Rachel Kleinman, 2L
Managing Editor
Glen Parker, 3L
Executive Editor
This summer, Family Law Professor Ed Stein got a makeover, or at least a new hat. As Vice Dean, Stein takes on the role of chief academic officer at Cardozo, while remaining committed to his teaching and scholarly pursuits. Despite his hectic schedule, Vice Dean Stein sat down with the Jurist for a candid interview to discuss his new appointment.
Where are you from originally?
I was born in Washington, D.C., and I grew up in Rockville, MD.
How old are you?
I was born in 1965. I’m 43.
Where did you go to school?
I went to Williams College in Western Massachusetts. I got my Bachelor’s in Philosophy and I minored in Computer Science. I was interested in Artificial Intelligence. I went directly to graduate school after undergrad. I got my Ph.D. in Philosophy from MIT in 1992.
What was the topic of your Ph.D. thesis?
I wrote on the debate about the question: are humans rational? I was interested in who gets to answer that question. Philosophers think they do, psychologists think they do. Is the question ‘are humans rational’ an empirical question, about which we should do science? Or, is it a conceptual question, about which we should do armchair theorizing? The project fit into epistemology, philosophy of science, and philosophy of mind. Ultimately, I wrote a book on the topic called Without Good Reason: The Rationality Debate in Philosophy and Cognitive Science (Oxford University Press, 1996).
What sparked your interest in the law?
After writing Without Good Reason, my next major project was scientific research on sexual orientation and how it develops in a person. My next book, The Mismeasure of Desire, addresses this question. Some people link the answer to some social and ethical questions to whether sexual orientations are innate or a choice of some sort. It was a hot topic at the time, and it excited me in a variety of ways. At the time, a lot of research was about to come out supporting the claim that sexual orientations are innate, and some thought this research was relevant to ethical questions about families, sex, and sexuality. I began teaching about these topics. The first course I taught on the topic was called “The Metaphysics and Ethics of Sex.” Through this class and others, I became wrapped up in Supreme Court cases and explored the connection between law and ethics, as well as family and justice in the law. As my scholarly interests were developing, my research in gay rights issues and family law came together with another set of things I was already interested in: politics. I was always sort of a political junkie. As a child, I stayed home from summer camp to watch Watergate hearings. At least that’s my story. On the other hand, my mother said she always thought I was going to be a lawyer.
Have you always wanted to teach?
I don’t know if I have always wanted to teach, but I love teaching. I took to it really well, and I’ve been teaching in some way or another since 1992. I find it engaging and exciting and it’s sometimes hard to believe I get paid to talk about things that are interesting to me. My mother was a teacher. She taught junior high school mathematics. There are a lot of teachers in my family, but it’s nothing I planned before college. Since college, I’ve wanted to be a professor.
What brought you to Cardozo?
I did a lot of things backwards. In the mid-90s, the job market in philosophy was pretty bad and I was lucky to get a series of very good, but temporary jobs at NYU, Mount Holyoke, Williams, and Yale. I taught philosophy for a while at NYU, and I got addicted to living in New York. At a certain point, I decided I would like a more permanent job teaching, but the market in philosophy was such that I was practically sitting around waiting for an epistemologist to die. So, in 1996, I was 31 and teaching at Yale. I was disappointed with the connections I had with the Philosophy department, and I decided to go to law school. Yale Law was hiring lots of interesting folks who were interested in law and sexuality, and it was an exciting place to be at the time. However, during law school, I really missed teaching, so I started applying for jobs as a law professor. Lucky for me, I got a job teaching here at Cardozo. Despite the fact that I was a risky, nontraditional candidate for a law professor job, Cardozo offered me an attractive job, blocks from where I was living. The only more convenient job would have been the doorman in my building. It was good fortune on my part and it’s proven to be a really great fit. After one year, I took a leave for a year to clerk for Judge Dolores Sloviter on the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia. After a year, I was happy to come home to New York and Cardozo.
What classes have you taught at Cardozo?
I’ve taught Family Law, Elements of Law, Sexual Orientation and Gender in the Law, Evidence, a seminar on Reproduction Law and Policy (team taught with Adrienne Asch, a bioethicist), and a seminar on Children, Psychology, and the Law (team taught with Paul Bloom, a Yale psychology professor).
How much will you continue teaching now that you are Vice Dean?
I will teach about half as much. I’ll be teaching Family Law both semesters this year. Next year, I might teach Elements again because I enjoy teaching first year students. Last year I taught Family Law at NYU, and I’ll be doing that again in the spring.
How did you become Vice Dean?
As a professor, I’m really happy to have a job I like and I’d be really happy to have that job for the rest of my life. On the other hand, what’s left to do in life? The vice-deanship is a low-risk opportunity to try out something different. I’ve been involved either as a student or a professor in higher education for a long time—since 1983. Becoming an administrator gives me new perspective. I get to try to help an institution I’m really committed to and learn a lot about institutions. I was asked to be Vice Dean by Dean Diller. He’s new at Cardozo. I’ve been around for a while, so I can help him understand the place. The process of being selected to be Vice Dean was sort of like going on a blind date. I had only met Matthew Diller once before he was selected to be our new a dean. He asked me to have breakfast to talk about the Vice Deanship and, ultimately, he asked if I’d like to be the Vice Dean. It seemed like an exciting opportunity, and I thought I could do a good job for him and for Cardozo, so I said yes.
How is being Vice Dean different than being a professor?
It’s a very different kind of job than being a law professor. You pretty much know what’s going to happen each day when you are a professor, but as Vice Dean you really don’t know what each day is going to bring, whether it’s a problem with registration or a broken elevator. Being Vice Dean is more like running a business or managing a law firm that it is like being a professor.
What is the role of the Vice Dean?
The Vice Dean is essentially the top academic officer of the law school. This position is concerned with all things academic. I support the teachers, I support the students, and more practically, I’m in charge of putting out all the fires. This job is not about fundraising and money and the law school’s relationship to the university (I leave that to Matthew, fortunately); my job is about everything else.
What would you like to accomplish as Vice Dean?
I plan to continue to build and expand the faculty, work to retain the best faculty, and help the faculty here do the best scholarship and teaching possible. I’d like to provide better support and improve the quality of the classroom experience for the students. More specifically, I’d like to increase diversity and provide b
etter support for members of diverse groups at the school. We have a lot of people who do legal theory here, which is one of my
pas
sions, so I want to help support work related to legal theory. Some of the work that gets done in the administration, especially some of the behind-the-scenes processes, could be streamlined and upgraded to make better use of technology. For example, some of the ways we do registration and scheduling can be updated. I’d also like to help build on the strengths that we have in our clinical program. Another big concern is the job market situation for our graduates right now: what changes do we need to make, if any, institutionally, to deal with the changing market?
What kind of research are you currently doing?
One topic I’m interested in right now relates to reproduction and marriage. Why is the state interested in marriage? Why does the state want to say who can marry and who cannot? Some people think the answer has something to do with a state’s interest in procreation. This connects to, among other things, same-sex marriage, which is something I’ve been writing about in various ways for several years. I’m also working on a piece about immutability, in particular as it has something to do with lesbian and gay rights. Some people think that some classifications warrant special judicial scrutiny because membership in a particular group is not a choice (e.g. race, sex, nationality, sexual orientation). Some people have tried to use this notion as a link to ideas about equality, but I don’t think this is a good approach. I’m working on a paper that explains why I think immutability is irrelevant, for the most part, to equality and justice. I’m also finishing up an article about spousal testimonial privileges.
What is your favorite legal word?
Miscegenation. It’s a bizarre word, but happily it’s not a word that’s so significant anymore. Anti-miscegenation laws were constitutional until 1967, so it’s a good reminder of the possibility of legal change, about constitutional change, and about the intersection of the Constitution and family.
What is your least favorite legal word?
I don’t know if I have a single least favorite legal word, but I don’t like words that obscure simple meanings. When there is a legal concept that could be expressed simply, we shouldn’t use an obscure Latin phrase to express it. One should say “all else equal,” not “ceteris paribus.” Sometimes we need technical vocabulary and sometimes we don’t, but in general, I think using technical words when they simply aren’t needed is bad for students and bad for those who need to understand law.
What profession other than your own would you like to attempt?
I’ve been lucky in that I’ve tried several different professions, all of which I liked, but if I had to pick a new one, maybe I would be a scientist. I’ve always been interested in science. Sometimes I think I would have liked to be a cognitive scientist. Sometimes, however, when I tire of things intellectual, I think I’d like to be a baker. The only problem is that I’m nowhere near as good as Alex Reinert. Alex is an amazing baker. What appeals to me about baking is the fact that you can produce something relatively quickly and what you get is a concrete thing. There is a clear end product. In the jobs that I’ve had, the end product is sometimes less clear.
What would you like our readers to know about you that they may not already know?
I can’t think of anything right now. It’s been a long day.