拯救罗格斯卡姆登大学

Perry Dane, A. Stein, Robert F. Williams
{"title":"拯救罗格斯卡姆登大学","authors":"Perry Dane, A. Stein, Robert F. Williams","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2302826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In January 2012, Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey, announced that the Camden campus of Rutgers, the State University, was to be severed from Rutgers and taken over by Rowan University. Every major political force in the state, Democratic and Republican, elected and behind the scenes, lined up in support of the plan. Nevertheless, Rutgers-Camden faculty, students, administrators, alumni, and trustees, and their allies, vigorously fought the plan, convinced that it made no sense and would be devastating to the campus and higher education in the State more generally. The campaign opposing the merger with Rowan was popular and political, but it ultimately depended on powerful legal arguments grounded in Rutgers’ distinct and complex history. By the end of June, the merger idea had been defeated. As one assistant professor put it, “The bad guys got outmaneuvered by a bunch of nerds.” This article is a scholarly effort by three faculty participants to make sense of the struggle to save Rutgers-Camden and put it in theoretical context. The article narrates the story of the fight over the proposed merger and carefully analyzes the legal constraints on the plan. It also links the story to important broader questions about legal pluralism, the public/private divide, the relationship between state universities and state governments, and competing visions of the modern university faculty. Through this combination of case study, legal argument, and conceptual inquiry, the article provides a cautionary but hopeful tale about the importance of academic communities defending sound public policy and their own historical rights to self determination against the machinations that can infect our political culture and legislative process.","PeriodicalId":280037,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Legislation eJournal","volume":"3 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Saving Rutgers Camden\",\"authors\":\"Perry Dane, A. Stein, Robert F. Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2302826\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In January 2012, Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey, announced that the Camden campus of Rutgers, the State University, was to be severed from Rutgers and taken over by Rowan University. Every major political force in the state, Democratic and Republican, elected and behind the scenes, lined up in support of the plan. Nevertheless, Rutgers-Camden faculty, students, administrators, alumni, and trustees, and their allies, vigorously fought the plan, convinced that it made no sense and would be devastating to the campus and higher education in the State more generally. The campaign opposing the merger with Rowan was popular and political, but it ultimately depended on powerful legal arguments grounded in Rutgers’ distinct and complex history. By the end of June, the merger idea had been defeated. As one assistant professor put it, “The bad guys got outmaneuvered by a bunch of nerds.” This article is a scholarly effort by three faculty participants to make sense of the struggle to save Rutgers-Camden and put it in theoretical context. The article narrates the story of the fight over the proposed merger and carefully analyzes the legal constraints on the plan. It also links the story to important broader questions about legal pluralism, the public/private divide, the relationship between state universities and state governments, and competing visions of the modern university faculty. Through this combination of case study, legal argument, and conceptual inquiry, the article provides a cautionary but hopeful tale about the importance of academic communities defending sound public policy and their own historical rights to self determination against the machinations that can infect our political culture and legislative process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":280037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Legislation eJournal\",\"volume\":\"3 1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Legislation eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2302826\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Legislation eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2302826","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2012年1月,新泽西州州长克里斯·克里斯蒂(Chris Christie)宣布,州立大学罗格斯(Rutgers)的卡姆登校区将从罗格斯大学分离出来,由罗文大学(Rowan University)接管。该州的每一股主要政治力量,无论是民主党还是共和党,无论是民选的还是幕后的,都一致支持这项计划。然而,罗格斯-卡姆登大学的教职员工、学生、管理人员、校友、受托人以及他们的盟友都极力反对这一计划,认为这毫无意义,而且会对校园和全州的高等教育造成更大的破坏。反对与罗文大学合并的运动是受欢迎的,也是政治性的,但它最终依赖于基于罗格斯大学独特而复杂的历史的强有力的法律论据。到六月底,合并的想法被否决了。正如一位助理教授所说,“坏人被一群书呆子打败了。”这篇文章是三位教职员工的学术努力,旨在解释拯救罗格斯-卡姆登大学的斗争,并将其置于理论背景下。本文叙述了围绕拟议的合并而进行的斗争,并仔细分析了该计划的法律约束。它还将这个故事与一些重要的更广泛的问题联系起来,这些问题包括法律多元化、公共/私人划分、州立大学和州政府之间的关系,以及对现代大学教师的相互竞争的看法。通过案例研究、法律论证和概念探究的结合,本文提供了一个警示但充满希望的故事,说明学术界捍卫健全的公共政策和他们自己的历史自决权利的重要性,反对可能影响我们的政治文化和立法程序的阴谋。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Saving Rutgers Camden
In January 2012, Chris Christie, Governor of New Jersey, announced that the Camden campus of Rutgers, the State University, was to be severed from Rutgers and taken over by Rowan University. Every major political force in the state, Democratic and Republican, elected and behind the scenes, lined up in support of the plan. Nevertheless, Rutgers-Camden faculty, students, administrators, alumni, and trustees, and their allies, vigorously fought the plan, convinced that it made no sense and would be devastating to the campus and higher education in the State more generally. The campaign opposing the merger with Rowan was popular and political, but it ultimately depended on powerful legal arguments grounded in Rutgers’ distinct and complex history. By the end of June, the merger idea had been defeated. As one assistant professor put it, “The bad guys got outmaneuvered by a bunch of nerds.” This article is a scholarly effort by three faculty participants to make sense of the struggle to save Rutgers-Camden and put it in theoretical context. The article narrates the story of the fight over the proposed merger and carefully analyzes the legal constraints on the plan. It also links the story to important broader questions about legal pluralism, the public/private divide, the relationship between state universities and state governments, and competing visions of the modern university faculty. Through this combination of case study, legal argument, and conceptual inquiry, the article provides a cautionary but hopeful tale about the importance of academic communities defending sound public policy and their own historical rights to self determination against the machinations that can infect our political culture and legislative process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信