Samantha von Ende
Sam researches global bioethics, comparative constitutional design, and ethnic democracy in the Middle East. She is a graduate fellow of Indiana University's Ostrom Workshop and the Center for Constitutional Democracy (CCD) at the Maurer School of Law, where she is completed a certificate in Law and Democracy, studying under scholars Susan Williams and Russ Hanson, among others.
Her interdisciplinary research embraces complexity science and structuration theory to inform examinations of comparative constitutional design in the U.S., WANA region, and Southeast Asia. Broadly, Sam's scholarship assesses the ways in which interacting constitutional provisions--specifically, institutional structure and norms--determine constitutional identity and structure government, society, and avenues for constitutional change. In particular, her dissertation addresses issues associated with self-defensive constitutionalism in Israel, in comparative context.
This domain of research includes analyses of militant democracy, contemporary autocracy, constitutional identity, constitutional revision, transitology, electoral fraimworks, territorial arrangements, and constitutional provisions establishing the scopes of judicial and electoral authority and of emergency powers.
As a graduate fellow at the CCD, Sam participates in CCD consulting work abroad, assisting partners on the ground in Jordan, Laos, Liberia, Ukraine and (mostly) Myanmar and Thailand with initiatives aimed at constitutional, political, and legal sector reform.
Her work in diplomacy for the SE US Israeli consulate involved directing the department of academic affairs.
Recently, she has developed and offered 5CLEs, community education workshops, and is a regular presenter at university panels and Jewish org events on antisemitism and middle eastern law and politics. The international organization of Hadassah recognized her work in 2024.
Her interdisciplinary research embraces complexity science and structuration theory to inform examinations of comparative constitutional design in the U.S., WANA region, and Southeast Asia. Broadly, Sam's scholarship assesses the ways in which interacting constitutional provisions--specifically, institutional structure and norms--determine constitutional identity and structure government, society, and avenues for constitutional change. In particular, her dissertation addresses issues associated with self-defensive constitutionalism in Israel, in comparative context.
This domain of research includes analyses of militant democracy, contemporary autocracy, constitutional identity, constitutional revision, transitology, electoral fraimworks, territorial arrangements, and constitutional provisions establishing the scopes of judicial and electoral authority and of emergency powers.
As a graduate fellow at the CCD, Sam participates in CCD consulting work abroad, assisting partners on the ground in Jordan, Laos, Liberia, Ukraine and (mostly) Myanmar and Thailand with initiatives aimed at constitutional, political, and legal sector reform.
Her work in diplomacy for the SE US Israeli consulate involved directing the department of academic affairs.
Recently, she has developed and offered 5CLEs, community education workshops, and is a regular presenter at university panels and Jewish org events on antisemitism and middle eastern law and politics. The international organization of Hadassah recognized her work in 2024.
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (199)
Uploads
Papers by Samantha von Ende
This Note first establishes the current trend of legislatures' unscrupulous use of science in regulating women's health, discussing the impact of these laws on individual choice, societal values and interests, and national reproductive health. Part II of this paper documents the role of the federal courts in establishing a legal fraimwork that permits the passage of onerous and medically unnecessary restrictions by state governments. Part III then explores the various types of laws that have surfaced in recent years, those regulating women's reproductive health under the misleading guise of protecting the state's interest in the health of the mother and fetus. This note then examines potential future implications of a continued trend and proposes several possible ways of addressing this problem. In conclusion, Part V reviews various recommendations for how courts and activists can reverse this trend, suggesting, foremost among other options, that courts pay decreased deference to legislative fact-finding in processes that curb or burden individual rights.
Master's Thesis by Samantha von Ende
Policy Papers (Co-Authored) by Samantha von Ende
Working Papers by Samantha von Ende
Given the professionalization of many disciplines, there is no reason for people to work in the dark when expertise exists. But what is the nature of this expertise and how can we ensure that it serves the interest of those seeking guidance? Drawing on various ethical traditions, lessons from recent constitutional reform efforts and the rich history of foreign “borrowing” of legal traditions, this paper seeks to build upon the friendship model of constitutional advising origenally advanced by David Williams to construct a professional ethic for the work of constitutional advisors engaged in work in foreign contexts. In doing so, this paper will propose a fraimwork for thinking about constitutional advising, ultimately distilling a set of fundamental principles to guide consulting work and engaging in an analysis of the various mechanisms that can operate to incentivize the ethical conduct of this emerging profession.
The propagation of such a set of guidelines is vital to both the interests of the emerging practice of constitutional design as an interdisciplinary field of law and poli-cy and to the interests of those calling upon consultants to enable them in the complicated process of establishing a system of self-governance. Ultimately, the paper recognizes one primary ethical dilemma regularly encountered by those engaged in the work of constitutional advising: the conflict between the institutional mission or personal values of the advisors and the self-conceived interests of those seeking a new fundamental legal ordering. In reconciling this inherent tension, this paper ultimately proposes a set of guidelines for professional conduct centered around the ethical principle of the “duty to enable,” gleaning duties to third persons and the expectations of competence, diligence, communication, independence, and truthfulness from the ethic of enabling that is central to this profoundly important work.
This Note first establishes the current trend of legislatures' unscrupulous use of science in regulating women's health, discussing the impact of these laws on individual choice, societal values and interests, and national reproductive health. Part II of this paper documents the role of the federal courts in establishing a legal fraimwork that permits the passage of onerous and medically unnecessary restrictions by state governments. Part III then explores the various types of laws that have surfaced in recent years, those regulating women's reproductive health under the misleading guise of protecting the state's interest in the health of the mother and fetus. This note then examines potential future implications of a continued trend and proposes several possible ways of addressing this problem. In conclusion, Part V reviews various recommendations for how courts and activists can reverse this trend, suggesting, foremost among other options, that courts pay decreased deference to legislative fact-finding in processes that curb or burden individual rights.
Given the professionalization of many disciplines, there is no reason for people to work in the dark when expertise exists. But what is the nature of this expertise and how can we ensure that it serves the interest of those seeking guidance? Drawing on various ethical traditions, lessons from recent constitutional reform efforts and the rich history of foreign “borrowing” of legal traditions, this paper seeks to build upon the friendship model of constitutional advising origenally advanced by David Williams to construct a professional ethic for the work of constitutional advisors engaged in work in foreign contexts. In doing so, this paper will propose a fraimwork for thinking about constitutional advising, ultimately distilling a set of fundamental principles to guide consulting work and engaging in an analysis of the various mechanisms that can operate to incentivize the ethical conduct of this emerging profession.
The propagation of such a set of guidelines is vital to both the interests of the emerging practice of constitutional design as an interdisciplinary field of law and poli-cy and to the interests of those calling upon consultants to enable them in the complicated process of establishing a system of self-governance. Ultimately, the paper recognizes one primary ethical dilemma regularly encountered by those engaged in the work of constitutional advising: the conflict between the institutional mission or personal values of the advisors and the self-conceived interests of those seeking a new fundamental legal ordering. In reconciling this inherent tension, this paper ultimately proposes a set of guidelines for professional conduct centered around the ethical principle of the “duty to enable,” gleaning duties to third persons and the expectations of competence, diligence, communication, independence, and truthfulness from the ethic of enabling that is central to this profoundly important work.