How Hermann Kantorowicz Changed His Mind About America and Its Law, 1927–34
Keywords:
Hermann Kantorowicz, Columbia Law School, University in Exile, German-Jewish émigré, transatlantic jurisprudence, free law movement,Abstract
Hermann Kantorowicz crossed the Atlantic twice: to take up a visiting professorship at Columbia Law School in the summer of 1927, and to find refuge at New York's University in Exile in 1933/1934. Between his first and second stay, the German-Jewish émigré changed his mind about America and its law fundamentally. While he had—patronizingly—praised his US colleagues for “catch[ing] up… intellectually” in 1927, he accused them of “destroy[ing] the Law itself” in 1934. Reconstructing Kantorowicz's change of heart, my article uncovers just how open the transatlantic 1930s still were in jurisprudential matters. As leader of the so-called “free law” movement, Kantorowicz had sparked a turn to “life” in German legal science in the years before World War I. Throughout the 1920s, he had then watched contentedly, as American “realist” scholars drew on free law ideas for their own critical projects. By 1934, however, Kantorowicz could not help but notice parallels between New Deal and Nazi law. To his mind, both Roosevelt's and Hitler's jurists had started turning his moderate free law ideas into a radical—and dangerous—legal nihilism: in designating law as life's only source, they shunned scientific legal methods. In light of these concerns, my article excavates life-law's delicate suspension between peril and potential. My sources reveal a striking, triangular relationship between German free law, American legal realism, and Nazi life-jurisprudence.
References
See generally Lerner, Robert E., Ernst Kantorowicz: A Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017)Google Scholar.
2
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, February 27, 1934 (C36 Hermann Kantorowicz Papers [hereafter HKP], Freiburg University Archive, file no. 151).
3
Kantorowicz, Hermann, “Some Rationalism about Realism,” Yale Law Journal 43 (1934): 1240–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4
Ibid., 1251.
5
Curran, Vivian Grosswald, “Rethinking Hermann Kantorowicz: Free Law, American Legal Realism and the Legacy of Anti-Formalism,” in Rethinking the Masters of Comparative Law, ed. Riles, Annelise (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001), 66–91Google Scholar.
6
See especially Chapoutot, Johann, The Law of Blood: Thinking and Acting as a Nazi, trans. Mouillot, Miranda Richmond (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2018)Google Scholar as well as Rückert, Joachim, “Der Rechtsbegriff der Deutschen Rechtsgeschichte in der NS-Zeit: der Sieg des ‘Lebens’ und des konkreten Ordnungsdenkens, seine Vorgeschichte und seine Nachwirkungen,” in Unrecht durch Recht: Zur Rechtsgeschichte der NS-Zeit, ed. Rückert, Joachim (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), 101–62Google Scholar.
7
For contrasting analyses of Nazi law, see Fraenkel, Ernst, The Dual State: A Contribution to the Theory of Dictatorship, trans. Shils, Edward A., in collaboration with Edith Lowenstein and Klaus Knorr (New York: Oxford University Press, 1941)Google Scholar; and Neumann, Franz L., Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism (London: V. Gollancz Ltd., 1942)Google Scholar. For discussion, see Meierhenrich, Jens, The Remnants of the Rechtsstaat: An Ethnography of Nazi Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Morris, Douglas G., Legal Sabotage: Ernst Fraenkel in Hitler's Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8
For a similar reperiodization project, see Greenberg, Udi, The Weimar Century: German Émigrés and the Ideological Foundations of the Cold War (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015)Google Scholar.
9
On the transatlantic 1930s, see Schivelbusch, Wolfgang, Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany, 1933–1939 (New York: Picador, 2006)Google Scholar; and Patel, Kiran Klaus, The New Deal: A Global History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016)Google Scholar.
10
See Whitman, James Q., Hitler's American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2017)Google Scholar.
11
On America's twin crises, see Edward A. Purcell, Jr., The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value (Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 1973); and Morton J. Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).
12
On Kantorowicz's life and work, see generally David Ibbetson, “Hermann Kantorowicz (1877–1940) and Walter Ullmann (1910–1983),” in Jurists Uprooted: German-Speaking Émigré Lawyers in Twentieth-Century Britain, ed. Jack Beatson and Reinhard Zimmermann (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 269–98 as well as Karlheinz Muscheler, Hermann Ulrich Kantorowicz: Eine Biographie (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1984).
13
For an autobiographical account of Kantorowicz's legal-modernist discontent, see Hermann Kantorowicz, Forschungen zur Geschichte der Freirechtslehre (mit einem Bildnis Jherings?), unpublished manuscript, ca. 1904–19 (HKP, files no. 35–38).
14
François Gény, Méthode d'interprétation et sources en droit privé positif: essai critique, 2nd ed. (Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit & de Jurisprudence, 1919), 2:369.
15
Gnaeus Flavius (Hermann Kantorowicz), Der Kampf um die Rechtswissenschaft (Heidelberg: C. Winter, 1906).
16
Ibid., 15.
17
For a detailed history of the free law movement, see Katharina Isabel Schmidt, “The Law That We Feel Living Within Us”: German Jurists and the Search for “Life” in Modern Legal Science, 1900–1946 (Unpublished PhD diss., Princeton University, 2021).
18
Roscoe Pound to Francis de Zulueta, January 23, 1935 (Roscoe Pound Papers [hereafter RPP], Part I, Harvard University Archives, folder 001766-024-0422, available through ProQuest History Vault). Legal realism's global history remains to be written. For a starting point, see Duncan Kennedy, “Three Globalizations of Law and Legal Thought: 1850-2000,” in The New Law and Economic Development: A Critical Appraisal, ed. David M. Trubek and Alvaro Santos (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 19–73. For legal-realist projects beyond Western Europe and North America, see Bartosz Brożek, Julia Stanek, and Jerzy Stelmach, ed., Russian Legal Realism (Cham: Springer, 2018); and Colin Jones, Living Law in Japan: Social Jurisprudence in the Interwar Period (Unpublished PhD diss., Columbia University, 2017).
19
Hermann Kantorowicz, Der Geist der englischen Politik und das Gespenst der Einkreisung Deutschlands (Berlin: E. Rowohlt, 1929). For an English version, see Hermann Kantorowicz, The Spirit of British Policy and the Myth of the Encirclement of Germany, trans. Walter Henry Johnston (London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1931).
20
In this sense, Kantorowicz, too, had many exiles, see Assaf Likhovski, “The Many Exiles of Max Laserson,” Clio@Themis 22 (2022): 302–323.
21
Francis de Zulueta, “Dr. Hermann Kantorowicz,” Law Quarterly Review 56 (1940): 171.
22
Hermann Kantorowicz, Tat und Schuld (Zurich: Orell Füssli, 1933).
23
Einar Tegen, Åke Holmbäck, and Gunnar Myrdal to the Nobel Prize Committee, January 27, 1934 (Nomination Archive of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, the Norwegian Nobel Institute, Oslo). The prize was to be jointly awarded to Kantorowicz and Kelsen, or to one of the two individually. On Kantorowicz and Kelsen, see Jacob Giltaij, “Hermann Kantorowicz and Hans Kelsen: From Debating Legal Sociology to Constructing an International Legal Order,” History of European Ideas 48 (2022): 112–28. On the relationship between German, American, and Scandinavian legal realism, see Heikki Pihlajamäki, “Against Metaphysics in Law: The Historical Background of American and Scandinavian Legal Realism Compared,” American Journal of Comparative Law 52 (2004): 469–87 as well as Toni Malminen, “Scandinavian Legal Realism—Some Unfinished Business,” Retfærd 155 (2016): 57–71.
24
Det Norske Stortings Nobelkomité, Redegjørelse for Nobels Fredspris XXXIV (Oslo: Steenske Boktrykkeri Johannes Bjørnstad A/S, 1934), 29–30.
25
On Pound's high opinion of Kantorowicz, see Roscoe Pound to Francis de Zulueta, January 23, 1935. On Pound's attempt to get Kantorowicz to Harvard, see Roscoe Pound to Morris Cohen, June 24, 1926 (Morris Raphael Cohen Papers [hereafter MRCP], Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library, box 10, folder 11).
26
On the situation at Columbia Law School in the mid-1920s, see generally Julius Goebel, Jr., A History of the School of Law, Columbia University (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955).
27
See Hermann Kantorowicz, “Eindrücke einer Reise nach New York. August-September 1927” (HKP, file no. 147).
28
See generally Hermann Kantorowicz, “Vom Geiste Amerikas: Reiseeindrücke,” National-Zeitung, no. 574, 576, and 578 (December 8, 9, and 11, 1927).
29
For a strikingly neutral account, see Hermann Kantorowicz, “Die Sterilisierung von Minderwertigen in den Vereinigten Staaten,” Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft 49 (1929): 524–31.
30
Kantorowicz, “Vom Geiste Amerikas.”
31
Herman [sic] U. Kantorowicz and Edwin W. Patterson, “Legal Science—A Summary of Its Methodology,” Columbia Law Review 28 (1928): 679–707 establishes Patterson's attendance. For Clark's attendance, see Charles E. Clark to Max Radin, May 19, 1933, reprinted in Max Radin, Cartas Romanísticas (1923–1950), ed. Carlos Petit (Naples: Jovene, 2001), 91–92.
32
See Hermann Kantorowicz to Morris Cohen, August 5, 1929 (MRCP, box 7, folder 13) and Karl Llewellyn to Hermann Kantorowicz, September 15, 1927, reprinted in Kristina Schönfeldt, “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Hermann Kantorowicz und Karl Nickerson Llewellyn—ein Beitrag zum transatlantischen Dialog um Recht und Methode,” in Hermann Kantorowicz’ Begriff des Rechts und der Rechtswissenschaft, ed. Ino Augsberg, Saskia Lettmaier, and Rudolf Meyer-Pritzl (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020), 269–70.
33
On the relationship between German and American legal thought during this time, see James E. Herget and Stephen Wallace, “The German Free Law Movement as the Source of American Legal Realism,” Virginia Law Review 73 (1987): 399–455; Christian Joerges, “On the Context of German-American Debates on Sociological Jurisprudence and Legal Criticism: A History of Transatlantic Misunderstandings and Missed Opportunities,” in European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law, ed. Alberto Febbrajo and David Nelken (Milan: Giuffrè, 1993): 403–18; and Katharina Isabel Schmidt, “Law, Modernity, Crisis: German Free Lawyers, American Legal Realists, and the Transatlantic Turn to ‘Life,’ 1903–1933,” German Studies Review 39 (2016): 121–40.
34
See generally Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law.
35
On so-called classical legal thought, see Thomas C. Grey, “Langdell's Orthodoxy,” University of Pittsburgh Law Review 45 (1983): 1–53; and William M. Wiecek, The Lost World of Classical Legal Thought: Law and Ideology in America, 1886–1937 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998).
36
Roscoe Pound, “Mechanical Jurisprudence,” Columbia Law Review 8 (1908): 607 fn. 9. On Pound's German sources, see David M. Rabban, Law's History: American Legal Thought and the Transatlantic Turn to History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 423–71.
37
Max Radin to Ernst Fuchs, March 11, 1925, reprinted in Ernst Fuchs, Gesammelte Schriften über Freirecht und Rechtsreform, vol. 3, ed. Albert S. Foulkes (Aalen: Scientia, 1975), 421.
38
On the situation at Columbia Law School in the later 1920s, see especially Laura Kalman, Legal Realism at Yale, 1927–1960 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986), 67–97; and William Twining, Karl Llewellyn and the Realist Movement, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 41–55.
39
Kantorowicz and Patterson, “Legal Science.”
40
See generally Daniel T. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1998) as well as Emily J. Levine, Allies and Rivals: German-American Exchange and the Rise of the Modern Research University (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2021).
41
Kantorowicz and Patterson, “Legal Science,” 679 fn. * (editor's note).
42
Hermann Kantorowicz, “Der offene Abend: Mitteilungsblatt für meine ehemaligen Hörer und Hörerinnen: Bericht über das Jahr 1926/1927” (Freiburg, March 1928) (HKP, file no. 57).
43
See Kantorowicz, “Eindrücke” and “Vom Geiste Amerikas.”
44
Kantorowicz, “Eindrücke.”
45
Kantorowicz, “Vom Geiste Amerikas.”
46
Ibid.
47
Kantorowicz, “Der offene Abend.”
48
Kantorowicz, “Vom Geiste Amerikas.”
49
“Declares Germany Will Stay a Republic,” New York Times, July 31, 1927, 27.
50
See generally Judith Friedlander, A Light in Dark Times: The New School for Social Research and Its University in Exile (New York: Columbia University Press, 2019).
51
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1251.
52
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, October 30, 1933 (HKP, file no. 151).
53
Ibid.
54
On Kantorowicz's New School activities, see “Graduate Faculty 1933–1934” and “Graduate Faculty Supplementary Announcement, 1934 Spring” (The New School Archives and Special Collections, Digital Collections). See also “Gets City College Post,” New York Times, January 31, 1934, 15 as well as Hermann Kantorowicz, “Has Capitalism Failed in Law?” in Law: A Century of Progress 1835–1935 (Contributions in Celebration of the 100th Anniversary of the Founding of the School of Law of New York University) (New York: New York University Press, 1937), 320–31.
55
See “Kantorowicz to Address Meeting of Liberal Club,” The Harvard Crimson, February 16, 1934 as well as Roscoe Pound Diary, February 19, 1934 (RPP, Part II, folder 001767-041-0377).
56
Roscoe Pound to Francis de Zulueta, January 23, 1935.
57
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, February 27, 1934.
58
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, October 30, 1933 (HKP, file no. 151).
59
Ibid.
60
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, February 27, 1934.
61
On this spat, see N. E. H. Hull, “Reconstructing the Origins of Realistic Jurisprudence: A Prequel to the Llewellyn-Pound Exchange Over Legal Realism,” Duke Law Journal 1989 (1989): 1302–34 as well as N. E. H. Hull, Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn: Searching for an American Jurisprudence (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997).
62
Karl N. Llewellyn, “A Realistic Jurisprudence—The Next Step,” Columbia Law Review 30 (1930): 431–65.
63
Ibid., 432 and 464.
64
Roscoe Pound, “The Call for a Realist Jurisprudence,” Harvard Law Review 44 (1931): 697–711.
65
Ibid., 703.
66
Karl N. Llewellyn, “Some Realism about Realism: Responding to Dean Pound,” Harvard Law Review 44 (1931): 1254.
67
On Pound's “gentl[e] chid[ing]” of the realists, see Hull, Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn, 255. Notably, Pound began his response by quoting Kantorowicz in his very first sentence, see Roscoe Pound, “Law and the Science of Law in Recent Theories,” Yale Law Journal 43 (1934): 525: “‘Rechtswissenschaft,’ says Kantorowicz, ‘ist Wortwissenschaft.’”
68
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1243.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid., 1244–47.
71
Ibid., 1248.
72
Ibid.
73
Ibid., 1248–51.
74
Ibid., 1250.
75
Ibid.
76
Ibid., 1251–52.
77
Ibid., 1251.
78
Ibid.
79
Hull, “Reconstructing the Origins of Realistic Jurisprudence,” 1302.
80
Hermann Kantorowicz, “Materialien zum Rechtsrealismus” (HKP, file no. 5).
81
Ibid.
82
Hermann Kantorowicz, “Review of Law and the Social Order,” Columbia Law Review 34 (1934): 189.
83
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1242.
84
Karl N. Llewellyn, “The Constitution as an Institution,” Columbia Law Review 34 (1934): 10.
85
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1242.
86
Hermann Kantorowicz to Lydia Radbruch, February 27, 1934.
87
On the illiberal compromises that New Dealers struck at the time, see Ira Katznelson, Fear Itself: The New Deal and the Origins of Our Time (New York: Liveright, 2013). For the longer history of such compromises, see Thomas C. Leonard, Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016).
88
Kantorowicz, “Vom Geiste Amerikas.”
89
Ibid.; and Kantorowicz, “Eindrücke.”
90
Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy, with the assistance of Richard Sterner and Arnold Rose (New York: Harper & Row, 1944).
91
See especially Gabrielle Simon Edgcomb, From Swastika to Jim Crow: Refugee Scholars at Black Colleges (Malabar, FL: Krieger, 1993).
92
Kantorowicz, “Materialien zum Rechtsrealismus.”
93
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1253.
94
Hermann Kantorowicz to Max Radin, April 2, 1933, reprinted in Radin, Cartas Romanísticas, 89–90.
95
Cassander (Hermann Kantorowicz), “Current Misunderstandings of Hitlerism,” B'Nai B'Rith Magazine 48 (1933), 90, 99, and 111. For attribution of this piece to Kantorowicz, see Karlheinz Muscheler, Relativismus und Freirecht: Ein Versuch über Hermann Kantorowicz (Heidelberg: C.F. Müller, 1984), 249.
96
Hermann Kantorowicz, Dictatorships: A Sociological Study, with a bibliography by Alexander Elkin (Cambridge: W. Heffer & Sons Ltd., 1935).
97
Kantorowicz, “Materialien zum Rechtsrealismus.”
98
Hermann Kantorowicz, The Definition of Law, ed. Archibald H. Campbell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958). The work remained a fragment and was not published until 1958. The original manuscript seems to have been lost and with it, unfortunately, Kantorowicz's extensive treatment of Nazi legal thought. The book's editor thus “suppress[ed] a short passage of detailed exposition and refutation of one of [the Nazis’] theories,” which he considered “now not worth remembering” (viii). I would be grateful for any hint as to where a copy of the original manuscript might be found.
99
Ibid., 18.
100
Ibid.
101
See Schmitt's references to free law texts and authors in Gesetz und Urteil: Eine Untersuchung zum Problem der Rechtspraxis (Berlin: Liebmann, 1912). For an English version, see Carl Schmitt, “Statute and Judgment: An Investigation into the Problem of Legal Practice,” in Carl Schmitt's Early Legal-Theoretical Writings, trans. and ed. Lars Vinx and Samuel Garrett Zeitlin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021), 39–155.
102
Kantorowicz, The Definition of Law, 18.
103
Ibid., 26.
104
Walter G. Becker to Max Radin, December 18, 1934 (Bancroft Library, Mss. 76/165c, carton 1).
105
Karl N. Llewellyn, The Bramble Bush: On Our Law and Its Study (New York: Oceana Publications, 1951), 10.
106
Ibid., 153.
107
Although the first line of the letter in question is illegible, Schönfeldt suggests that Llewellyn was referring to “A Realistic Jurisprudence.” See Karl Llewellyn to Hermann Kantorowicz, October 11, 1929, reprinted in Schönfeldt, “Der Briefwechsel,” 274 fn. 139.
108
Karl Llewellyn to Hermann Kantorowicz, December 10, 1931, reprinted in Schönfeldt, “Der Briefwechsel,” 282.
109
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1240 fn. †.
110
Hermann Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism About Realism,” Preprint from the Yale Law Journal [hereafter: “Preprint”], June 1934, Karl N. Llewellyn Papers, Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library, box 25, folder 16, annotation to 1240 fn. †.
111
Ibid., annotation to 1240. On Gény's influence on US legal thought, see Duncan Kennedy and Marie-Claire Belleau, “François Gény aux États-Unis,” in François Gény, mythe et réalités: 1899–1999, centenaire de Méthode d'interprétation et sources en droit privé positif, essai critique, ed. Claude Thomasset, Jacques Vanderlinden, and Philippe Jestaz (Quebec: Editions Yvon Blais, 2000), 295–320; and Ward Alexander Penfold, “An Ineluctable Minimum of Natural Law: François Gény, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and the Limits of Legal Skepticism,” History of European Ideas 37 (2011): 475–82.
112
Preprint, annotation to 1240.
113
Ibid.
114
Ibid.
115
Ibid., annotation to 1250.
116
Ibid., annotation to 1247. The annotation appears as a direct reaction to Kantorowicz's invocation of Herman Oliphant's “any truly scientific study of law” in fn. 21.
117
Ibid., annotation to 1248 (italics reflect Llewellyn's insertions).
118
Ibid., annotation to 1252.
119
Karl N. Llewellyn, Präjudizienrecht und Rechtsprechung in Amerika: Eine Spruchauswahl mit Besprechung (Leipzig: Weicher, 1933), published in English as Karl N. Llewellyn, The Case Law System in America, ed. Paul Gerwitz, trans. Michael Ansaldi (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989).
120
Samuel Klaus to Karl Llewellyn, April 21, 1934, quoted in Hull, Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn, 237.
121
Ibid.
122
On Pound's involvement with the Nazis, see Peter Rees, “Nathan Roscoe Pound and the Nazis,” Boston College Law Review 60 (2019): 1313–47; and Stephen H. Norwood, The Third Reich in the Ivory Tower: Complicity and Conflict on American Campuses (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 56–57. On Llewellyn's “liberalism,” see Twining, Karl Llewellyn, 110.
123
Karl Llewellyn, “On the Reichstag Trial” (Emma Corstvet Llewellyn Papers, Bryn Mawr College Library, Special Collections), which I would not have seen but for Hull, Roscoe Pound and Karl Llewellyn, 238 fn. 38.
124
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1253.
125
Curran, “Rethinking Hermann Kantorowicz,” 68.
126
Indeed, Kantorowicz acknowledged as much, see “Some Rationalism,” 1242 text accompanying fn. 8.
127
Lon L. Fuller, “American Legal Realism,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 82 (1934): 461. For a list of Llewellyn's other critics, see Llewellyn, Bramble Bush, 10.
128
See generally Edward A. Purcell, Jr., “American Jurisprudence Between the Wars: Legal Realism and the Crisis of Democratic Theory,” American Historical Review 75 (1969): 424–46 as well as Purcell, The Crisis.
129
Edgar Bodenheimer, Jurisprudence (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1940), 316, quoted in Purcell, “American Jurisprudence,” 438 fn. 45.
130
Walter Kennedy's contribution to My Philosophy of Law: Credos of Sixteen American Scholars, ed. Julius Rosenthal Foundation, Northwestern University (Boston: Boston Law Book Co., 1941), 151–52, quoted in Purcell, The Crisis, 176 fn. 70.
131
Francis E. Lucey, “Natural Law and American Legal Realism: Their Respective Contributions to a Theory of Law in a Democratic Society,” Georgetown Law Journal 30 (1942): 531, quoted in Kalman, Legal Realism, 121. On Lucey and other Jesuit critics, see David H. Burton, “Justice Holmes and the Jesuits,” American Journal of Jurisprudence 27 (1982): 32–45; and Ajay K. Mehrotra, “Father Francis E. Lucey and President Franklin D. Roosevelt: A Neo-Scholastic Legal Scholar's Ambivalent Reaction to the New Deal,” in FDR, the Vatican, and the Roman Catholic Church in America, 1933–1945, ed. Richard G. Kurial and David B. Woolner (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), 105–20.
132
Kantorowicz himself contributed to the negative association between realism and communism in “Some Rationalism,” see 1252 fn. 25. As such, he reported that one of his former “star” students at Freiburg had gone on to take up a post as an attorney in a Russian provincial town. That same student had subsequently lost all interest in law, caring only about how to “fix” witnesses and officials. This unflattering account of Soviet legal practice tracked how reactionary US jurists maligned realism at the time. For a discussion of, and defense against, such communist charges, see Morris Cohen to Roscoe Pound, September 20, 1938 (MRCP, box 10, folder 11).
133
For recent studies of how US jurists modeled their craft in opposition to Third Reich law, see Noah A. Rosenblum, “The Antifascist Roots of Presidential Administration,” Columbia Law Review 122 (2022), 1–85; and Anne M. Kornhauser, Debating the American State: Liberal Anxieties and the New Leviathan, 1930–1970 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015).
134
Whitman, Hitler's American Model, 146. For an earlier discussion of “German realism,” see Richard Hyland, “Evening in Lisbon,” in Festschrift für Claus-Wilhelm Canaris zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Andreas Heldrich, Jürgen Prölss, Ingo Koller, Katja Langenbucher, Hans Christoph Grigoleit, Johannes Hager, Felix Christopher Hex, Jörg Neuner, Jens Petersen, and Reinhard Singer (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2007), 1161–80.
135
Whitman, Hitler's American Model, 156.
136
On German émigrés’ struggle to find work at US law schools, see Kyle Graham, “The Refugee Jurist and American Law Schools, 1933–1941,” American Journal of Comparative Law 50 (2002): 777–818.
137
See, for example, Fritz Morstein Marx, “Juristischer Realismus in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika,” Revue International de la Théorie du Droit 10 (1936): 32.
138
See Kantorowicz, Dictatorships, 2.
139
On Llewellyn's eventual “retreat,” see Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law, 247–50.
140
Kantorowicz, Tat und Schuld, viii.
141
Ibid.
142
Ibid.
143
Kantorowicz, “Some Rationalism,” 1252.
144
Ibid., 1252–53.
145
Ibid., 1253.
146
This is particularly true of Fritz Schulz, see Tuori, Kaius, Empire of Law: Nazi Germany, Exile Scholars and the Battle for the Future of Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 40–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
147
On Friedrich, see especially Greenberg, The Weimar Century, 25–75; and Kornhauser, Debating the American State, 149–60.
148
Hildedore Oldenburg (née Kantorowicz) to Margrit and Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, March 3, 1940 (MS-522 Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy Papers, Rauner Special Collections Library Repository, Dartmouth Library Archives & Manuscripts, box 4, folder 21).
149
Hermann Kantorowicz to Morris Cohen, January 24, 1940 (MRCP, box 7, folder 13).
150
Kantorowicz, “Review,” 188.
151
Ibid., 189.
152
For another instance of the “glaring irony” that these times produced, see Bassok, Or, “The Mysterious Meeting Between Carl Schmitt and Josef Redlich,” International Journal of Constitutional Law 19 (2021): 694–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
153
For a reappraisal of Kelsen's vision of law as science, see Wheatley, Natasha, The Life and Death of States: Central Europe and the Transformation of Modern Sovereignty (Princeton: Princeton University Press, forthcoming 2023)Google Scholar.
