperity through the implementation of laws that increase the efficiency of trade and promote stable market conditions. The lawyer’s perspective treats the Rule of Law as a principle of equality, where everyone is subject to the same legal restrictions. Finally, the philosopher’s perspective sees the Rule of Law as entirely incomplete without rules that provide for substantive justice and the protection of human rights.

The last seminar was entitled “Can the Rule of Law Safeguard Democracy?” We discussed everything we learned from the week. We reflected on what we had learned from our friends in Germany, Turkey, Kenya, Lebanon, Bhutan, Honduras, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Although we never reached an ultimate conclusion on the exact role or precise definition of the Rule of Law, we gained an enriching global perspective on this critical topic. Thanks to Professor Miller’s enthusiastic discursive style, the material was always engaging. Thanks to Professor Thiele, we gained a deep appreciation for the troubles facing the German legal system and how they are analogous to the challenges currently faced by the American legal system. Thanks to Dr. Rinke, we gained deep insights into the declining state of the Rule of Law and democracy on a global scale. We also continuously reaped the benefits of the hard work and excellent organizational efforts that Dr. Rinke and her team at the Konrad Adenauer Foundation put into the week’s programming. A special thanks to the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, the BSP Law School, and the German Law Journal for sponsoring this incredibly enriching event.

We started with one question, and in the end, we came away with one question: what can we do as lawyers to promote the Rule of Law in a way that saves democracy and human rights? We’ll be pondering this question for a while, but this program was integral in instilling a sense of duty as we head into the legal profession.