Comparative Law Workshop at the University of Baltimore School of Law
June 24, 2025
On Friday, June 13, 2025, comparative law scholars gathered at the University of Baltimore, School of Law, to discuss their forthcoming publications. The group consisted of professors, students, and legal practitioners from national universities and international institutions.
Professor Fernanda G. Nicola from American University Washington College of Law, presented her forthcoming book, Mis-Uses of Comparative Law in International Development, (Cambridge University Press, 2025). She opened with discussing the trend of states gradual decrease of funding international assistance and development as revealing of a deeper problem: the misuse of comparative law in both international organizations and domestic legal reforms. She called for a shift in perspective about the supposed neutrality of comparative law and suggested methods for reform. These include reclaiming existing international indexes and comparative knowledge for more constructive purposes, such as reinforcing social protections and embedding rule of law guarantees within economic development initiatives.
Dhaisy Paredes Guzmán from American University Washington College of Law, presented an op-ed titled “From Doing Business to B‑READY: World Bank’s new rankings represent a rebrand, not a revamp,” which she co-authored with Professor Nicola. The op-ed was developed as a result of the research she conducted while working on a book project. She discussed the op-ed’s two critiques on labor and rule of law assessing the transition from Doing Business to B‑READY. She then introduced a new line of research on the absence of Human Rights Due Diligence (HRDD) in global economic assessments, arguing that tools like B‑READY must evolve to assess whether states are fulfilling their responsibilities under instruments like the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
Professor Nuno Garoupa from the Antonin Scalia Law School, presented his research, “Judicial Legitimacy and Citation Patterns under Authoritarianism: The Case of the Macao Court of Final Appeal.” Professor Garoupa discussed his investigation on the judicial use of citations in cases involving the government as a party, and suggested some hypotheses that fit existing patterns. Professor Garoupa also noted the use of foreign citations in criminal, civil, administrative, and constitutional cases in the Macao Court of Final Appeal and the connection between public confidence in the judiciary and the use of foreign citations, especially by foreign judges, as the Macao Court has nationals of China and Portugal. During the discussion, other contributors posed their own hypotheses to the research presented.
Professor Mark Graber, from the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, presented his upcoming publication, “Meaning and Doing in (American) Constitutionalism.” Professor Graber discussed the normative structure of constitutions and the historical underpinning of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Professor Graber emphasized the need to restructure the constitution to vest authority in people who can create positive changes rather than acting to constrain those who act with bad intentions. He explained the link between an educated and sympathetic society through a change in perspective on positive law.
Professor Kish Parella, from Washington and Lee University School of Law, reviewed her article on, “The Human Rights Obligations of Corporate Directors.” Professor Parella talked about the current accountability process for corporate boards, identifying it as a fragmented system. She stressed the need to have a uniform and coherent regulatory framework in order to ensure not only accountability, but prevention of human rights violations. Professor Parella stated that the conversation surrounding good corporate governance must change. She also discussed the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive of the European Union and its implementation, both directly and indirectly. Professor Parella and the other contributors debated the influence of other scholars in the area, particularly in coining the Brussels Effect and the Delaware Effect.
Professor Janet Lord, from the University of Baltimore, School of Law, and Bryce Hollander, from the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, presented their human rights approach to Hugo Grotius’s writings. Their research, entitled “Grotian Traditions and Disability in De Jure Belli ac Pacis,” focused on applying a disability-centered critical approach to Grotius. Professor Lord and Mr. Hollander explained the definition of ableism and how it was used by early legalists. They identified statements reflecting ableism in Grotius’ works, such as the link between a right to own property and a person’s rational capacity. The contributors explained how building on pre-modern ableist standards have contributed to existing discriminatory societal structures today, including the lack of explicit protection for persons with disabilities in international agreements prior to the drafting of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2010.
Professor Ioanna Tourkochoriti from the University of Baltimore, School of Law, discussed her forthcoming publication, “Should the Law Regulate Historical Memory?” In her discussion, Professor Tourkochoriti emphasized the risks associated when governments define the collective consciousness of societies. Citing several examples of governments criminalizing speech of both truth and falsehoods, Professor Tourkochoriti identified the messages often censored by states as either self-inculpatory or -exculpatory. She discussed government memory politics, from Ancient Athens to contemporary states. The risks associated with memory politics include limiting rights to free speech, the free marketplace of ideas, and personal autonomy.
Professor Mortimer Sellers, from the University of Baltimore, School of Law, examined “The Subversive History of Comparative Law.” He explained that comparativists are heroes of social change because it takes external reflection from one’s culture or society in order to identify problems and solutions for positive progress. Professor Sellers appraised the need for comparative reflection to truly better a constituency.