“One can’t be a lawyer without thinking in some measure historically, because lawyers think about how doctrine changes over time, and how legal institutions change over time,” explains Professor Kenneth Mack. “I find it very natural to think historically when I’m teaching property.”
When Mack teaches property law to 1Ls, he takes them on a hundred-year journey through American suburban residential development. Suburbanites “…want a certain type of house, want a certain type of community. Lots of doctrines that govern that type of thing were changed in the early 20th century precisely to accomodate that development.”
He also has a uniquely historical view of constitutional law, public interest law and civil rights. Every year or two, Mack teaches a survey class from 1865 to the present. He guides students in the study of how modern concepts of U.S. citizenship—”and I use the term ‘citizenship’ very broadly”—came into being, tracing the idea from the end of the civil war to the present.
In an article in the Yale Law Journal [PDF], Mack addresses the power of law to re-order American race relations, challenging today’s take on the past civil rights effort. “There’s a particular narrative that undergirds lots of debates about civil rights law, and much of that narrative is incorrect.”
“There’s a standard story that you find in lots of works about public interest lawyering, civil rights lawyering and civil rights history right now: That the lawyers in the 1940s and 50s tried to transform society by getting decrees from the court, hoping it would revolutionize American race relations…Appended to that narrative is this: Most people think that the public interest lawyers of the 60s and 70s tried to model themselves off this earlier group of lawyers.
“I try to take that story apart. There was a quite vigorous debate among the civil rights bar about …precisely this question. What could you get out of the Supreme Court? Out of law? There was debate that was quite sophisticated in our terms. We could learn a lot from examining the contours of that debate. What was not there was the uncriticized idea that we could just get a Supreme Court decision, and implement it, and revolutionize American law and society.”
When I ask him for advice on becoming a legal academic, he says, “There are lots of different routes to law.” His combination of Ph.D. and law degree is helpful, he says, but the main thing to do, if you’re interested in academia, is to write. Law school has become an even better place to do that, says Mack, since he was a student here 16 years ago.
Podcast: Kenneth Mack (13:10)