Welcome to this a conference of the Stanford constitutional Law Center on the hundredth anniversary of Pierce Versus Society of Sisters. For those, I think I know most people in the room, but if not Michael McConnell. I’m the director of the Center. And it is my real pleasure to welcome everyone here.

Students I see students, I see faculty from all over the country, distinguished members of the judiciary and community, people of. Who are interested in the topic. I think this is probably, I, it appears may well be one of the most important cases that most people never heard of. But of course, those of us who teach constitutional law have long, scratched our heads over it because it is a, a beguilingly short opinion with enormous implications for the practical world of education, but also for a number of other doctrinal areas. And it’s one of those cases where everybody from left, maybe everybody but center left and right at least have, can find things in this opinion that they love.

So if you’re a great believer in school choice Pierce is your case. If you’re a great believer in parental rights, Pierce is your case. If you, if you like the Supreme Court’s Privacy doctrine leading to Griswold and Roe Pierce is your case. So it’s a case with all kinds of of ramifications.

And we’re gonna be discussing it from a number of different points of view, beginning with a panel on its historical background, because actually the case arises out of a set of, of historical circumstances, which are quite fascinating. It’s one of the few cases that I teach where I actually give the students some extra judicial background so they can understand the politics behind the case, which are extremely interesting.

We’re then gonna be talking about its doctrinal implications. We’re going to be talking about it as a parental rights case. We’re gonna be talking about it as a privacy case. We’re going to be looking at the ways in which. Concrete disputes before the courts today are influenced and maybe even directed in some sense th by through the prism of Pierce versus Society of Sisters and and.

I’m really looking forward to hearing this. Let me tell you the way we like to conduct these conferences. Unlike some conferences where people, stand at the podium and read a paper, that’s not what we’re going to be doing. We have invited the people whom I consider to be like the best, the most, the leading experts in the country.

People have thought deeply and long about the relevant subjects. So they’re not going to be talking off the cuff. But nor are they gonna be reading ponderous academic papers. They’re going to pre each speaker is going to present a a fairly brief introduction of their way of thinking about the case.

And then each panel is going to engage in genuine conversation. Back and forth, unscripted and with the audience invited to participate through questions and comments. And we try our best in putting together these panels of not only to bring people who are, it’ll bring serious expertise and deep thought to the questions, but also to have a variety of points of view.

So it ought to be a lively conversation in each instance. With that, I’m going to turn the podium over to judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, who’s the moderator of the next panel. Thank you for coming.