Georgetown Law Welcomes Dean M. Elizabeth Magill

“I cannot think of a more exciting time to lead this remarkable law school. Our country and our world urgently need what Georgetown Law offers,” Magill said.

An administrative and constitutional law scholar, Magill brings a wealth of academic leadership experience to the Law Center. She began her teaching career at her law school alma mater, the University of Virginia (UVA), and went on to serve as Dean of Stanford Law, Executive Vice President and Provost at UVA, and Franklin University Professor and President of the University of Pennsylvania.

Magill is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of both the American Philosophical Society and American Law Institute, and serves on the Board of the National Constitution Center and ITHAKA S+R. She holds a B.A. in history from Yale University and a J.D. from UVA. Earlier in her career, she worked as a legislative aide to U.S. Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and clerked for Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

As she prepared to greet new 1Ls, LL.M.s, transfer students and returning students later this month, Magill spoke with us about growing up in a Hoya family, what drew her to teaching, scholarship and leadership in higher education – and her recent favorite TV show.

Click to watch a video message from Dean Magill.

Your parents didn’t meet at Georgetown Law – but both were students here. What do you know about their Georgetown experiences?

My mother [Mary Timlin Magill] applied to Georgetown Law in 1952. She was living in Washington and working for the predecessor to the CIA, where she had been trained to interpret documents in Mandarin reporting on agricultural production in China. Though she disliked law school and left after a semester, she claimed she had a better grade in torts than my dad, so I’m working with the archivists to see if we can settle that family score.

My dad [Francis Magill, F’51, L’55], meanwhile, applied in 1953. He’d grown up on a farm in North Dakota, and after World War II, he came to Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service as an undergraduate. He later started law school at the University of North Dakota, then transferred to Georgetown Law. He returned to North Dakota to practice law and eventually became a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. He talked about Georgetown for the rest of his life. The overwhelming impression I had from my father’s experience at Georgetown – particularly at the law school, because it gave him a career he loved – was that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. He called Georgetown Law the “ne plus ultra” – the best of the best.

My parents met at a wedding in Washington, and their first date was at the Georgetown Hilltop tennis courts. My father explained that my mother showed up in a stunning tennis outfit, but it soon became clear that she had never played tennis before. Still, it was a match that lasted 58 years. They got married at Holy Trinity, moved to Fargo, eventually had six children. I am the fourth of the group. In my family there are lots of Georgetown degrees – my sister, brothers, in-laws, cousins and nephews. It’s extra special to get to have my own Georgetown experience now.

Tell us a little about your own family.

My husband, Leon Szeptycki, is on the law faculty at UVA, and he’s an expert in water law and policy. We met at Yale, when he was in law school and I was an undergraduate, and we’ve been married 36 years. Our kids are now 25 and 28, and they are not planning on law, which is fine by us. They’re very happy with what they’re doing. And we have a dog named Olive, who is the best member of our family.

You’ve spent your entire adult life living on the East and West Coasts – what do you hold on to from growing up in Fargo, North Dakota?

I remember asking my dad, why Fargo, after living in Washington? I was a teenager and really felt like we lived in the sticks. And he said, “I think this is as much the center of the universe as any other place. The best and most talented people I have known are from here.” Now that I have lived in different parts of the country, I agree with him, and I’m convinced that growing up there gave me a wider perspective on the world than I otherwise would have had. I have a midwestern sensibility, but it’s more than that. I know that it’s a big country, where people have different experiences, perspectives, talents and ways of living their lives. Appreciating that is a gift from a childhood in Fargo.

What was your path into legal academia, and how did you choose a specialty?

I began thinking about it as an undergraduate. I majored in history and I had some incredible professors, and I couldn’t imagine a more noble or satisfying thing to do with my life than teaching and writing. But I realized while working on the Hill that I didn’t have the patience for the archival work so crucial to some of the best writing I’d read. I went to law school instead of a Ph.D. program, with the aspiration to be a legal academic from the beginning. After my clerkships, I was lucky enough to get a teaching position at my alma mater, the University of Virginia School of Law.

My scholarship and teaching are in administrative and constitutional law. For me, those fields are endlessly rewarding. I am interested in how government interacts with individuals – in constitutional law, we evaluate the high ideals of those interactions and in administrative law, we see where the rubber meets the road in the everyday interactions between government agencies and individuals.

Do you have any papers or other pieces of scholarship that you are particularly proud of?

One of my favorite papers is more than 20 years old now, titled “Agency Choice of Policymaking Form.” I looked at how government agencies often have the power to act like a legislature (adopting a general rule), a court (adjudicating disputes), and the executive (bringing an enforcement action). It’s a curious state of affairs, and I explained why courts allow agencies to choose which of those instruments it will use to advance its objective. My most recent paper, “The (Still) Toothless Nondelegation Doctrine and the Trouble with Second-Best Nondelegation Strategies,” evaluates FCC v. Consumers’ Research, a case from the last term of the Supreme Court. I argue that the decision put to rest for now any big doctrinal change in the nondelegation doctrine. I also take aim at a common approach in the Supreme Court to, in the absence of an enforced nondelegation doctrine that would invalidate statutes, enforce the values of that doctrine in other ways, through canons of construction or readings of the Constitution. My view is that those moves do not serve the values of that doctrine and instead shift authority to the courts or the executive and have other significant problems.

Tell us about your classroom style.

For me, one of the joys of teaching has to do with the students’ reaction to the material. I’ve often taught a 1L intro course on constitutional law, and there are lots of different ways of viewing the Constitution. My job is to convey understanding, and there might be five plausible answers to a particular question, so I try to pull them out of the students. Many students come to question what they learned in high school about civics. And we faculty also get new insights from these exchanges. It keeps you fresh and it keeps you from becoming more and more closed-minded, as some people tend to do over time. It’s an electric experience to have.

How did you develop your leadership approach and what do you like about the work?

It began when I was a professor at UVA and had the opportunity to serve on and then chair a few different committees. I found it rewarding to work with others, thinking together for the good of the institution. I felt like: if I can make this place better, I’d like to do that.
The provost I worked with at Stanford, John Etchemendy, taught me so much about leadership and about empowering others to do great work. I think I’m proudest of the people I’ve been able to hire and support. I have found leadership deeply satisfying because of the impact you can have on the institution and its mission.

You’ve lived in Washington twice before. What do you like most about the city?

Washington is the city for me, and still feels like home even though I lived here long ago. My husband and I are settling into our new place on Capitol Hill. I like the neighborhood feel, with lots of great shops and restaurants nearby. Over the summer we found some fun places to watch the World Cup. (Thanks to my son’s early interest in soccer – he has been a Liverpool FC fan since age 7 – we are all Liverpool and of course World Cup fans.) And I can walk to campus! I’m loving it so far.

What’s something you’ve read or watched lately that you’d recommend?

My husband and I watch a lot of different shows, so I have a long list. “The Bureau” is one I’m thinking about a lot lately. It’s a French espionage thriller, and it’s in French with subtitles – which I think is good, because then I don’t look at my phone while I’m watching the show. Unfortunately, I didn’t do well in French, so I definitely need the subtitles. It’s been remade as a British-American series, “The Agency.” But I’d start with the original, “The Bureau.”

You’ve been through many back-to-school seasons – what is your best advice to our newest students about making the most of their time at Georgetown?

The first fall for J.D. students can be challenging. You’re learning a new language and a different way of thinking. I’d say just be open to it and hang on for the ride – you got this. Our new LL.M. students are already lawyers and are here to deepen their knowledge; my suggestion is that they get to know their classmates, especially those from all over the world. Finally, to all our students, whatever year or program you are in: spend time with the faculty teaching you. They are masters of their subject and there’s so much to learn from them.

You’ve probably learned by now that at Georgetown Law, we love our motto: “Law is but the means, justice is the end.” What does that phrase mean to you?

It’s a call to action and it’s simple, if sometimes hard to do: Do the right thing, always. It’s more than that, though. It’s a call to each of us to think beyond the narrow, to always have in our minds the purpose and meaning of the work we do.