The S.J. Quinney College of Law recently kicked off the Dean’s Debate Series with its inaugural debate. This free event on April 9 brought together environmental and social justice advocate Lexi Tuddenham and counsel in the Hogan Lovells energy regulatory practice group, Stewart Forbes, to discuss the future of nuclear energy in the United States.

The debate was the first of many that are planned to address various controversial topics. The series gathers prominent guests, such as legislators and legal scholars, at the S.J. Quinney College of Law to debate topics that have an impact on Utah communities. Created by Elizabeth Kronk-Warner, dean of the College of Law, the series responds to a need for respectful engagement with issues that matter.

“A university education is supposed to push students out of their comfort zones, expose them to new ideas and refine their ability to examine viewpoints,” says Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs Mitzi Montoya. “This debate series does exactly that in a controlled, safe environment.”

In the Q&A below, Kronk-Warner shares her goals for the debate series.

Can you tell me a little bit about the creation of this series? What inspired you to start it?

We live in a moment when public discourse often feels fractured, and yet lawyers, by training and by vocation, are supposed to be among the people best equipped to navigate disagreement productively. It struck me that the law school was the right place to model what that can look like. The series is my attempt to put that conviction into practice—to create a space where hard questions get asked and genuinely different perspectives get heard. Our goal is to promote both ideological plurality and civil, healthy discourse.

What do you hope attendees will gain from showing up?

My primary goal is to demonstrate that civil, rigorous debate is not just possible—it’s valuable. I want attendees to leave with a more nuanced understanding of whatever issue we’ve taken on. … For our students especially, I hope this builds the intellectual humility and advocacy skills they’ll need throughout their careers. A lawyer who can only argue one side isn’t fully prepared for the real world.

Why is it important to encourage diversity of thought and civil exchanges of ideas?

I think about this both as a dean and as a scholar. In my own research on federal Indian law, I’ve often had to engage seriously with arguments I find deeply problematic—because understanding them is the only way to effectively counter them. That’s true across legal practice and public life. When we stop genuinely engaging with views we disagree with, we become intellectually weaker, not stronger. Civil discourse isn’t about false equivalence or pretending every position is equally valid. It’s about taking ideas seriously enough to actually grapple with them. A legal education that doesn’t train students to do that is falling short of what the profession demands.

How are you choosing the topics you want to cover?

We’re looking for topics that are genuinely contested … and that have real stakes for law, policy and the communities our graduates will serve. We also want topics that resonate locally and nationally. Utah has a distinctive political and cultural landscape, and I think our debates should reflect that context while connecting to broader national conversations.

How have you prepped participants and organized the event to ensure that the dialogue stays civil and productive?

We’re intentional about structure from the start. Participants know going in what the format is, what the ground rules are and what we’re trying to accomplish together. We’re not looking for gotcha moments—we’re looking for genuine argument. We also have a skilled moderator who keeps the conversation on track and makes sure both sides have equal opportunity to make their case.

Why do you feel the law school in particular would benefit from this series?

Law school, at its best, teaches you to hold an argument up to the light and examine it from every angle. The Socratic method, moot court, legal writing—all of it is designed to sharpen your ability to reason under pressure and engage with opposing views. But that training can become siloed if it only happens inside the classroom. The Dean’s Debate Series extends that culture into the broader community—it brings in voices from outside the building and invites the public in.