Rate My Professor L K Weis

Associate Professor Lael K. Weis is a philosophically-trained legal scholar at Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne. She holds a PhD in Philosophy, a JD, and an MA from Stanford University. Weis joined Melbourne Law School in July 2010 as a McKenzie Post-Doctoral Fellow. Her research focuses on comparatively-informed and empirically-grounded scholarship that critically examines key concepts and assumptions in constitutional theory. Principal areas of expertise include constitutional interpretation and judicial reasoning; constitutional duties, such as directive principles; method in constitutional theory; and the constitutionalisation of property (broadly understood). Her current research project explores green (non-anthropocentric) constitutionalism, including the principles, institutions, and legal forms of a green constitution. She is recognized for work on environmental constitutionalism and constitutional change.

Weis is the founder and co-convenor of Melbourne Law School’s Legal Theory Workshop, featuring leading international theorists discussing works in progress. She serves as a founding General Editor of the international journal Comparative Constitutional Studies and previously held the position of Treasurer for the Australasian Society of Legal Philosophy. An expert affiliate of the Constitutional Transformations Network, her scholarship has been cited 264 times according to Google Scholar. Key publications include “Environmental constitutionalism: Aspiration or transformation?” (International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2018), “Constitutional directive principles” (Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2017), “Originalism and Constitutional Amendment” (Chapman Law Review, 2021), “Vanderstock v Victoria: Fiscal Federalism Meets Environmental Constitutionalism?” (Journal of Environmental Law, 2024), “Rethinking ‘On Just Terms’: Commonwealth v Yunupingu” (Sydney Law Review, 2024, with Rosalind Dixon), and “Constitutionally obligatory legislation: A case study in legal constitutionalism” (Federal Law Review, 2016).