Stanford Legal

Do courts have the expertise to decide on important environmental law issues? Pam Karlan and Rich Ford speak with environmental law expert Debbie Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford, about recent Supreme Court decisions affecting environmental and administrative law--including the Court's decision to overturn decades of settled law by overturning Chevron. What are the implications of the Court's recent blockbuster environmental decisions--the impact on the Clean Air Act, and broader consequences for regulatory agencies and environmental policies. Tune in to explore how these legal shifts could reshape the landscape of environmental regulation in the United States.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Deborah Sivas >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and OverviewPam and Rich welcome Professor Debbie Sivas from Stanford's Environmental Law Clinic. They provide an overview of significant Supreme Court cases impacting environmental and administrative law, highlighting the pivotal Loeb or Wright decision that ended Chevron deference.(00:02:06) Chapter 2: Chevron Deference and Its Implications Explained Discussion on the historical context and implications of Chevron deference, with Debbie Sivas explaining its significance and how its removal might affect future legal interpretations and administrative agency power.(00:09:12) Chapter 3: Expert Opinions vs. Judicial InterpretationsExamination of the Supreme Court's approach to statutory interpretation versus agency expertise, highlighting cases like Ohio against EPA and the challenges posed by the court's stance on scientific and technical matters.(00:16:12) Chapter 4: The Role of the Major Questions Doctrine and Non-Delegation DoctrineAnalysis of the Major Questions Doctrine's impact on regulatory power and the potential resurgence of the Non-Delegation Doctrine, focusing on how these legal principles shape environmental policy and agency authority.(00:18:57) Chapter 5: The Ohio Against EPA Case and Its Broader ImplicationsDetailed discussion on the Ohio against EPA case, its current status, and the implications of the Supreme Court's emergency stay decision on future regulatory actions and environmental protections. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Will the three remaining cases against former president Donald Trump ever get to trial? After Judge Cannon's controversial dismissal of charges in the classified documents case—and the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision—the question is not so obvious. In this episode, criminal law expert David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss these two earthquake decisions, Special Prosecutor Jake Smith's appeal of Judge Cannon's decision, and the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Sklansky’s Book >>> A Pattern of Violence: How the Law Classifies Crimes and What It Means for Justice (00:00:00) Introduction and OverviewIntroduction to the podcast, Professor David Sklansky, and overview of the topics: Judge Cannon's decision, special master appointment, and Supreme Court's recent decision on immunity.(00:01:43) Judge Cannon's Decision and RationaleDiscussion on Judge Cannon's rationale for dismissing the classified documents case, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and the extraordinary nature of her decision.(00:04:12) Special Counsel Appointment and Historical ContextExamination of the reasoning behind appointing a special counsel, Judge Cannon's strained statutory interpretations, and the long history of appointing special counsels.(00:07:23) Analysis of Previous Controversial RulingsReview of Judge Cannon's earlier controversial ruling about appointing a special master, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and consistency in historical interpretations.(00:13:42) Unitary Executive Theory and AccountabilityDiscussion on the unitary executive theory, potential motivations behind Judge Cannon's rulings, and whether the case is about presidential accountability or diffusing responsibility.(00:21:05) Supreme Court's Immunity Decision and Future ImplicationsAnalysis of the Supreme Court's decision to remand the election interference case, challenges and potential outcomes, and the impact on the Manhattan case involving official acts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Control of the border and illegal immigration are again in the headlines and the centerpiece of a divisive presidential campaign. Here to help make sense of recent legal successes and failures is immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón, the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law at Stanford. The author of the new book, Legal Phantoms: Executive Action and Haunting Failures of Immigration Law, which offers insights into the human stories and governmental challenges shaping contemporary immigration debates, Chacon discusses the complexities of immigration policy, its intersection with constitutional law, criminal law, and societal perceptions of identity and belonging.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Jennifer Chacón >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Background Pam Karlan introduces the show and today’s guest, Jennifer Chacón, highlighting her research and recent book on immigration law, Legal Phantoms.( 00:02:26) Chapter 2: The Stalemate of Immigration Reform Rich Ford addresses the lack of progress in comprehensive immigration reform. Jennifer Chacón details the initial aim of her research project to study the implementation of Senate Bill 744.The shift in focus to executive actions by President Obama after the bill’s failure, including the Deferred Action for Parents and DACA expansion programs.(00:07:05) Chapter 3: Understanding Deferred ActionJennifer Chacón explains deferred action and its implications for individuals lacking legal status, plus the significance of work authorization and the temporary nature of deferred action programs.(00:10:38) Chapter 4: Personal Stories and Community Impact Jennifer Chacón shares insights from her interviews with long-term residents about their perceptions of border policy and local enforcement and the varied perspectives of immigrants on the issues of border control and local government actions.(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Future of Immigration Reform Rich Ford inquires about potential reforms, and Jennifer Chacón emphasizes the interconnectedness of border policy and long-term resident solutions. They discuss the Biden administration’s recent announcements and their implications. Jennifer Chacón shares her view on the political challenges and ideal legislative changes for addressing immigration issues. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Should presidents be immune from prosecution? If yes, under what circumstances? Stanford Professor Michael McConnell, a former federal judge, joins Pam Karlan for a discussion on presidential immunity, the Constitution, and former president Trump's cases. In this insightful episode, they discuss the implications of the Supreme Court's stance on criminal versus civil liabilities for presidents, the political ramifications of prosecutorial actions, and the historical context of executive power under the U.S. Constitution. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Is legal representation in the U.S. only for the rich and corporations? That's a question that we'll explore in this episode of Stanford Legal with guests David and Nora Freeman Engstrom, two leading authorities on access to justice and the legal profession. They'll explain the roots of the challenge, how unauthorized practice of law rules contribute to the problem, and how to address them. The Engstroms co-direct Stanford Law School's Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession, an academic center working to shape the future of legal services and access to the legal system. This episode delves into some alarming statistics, including the fact that in three-quarters of civil cases in state courts, at least one party is without a lawyer. This alone often leads to unjust outcomes in cases involving debt collection, evictions, family law, and other areas. And that is just part of the problem, as the Engstroms explain. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Nora Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageChapter 1: The Access to Justice Crisis in the U.S.(00:00:00) Pam Karlan introduces the episode, discussing the work of David and Nora Freeman Engstrom at Stanford Law School's Deborah Rhode Center on the Legal Profession. This section provides an overview of the access to justice crisis, highlighting the high percentage of cases where individuals lack legal representation and a look at the types of cases predominantly at issue, including debt collection, evictions, mortgage foreclosures, and family law cases.Chapter 2: Understanding the Consequences and Causes of Legal Inaccessibility(00:7:06) David and Nora Freeman Engstrom explore the broader implications of the lack of legal representation, including the cascade of related legal and financial issues that arise from initial problems like wage garnishment and eviction. They also touch on the hidden legal issues that never make it to court due to individuals' inability to seek legal help.Chapter 3: Exploring Solutions and Technological Impacts on Access to Justice(00:10:07) David and Nora Freeman Engstrom delve into potential solutions to the access to justice crisis, including the role of technology in both exacerbating and potentially alleviating the problem. They discuss the efficiency of technological tools used by the debt collection industry and the implications for legal access.Chapter 4: The Technology Asymmetry in Debt Collection(00:14:19 ) Pam Karlan and David Freeman Engstrom discuss how debt collectors use automation to exploit legal processes against unrepresented individuals. They highlight the stark disparity between technological access for debt collectors and individual defendants. Engstrom points out the restrictive rules that limit software-driven legal services, exacerbating the access to justice crisis.Chapter 5: The Historical Context and Current Restrictions on Legal Services(00:15:55) Nora Freeman Engstrom delves into the history of legal service restrictions in the U.S., contrasting it with medical professions. She introduces her research on auto clubs and their provision of legal services in the early 20th century, showing how organized bar associations shut down these alternatives to preserve their monopoly.Chapter 6: Modern Innovations and Future Prospects in Legal Services(00:24:13) The host and guests discuss recent efforts to relax unauthorized practice of law rules in states like Utah and Arizona. They explore innovative legal service models emerging from these reforms, including tiered services and AI-driven solutions, and their potential to democratize access to legal assistance. The discussion highlights how entities like LegalZoom are now able to hire lawyers and provide more comprehensive services. They also touch on the potential of generative AI to bridge the gap between legal jargon and plain language, making legal assistance more accessible to the public. The chapter concludes with reflections on the promise and challenges of these technological advancements. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Rich and Pam discuss the successes and failures of Brown v. Board of Education with their colleague, Rick Banks. Marking the 70th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, they look at its impact on Jim Crow segregation and the ongoing challenges in achieving educational equality in the U.S. Banks offers a critical analysis of the effectiveness of Brown in integrating American primary and secondary education and explores alternative approaches to further racial and socioeconomic integration in schools.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Ralph Richard Banks >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Lawyer online feature >>> Brown v. Board: Success or Failure?(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Significance of Brown vs. Board of EducationIntroduction to the podcast and the topic of Brown vs. Board of Education. Discussion on the transformative impact of Brown on American society and its less effective impact on primary and secondary education.(00:02:36) Chapter 2: Initial Impact and Challenges of BrownExploration of the immediate aftermath of the Brown decision, including the decade of minimal desegregation and the eventual legislative push in the 1960s. Mention of personal anecdotes highlighting the slow progress.(00:06:35) Chapter 3: Massive Resistance and Supreme Court’s RoleDiscussion on the era of massive resistance to desegregation, the role of the Southern Manifesto, and the Supreme Court's strategic avoidance of direct intervention. Examination of the lingering effects of this period on the present educational landscape.(00:10:16) Chapter 4: Socioeconomic Disparities and School SegregationAnalysis of the ongoing economic inequality and its impact on school segregation. Comparison between Northern and Southern school desegregation efforts, with specific examples from Detroit and Charlotte.(00:14:45) Chapter 5: Legal and Structural Barriers to IntegrationExamination of legal decisions such as Milliken and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez that reinforced segregation and funding disparities. Discussion on the narrow scope of Brown and its consequences.(00:18:58) Chapter 6: Integration vs. Educational QualityDebate on the merits of integration versus focusing on educational quality through alternative methods such as charter schools and vouchers. Consideration of the mixed outcomes of these approaches.(00:22:19) Chapter 7: Parental Responsibility and Systemic SolutionsReflection on the burden placed on parents to seek better education through choice programs. Comparison to historical figures who fought for desegregation. Discussion on the need for systemic solutions rather than relying solely on choice.(00:25:02) Chapter 8: Future Directions and Pragmatic SolutionsCall for a mix of approaches to improve education, combining integration efforts with initiatives focused on educational quality. Emphasis on the importance of experimentation, evidence collection, and open-minded evaluation of educational policies. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Criminal law expert and former federal prosecutor David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss the New York trial and other cases against former president Trump. From state prosecutions to federal cases, they analyze the defense and prosecution strategies and implications of each trial, shedding light on the legal challenges facing Trump, the first current or former president in U.S. history to face criminal charges.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School Page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Progress and Impact of the New York TrialDiscussion of Donald Trump’s ongoing trial in New York related to hush money payments.Focus on the efficiency of jury selection and trial progress.Analysis of the impact of trial pace on prosecution's case.The role of trial speed in influencing juror perceptions.[00:04:48] Chapter 2: Trump's Response and Gag OrderTrump's response to the trial and constraints of the gag order.Effectiveness of the gag order in curbing Trump's behavior.Discussion on Trump's criminal contempt and its implications.Analysis of potential consequences and judicial response.[00:08:58] Chapter 3: Case Strength/Strategy and Jury Perception Evaluation of the strength of the case and potential challenges.Impact of jury perception on the trial outcome.Insight into trial strategy regarding witness sequencing.Discussion on the prosecution's approach to witness testimony.[00:19:45] Chapter 4: Supreme Court's Role and Case ComplexityDiscussion on the Supreme Court's involvement in pending cases.Analysis of case complexity and its impact on trial timelines.[00:22:56] Chapter 5: Challenges in the Mar-a-Lago Case Examination of challenges and delays in the Mar-a-Lago case.Analysis of trial judge's management and potential trial outcomes.[00:25:49] Chapter 6: Potential Trial Outcomes and Implications Discussion on potential trial outcomes and their implications.Overview of civil cases against Trump and their significance. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Joining Pam and Rich for this discussion are Professor Daniel Ho and RegLab Fellow Christie Lawrence, JD ’24 (MPP, Harvard Kennedy School of Government).Dan is the founding director of Stanford’s RegLab (Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab), which builds high-impact partnerships for data science and responsible AI in the public sector. The RegLab has an extensive track record partnering with government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Department of Labor, and Santa Clara County on prototyping and evaluating AI tools to make government more fair, efficient, and transparent. Building on this work, the RegLab also helps agencies strengthen AI governance and operationalize trustworthy AI principles.Christie, a third-year JD student, worked with RegLab and Stanford’s Innovation Clinic on projects to advise DOL on responsible AI and development practices and to support the work with Prof. Ho on the National AI Advisory Committee, which advises the White House on AI policy. In this interview, we’ll learn about several RegLab projects—and the importance of helping government develop smart AI policy and solutions.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Dan Ho >>> Stanford Law School web page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Setting the StageMention of the rapid acceleration of technology and the release of ChatGPT.Highlighting the risks associated with AI, such as bias and privacy concerns.Discussion on the relationship between AI and governance, including recent developments in AI policy and governance.Mention of the Biden administration's executive order on AI and its implications.[00:03:04] Chapter 2: The Role of Reg Lab and Collaboration with the IRSExplanation of the Reg Lab and its purpose.Discussion on the need for government agencies to modernize their technology infrastructure.Overview of the collaboration with the IRS to improve tax evasion detection using machine learning.Discovery of disparities in auditing rates and subsequent IRS reforms.Highlighting the intersection of AI, social justice, and government practices.[00:09:12] Chapter 3: Student PerspectiveChristie Lawrence shares her experience working on AI policy at Stanford Law School.Discussion on bridging the gap between policy, law, and technology.Impactful work done by students in collaboration with government agencies.[00:11:38] Chapter 4: AI and Social JusticePam Karlan's experience with AI issues in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.Examples of algorithmic discrimination and its implications for social justice.Discussion on the challenges of addressing AI-related issues in government practices.[00:23:55] Chapter 5: Future DirectionsOptimism about the future of AI governance and the recent executive order's impact.Anticipation of legislative proposals and state-level initiatives in AI regulation.Importance of maintaining an open innovation ecosystem and addressing talent gaps in government agencies.[00:25:55] Chapter 6: Audience Questions Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Professor Easha Anand, co-director of the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, joins Professors Pam Karlan and Richard Thompson Ford, along with Gareth Fowler, JD '24, for a discussion about three cases that she argued before the Court this term, the people behind the case titles, and what it takes to represent them at the highest court in the land. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Easha Anand >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Setting the StageEasha Anand shares the story of Mr. Ciavarini and the impact of the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic on restoring his reputation. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the episode and guests Professor Easha Anand and Gareth Fowler, discussing their work with the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.(00:01:52) Chapter 2: Joining the Clinic and the Clinic's Unique ApproachGareth Fowler describes his experience joining the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic and the process of working on cases as a student. Easha Anand explains the distinctive features of the clinic's model, emphasizing the significant role of students in producing legal work.(00:05:38) Chapter 3: Working on Cases and the Sarbanes-Oxley CaseGareth Fowler discusses the specific cases he worked on during his time at the clinic, including Mendez-Colleen and United States v. Jackson. Easha Anand recounts her experience arguing the case of Murray v. UBS before the Supreme Court and the significance of the outcome for whistleblower protection.(00:15:52) Chapter 4: Insights from Oral ArgumentsEasha Anand reflects on the differences between arguing cases at lower courts versus the Supreme Court, emphasizing the unique challenges and opportunities of Supreme Court advocacy.(00:18:16) Chapter 5: Clinic's Trip to D.C.Gareth Fowler shares his experience attending Supreme Court oral arguments in Washington, D.C., providing insights into the courtroom dynamics and the significance of the proceedings.(00:20:27) Chapter 6: Preparing for Future Cases and Impactful MomentsEasha Anand discusses the upcoming case of Chiavarini and the journey of preparing for oral arguments, highlighting the client's story and the clinic's commitment to justice. Pam Karlan and Easha Anand reflect on the profound impact of their work with clients and the meaningful experiences shared during their collaboration with the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic.[00:24:23] Chapter 7: Audience Question and Answer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Dive into the complex history of America's drug war with George Fisher, former Massachusetts Attorney General and acclaimed scholar of criminal law. In his latest book, "Beware Euphoria," Fisher explores the moral and racial dimensions of drug prohibition, challenging conventional narratives. Join the conversation on Stanford Legal as Fisher discusses the impact of racial justice movements on drug policy, including the legalization of cannabis, offering profound insights into a contentious issue shaping legal and social discourse.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:George Fisher >>> Stanford Law School PageBeware Euphoria: The Moral Roots and Racial Myths of America's War on Drugs(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins of Drug Prohibition Podcast guest, George Fisher, traces the history of drug prohibition, highlighting the departure of cannabis use from medical preservation. He also discusses the 19th-century roots of drug prohibition, particularly the moral concerns driving the anti-drug laws.(00:11:42) Chapter 2: Racial Narratives and Mass IncarcerationRich Ford discusses the common narrative linking mass incarceration to the war on drugs and its alleged racial motivations. Fisher challenges this narrative, arguing that early drug laws were about protecting whites' moral purity rather than targeting people of color. The conversation explores the racial dynamics of early drug laws, emphasizing the racism of indifference rather than explicit targeting.(00:20:20) Chapter 3: Moral Valence of Mind-Altering Drugs Fisher delves into the historical moral perceptions of mind-altering drugs, tracing back to Early Christian notions of reason and morality.He explains why certain drugs, like opium and later marijuana, were seen as threats to moral character, while alcohol was treated differently due to its varied uses.(00:26:15) Chapter 4: Legalization of Marijuana and Racial Justice The conversation shifts to the legalization of marijuana, highlighting its historical bans and recent movements towards legalization. Concerns about the increasing potency of marijuana and its potential backlash are explored, suggesting a need for careful regulation and messaging.(00:30:19) Conclusion: Closing RemarksRich Ford wraps up the conversation with George Fisher discussing insights and emphasizing the importance of discussing the ongoing struggle with drugs and intoxicants. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Pam Karlan and labor law expert and former NLRB chair William Gould IV explore the quickly changing arena of college athletics including the push for student-athlete unionization, the debate over compensation, and other issues at the intersection of sports and academia. From the Dartmouth College men's basketball team's union election to the broader challenges facing university athletics, they discuss the complex issues shaping the law and the future of collegiate sports.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:William Gould IV >>> Stanford Law School PageRecent Q&A with Gould >>> Stanford's Bill Gould on the Dartmouth College Basketball Union Vote (00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Intersection of Sports and Labor LawPam Karlan introduces the topic of sports law and labor law, highlighting the recent developments in the field and the significance of the intersection between the two areas. Bill and Pam look at an overview of the Dartmouth College men's basketball team unionization case and its implications for the traditional understanding of student-athlete status.(00:02:03) Chapter 2: The Evolving Definition of Student-AthleteWilliam B. Gould IV delves into the historical context of the student-athlete designation, tracing its origins and evolution over time. He discusses the complexities of defining student-athletes within the framework of labor law and examines the factors that have contributed to the recent challenges to this classification.(00:06:49) Chapter 3: Labor Law Considerations in Collegiate AthleticsGould explores the key principles of labor law as they apply to collegiate athletics, emphasizing the factors that determine employee status and the obligations of universities as employers. The chapter addresses issues such as control over athletes, compensation, and the role of collective bargaining in shaping the future of collegiate sports.(00:10:00) Chapter 4: Implications for Intercollegiate SportsKarlan and Gould discuss the broader implications of the Dartmouth case and similar unionization efforts for intercollegiate sports as a whole. They examine the challenges posed by conference realignment, Title IX considerations, and the evolving landscape of athlete compensation, including name, image, and likeness rights.(00:14:23) Chapter 5: Legal and Policy PerspectivesThe conversation shifts to a discussion of the legal and policy considerations surrounding student-athlete rights and the role of the courts in shaping future outcomes. Gould offers insights into the potential impact of Supreme Court decisions and judicial attitudes towards higher education institutions and their treatment of athletes.(00:21:08) Chapter 6: Looking AheadIn the final chapter, Karlan and Gould reflect on the future of collegiate athletics in light of ongoing legal battles and shifting societal norms. They explore potential scenarios for reform and address lingering questions about the balance between academic and athletic pursuits, the role of unions in protecting athlete rights, and the broader implications for labor relations in the sports industry. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When does life begin? In this episode of Stanford Legal, co-hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan dig into the recent decision by the Alabama Supreme Court that has sent shockwaves through the fertility treatment community. The ruling, which considers frozen embryos as children under state law, has wide-ranging implications for in vitro fertilization (IVF) practices. Bioethics and law expert Hank Greely joins the discussion, providing insights into the background of the case, its legal implications, and the potential ramifications for IVF clinics and patients in Alabama—and throughout the country. The conversation highlights the intersection of law, medicine, and ethics, revealing the complex challenges surrounding embryo rights and reproductive freedoms.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Hank Greely >>> Stanford Law School Page | Twitter/X(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court RulingHank Greely, discussing the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision regarding frozen embryos. He provides background on the Alabama Supreme Court decision and the implications for fertility treatment in the state along with explaining the legal basis of the ruling and the claims brought forth by the plaintiffs.(00:03:43) Chapter 2: Wrongful Death Act & Implications of the DecisionDiscussion on the Alabama Wrongful Death Act and its application to unborn children, including frozen embryos. Exploration of the broader implications of the decision, including ethical and legal concerns.(00:08:21) Chapter 3: Understanding Frozen EmbryosHank Greely explains the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and the concept of frozen embryos, including the harvesting of eggs and the reasons for freezing embryos.(00:14:05) Chapter 4: Legal and Ethical ConcernsAnalysis of the legal and ethical implications of the Alabama decision for IVF clinics and patients. Greely, Karlan, and Ford then discuss the political and legislative responses to the Alabama decision, including potential future actions(00:26:49) Chapter 5: Gender and Control Over ReproductionShow Notes: Discussion on the gender dynamics and control over reproduction highlighted by the Alabama Supreme Court ruling.(00:33:29) Chapter 6: Political Ramifications and PredictionsHank Greely offers his perspective on potential legislative responses and the broader implications for reproductive rights. From congressional bills to grassroots activism, we explore the evolving landscape of reproductive justice. They also explore the political ramifications and the future outlook for fertility treatment. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Why does the U.S. have the highest incarceration rate in the industrialized world, with individuals, communities, and taxpayers paying a steep price for lengthy prison terms for even nonviolent offenders? Michael Romano, a criminal justice lawyer who founded and directs the Three Strikes Project at Stanford Law School, the first law school program of its type in the country focused on securing reduced sentences for incarcerated people deemed to be serving disproportionate sentences, has spent his career on this uniquely American challenge. As the project’s director for the past 16 years, Mike has worked with Stanford Law students to win the release of more than 200 Californians imprisoned under the state’s Three Strikes law.Along with helping hundreds of people sentenced to life in prison for minor/nonviolent crimes, the Three Strikes team also worked to change California’s Three Strikes Law. In 2012 they celebrated passage of the Three Strikes Reform Act, a landmark legislative effort led from start to finish by Stanford Law students and project staff members in partnership with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XMichael Romano >>> Twitter/X Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Important questions regarding Trump: can he be prosecuted for criminal wrongdoing when he was serving as president, whether the two impeachment trials matter, and if Colorado’s decision to disqualify him from the state’s primary ballots is constitutional. Pulitzer Prize winning historian Jack Rakove joins Pam and Rich for a discussion on the U.S. Constitution, originalism, charges against former president Donald Trump, and the role of historians in constitutional litigation.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Jack Rakove >>> Stanford University Page Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Drinkable water is a precious commodity. But as population growth, aging infrastructure, drought, and climate change pose challenges to freshwater quality and quantity in America, the safety and amount of water in parts of the U.S. is in question. With more than 140,000 separate public water systems in the country, how can federal, state, and local governments, along with the various water authorities, take on this challenge alone? In this episode we hear from global water and natural resources expert Barton “Buzz” Thompson, about this new book Liquid Asset: How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis —and his recommendations for how to solve the freshwater crisis in the U.S.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Buzz Thompson >>> Stanford Law School PageLiquid Assets: How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis.Paul Milgrom & Auction TheoryChapter Timestamps:(00:00:00) Introduction & Water's Scarcity Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce guest, Buzz Thompson, an expert in water law and author of Liquid Assets(00:01:18) Water Challenges TodayThe scarcity of fresh water globally, and the multiple crises facing water resources: uneven distribution, climate change and the depletion of groundwater resources.(00:04:30) Water Infrastructure What is water infrastructure in the United States, the current state of it, and the repairs and upgrades required and being undertaken.(00:07:14) Updating Infrastructure & 21st-Century Technology Examples of modern wastewater treatment methods, advocating for resource recovery centers and outlining their potential benefits by adopting 21st century technology.(00:09:08) Fragmented Water Systems The complexity of water systems, & the challenges created by small water systems (00:12:00) Water Rights & Legal Structures The current legal structure of water rights in the USA,and defining the goals of both protecting water as a public resource, and a private commodity.(00:16:25) Private Sector's Role & Future Solutions Buzz discusses water markets internationally, and the private sector's role in innovation, technology, and financing to bridge the gap in water management. (00:18:59) Challenges with Outdated Water Rights Rich & Buzz discuss the challenges created by the current water rights model, and the necessity, possibilities, and challenges for legal reform.(00:21:18) Proposal for Tradeable Water Rights The concept of converting existing water rights into more easily transferable ones similar to real property, in order to eliminate the current challenges.(00:25:49) Changing a System of Water RightsAustralia's successful reform in the Murray-Darling Basin, where water rights were revamped for better tradeability and how they safeguarded the environment.(00:27:31) Conclusion Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Women and minorities continue to be underrepresented in patent issuing and less often are granted credit for their innovations. We examine why this is, the impacts it has, and what can be done about it. Patents, and the protection of inventor rights, was deemed important enough that when the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788 it included what is now known as the intellectual property clause: Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, which reads “[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” Our guest in this episode is Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, whose latest research looks at inequality in the patent system and how that impacts innovation. Her paper “Improving Equity in Patent Inventorship” was recently published in Science.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLisa Ouellette >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) Introduction and Patent System OverviewThe significance of patents and their historical context. Intro of guest Lisa Ouellette’s research on inequity in the patent system (00:01:47) Understanding Patents and their Benefits The purpose of patents, their duration, and their impact on inventors' rights. Discussion on how patents apply across various industries like pharmaceuticals, software, and AI.(00:04:10) Inequities in the Patent SystemDisparities within the patent system, and discussion on the lower representation of women and minorities in obtaining patents.(00:07:15) The Innovator-Inventor GapExploring the gap between authorship on scientific papers and recognition as patent inventors & potential mechanisms causing it.(00:11:15) Impact of Patent RecognitionThe significance of being listed as a patent inventor: impact on career, earnings, and professional reputation. (00:13:33) Innovation Type with Diverse InventorshipInsights into the potential shift in innovation focus due to diversity within inventor teams. (00:14:54) Addressing Inequity: Policy ReformsChallenges faced by underrepresented groups in persisting through the patent application process, suggestions for change and the impact of real-world programs to address these challenges(00:18:37) AI's Influence and ChallengesSpeculations on AI's impact on patent accessibility and equity. Challenges and potential exacerbation of disparities due to AI-generated patent claims.(00:21:11) Conclusion Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In June, 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court delivered an historic and far reaching decision overturning Roe v. Wade and turning abortion law to the states. Less than two years on, we are seeing just how that decision is playing out as women navigate a divided country with a patchwork of reproductive rights. The recent example of Kate Cox, a Dallas-area mother of two who sought to have a medical exemption from Texas’ strict abortion laws and was forced to leave the state to receive the care she needed when her request was denied, brought the consequences of the Court’s decision to the headlines. In this episode we hear from the show’s co-host Pam Karlan, an expert in reproductive law, about the Texas case and reproductive rights in the US after Roe was overturned.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionRich Ford introduces the episode and highlights the significant changes in abortion laws over recent years. (00:01:08) Current Legal ContextPam Karlan provides an overview of the legal landscape since the Dobbs case decision and summarizes the changes and confusion it has led to.(00:05:00) Texas Abortion Controversy: Kate Cox CaseFocus on the case of Kate Cox, a woman in Texas seeking abortion due to fetal health complications. Analysis of the legal, political, and ethical implications of the verdict.(00:10:02) Impact of Returning Abortion Laws to StatesThe misconception that returning abortion decisions to states would reduce controversy. Analysis of attempts to to restrict travel for abortion services.(00:12:20) Legal Ramifications and Political ScenariosDiscussion on potential legal consequences for aiding abortion travel and comparisons with state laws regarding child-related travel. Contemplation of federal abortion bans utilizing the Commerce Clause and the potential scenarios for imposing such bans.(00:14:48) Medical Abortions and Legal ChallengesInsights into the rise of medical abortions and the controversy surrounding the approval and distribution of drugs, and subsequent legal battles.(00:20:20) State Politics, Abortion Laws & State Referendum DynamicsExploration of the shifting dynamics in state politics, including red states' stances on protecting abortion rights, and measures in California & Ohio.(00:22:56) Shifting Political NarrativesDiscussion on the evolving focus of the abortion debate, and examination of how abortion politics are playing out in national and state elections, influencing political strategies.(00:24:59) Federal Legislation Prospects and Responsive ActivismThe potential for federal legislation protecting or banning abortion rights & insights into citizen activism both aiding and impeding abortion access. (00:28:18) Abortion in Unlikely ArenasExamples showcasing how abortion politics infiltrate seemingly unrelated areas, affecting military promotions and governmental functionality. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode, Pam Karlan and Rich Ford explore recent 2nd Amendment Supreme Court cases, the evolution of gun laws, and the implications of increased gun accessibility in the U.S. Joined by John Donohue, an empirical researcher who is an expert on firearms and the law, they discuss the proliferation of guns and automatic weapons, which make the US an outlier among Western countries for its mass killings, and the ways in which gun laws have made the U.S. more deadly—including for law enforcement. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XJohn Donahue >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) Introduction Pam Karlan introduces the episode, highlighting the recent surge in mass shootings in the US, and introduces this week’s guest, John Donahue, one of the nation’s leading experts on firearms and the law.(00:01:16) Proliferation & Access to Assault Weapons in AmericaThe impact of the termination of the federal assault weapon ban in 2004 on mass shootings and a comparison to other nations restrictions on these weapons.(00:05:07) Supreme Court and the Rahimi CaseAnalyzing the Rahimi case and its implications regarding the possession of weapons under restraining orders and the Supreme Court's evolving stance on gun rights.(00:06:37) The Gun Lobby & the Republican PartyExploring the relationship between the gun lobby, manufacturers, and republicans and the effects this evolving relationship has had since the mid nineties.(00:13:10) Constitutional Shifts The transformation in Second Amendment interpretations from the 1930s to the recent Bruen case, exploring the Supreme Court's methodology and its implications for gun regulations and the Rahimi decision before them now.(00:15:40) Frozen Interpretations The historical context of the Second Amendment, the oddity of freezing it, and how the current context challenges the applicability of historical Second Amendment interpretations.(00:19:05) Broader Implications The broader spectrum of issues stemming from the proliferation of access to firearms and the growing lethality of weaponry, including rising firearm-related suicides and homicides.(00:24:05) Bruen & Gun Laws The effect of the Bruen case on laws like restraining immediate access to weapons, and safe storage laws(00:26:08) Law Enforcement & Gun ProliferationJohn explains how the proliferation and of firearms has affected the polices ability to clear violent crimes, and increases police involved shootings(00:28:31) Conclusion Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

From the recent Senate dress code controversy to landmark legal cases, explore the nuanced intersection of the law and fashion, gender identity, and cultural expression. Join Pam Karlan and Rich Ford to delve into the intricate world of dress codes and the law, examining their historical roots and contemporary implications.The discussion begins with the recent Senate dress code controversy, unravelling the political and cultural factors at play. The hosts delve into the historical context, touching on sumptuary laws in medieval Europe and the Great Male Renunciation, offering valuable insights into the evolution of societal norms. Pivotal legal cases such as Jespersen v. Harrah’s and the challenges surrounding gender-specific dress codes and religious exemptions are dissected. Throughout the episode, engaging anecdotes and thought-provoking analysis provide listeners with a profound understanding of the legal complexities shaping our attire, identities, and societies.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XRich Ford's Book >>> Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made HistoryChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionPam Karlan and Rich Ford introduce the episode, Rich’s book 'Dress Codes, How the Laws of Fashion Made History’(00:01:08) Senate Dress Code DramaThe recent elimination and subsequent reinstatement of the dress code in the U.S. Senate; specific mention of John Fetterman & Kyrsten Sinema.(00:03:55) Solicitor General's OfficeAnalysis of the gendered nature of dress code challenges faced by the first female Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, in navigating the formal attire expectations.(00:06:53) Dress Code MessagesExamination of the message behind politicians & tech industry dress choices to send a message(00:09:47) The Personal Side of Dress CodesRich Ford's personal experiences and anecdotes, including his participation in Esquire's Best Dressed Real Man contest.(00:10:39) Sumptuary Laws and Fashion in the Middle AgesDiscussion on medieval sumptuary laws and their detailed regulations on attire, reflecting societal hierarchies and power dynamics.(00:12:27) Earrings as Signifiers: From Medieval Italy to Modern CampusesExploration of earrings as symbols, from distinguishing religious groups in medieval Italy to contemporary cultural identifiers on college campuses.(00:15:04) The Great Masculine Renunciation and Gendered AttireExamination of the historical shift in men's fashion during the 1700s, marking the beginning of subdued, practical attire and its implications on gender roles.(00:17:30) Modern Title VII ChallengesIn-depth analysis of modern legal cases involving gender and dress codes specifically discussing Jespersen v. Harrah, and the Amy Steven’s case involving transgender rights & how gender expression is changing.(00:22:18) Sex, Race, & Dress CodesReflection on cases where hairstyles were the center of dress-code legal cases, particularly affecting members of a particular race.(00:26:28) Religious Exemptions and Dress Codes: A Global PerspectiveExploration of religious exemptions from dress codes, and the clash between cultural expression and state regulations.(00:27:02) Conclusion Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

After a hiatus, Stanford Legal returns to your podcast feed. Start with our first episode back, where hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford sit down with criminal law expert David Sklansky to unpack the numerous indictments against Donald Trump. But that's not all: our upcoming episodes will explore a range of pressing legal topics from AI to the Supreme Court’s latest decisions. Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode! And "hit the bell" in Spotify.Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The many indictments against Donald Trump, former president and current Republican frontrunner for the 2024 presidential contest, have left many scratching their heads. Is the Florida documents case more important than the Georgia election interference one? Is it all just political theatre, or is this serious? Here to help make sense of it is former prosecutor and criminal law expert David Alan Sklansky, who joins Pam and Rich for this episode about the criminal cases against Trump and how they might play out in this critical campaign year. From the intricacies of witness testimonies to the strategic implications for co-defendants, this episode touches on the unprecedented challenges faced by judges, lawyers, and the American legal system.This is the first episode of the newly-relaunched Stanford Legal podcast; make sure you're following so you don't miss an episode!Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XDavid Sklansky >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionRich Ford and Pam Karlan reintroduce the Stanford Legal podcast after a hiatus, as well as guest David Alan Sklansky. Overview of the four major criminal indictments against Trump.(00:05:02) Severity and Strength of ChargesAnalysis of the seriousness of charges & assessment of the legal strengths of different cases, highlighting the Florida case as particularly challenging for Trump.(00:07:25) Trump's Trial StrategiesPrediction of strategies to delay the trials, including attempts to change judges, create discovery disputes & Trump's courtroom absence during the trials.(00:12:05) The Judges Navigate Trump’s CasesSklansky discusses the particular challenges the judges are facing presiding over these trials.(00:15:04) Ensuring an Unbiased JuryDiscussion on the difficulty of finding jurors unafraid to participate due to potential threats or intimidation. Insight into the legal system's approach to selecting jurors and the importance of reasoned deliberation.(00:18:12) Trump’s CodefendantsAnalysis of co-defendants in the cases, highlighting the New York and Georgia indictments. (00:22:24) Strategic Implications of ConvictionDiscussion on how trial outcomes may influence co-defendants' decisions & their repeated testimonies and its impact on legal proceedings.(00:24:18) Legal Representation ChallengesExamination of co-defendants' legal representation, including lawyers paid by the Trump campaign, as well as the intersection of cases, and unprecedented consequences.(00:26:30) March to Trial and Democracy's FutureDiscussion on the anticipation of the D.C. election fraud trial in March and its historical significance. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Join us this Thursday for the return of Stanford Legal, with a new episode featuring criminal law expert David Sklansky, who will break down some of the most serious charges against former president--and 2024 presidential hopeful-- Donald Trump. Sklansky, a former prosecutor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, lends his expertise to help us understand the complexities of these unprecedented legal proceedings. Be sure to subscribe for a front-row seat to this enlightening legal discourse.Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode!Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

After a hiatus, Stanford Legal returns to your podcast feed. In our first episode relaunching November 9th, join hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford as they sit down with criminal law expert David Sklansky to unpack the numerous indictments against Donald Trump. But that's not all: our upcoming episodes will explore a range of pressing legal topics from AI to the Supreme Court’s latest decisions. Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode!Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>> Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Criminal law expert David A. Sklansky discusses the August 8 search by the FBI of Donald J. Trump’s Florida residence and the legal implications of news reports that the former president took more than 700 pages of classified documents, including some related to the nation’s most covert intelligence operations, to his private club. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Urban law expert Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her new book, The Fight to Save the Town: Reimagining Discarded America, which looks at how local leaders are confronting government collapse in four blue-collar American communities—and the progress they are making against some of the seemingly intractable problems of poverty. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Pam Karlan, one of the nation’s leading experts on law and voting and the political process, discusses the new conservative-majority Supreme Court—and the potential consequences of its blockbuster term, including the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

What have we learned from the Congressional hearings into the January 6 storming of the Capitol and then-President Donald Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election? Join Stanford criminal law expert Professor Robert Weisberg for a discussion of the hearings—what we learned and who might face criminal charges. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

While polls of Republican voters still show strong support for former president Trump, some of the most powerful testimony against him during the January 6 Congressional hearings have been by members of his administration and party. In this episode we hear from Stanford Law Professor Michael W. McConnell, a former judge on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit nominated by President George W. Bush, about a new report he co-authored, Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election, which examined every count of every case of election irregularities brought by Trump’s team in six battleground states—and concluded that “Donald Trump and his supporters had their day in court and failed to produce substantive evidence to make their case.” Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Nearly ten years after the massacre of 26 students and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, the world has been shocked by another American school shooting—this one at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas where 19 students and two teachers were gunned down on May 24. That came barely a week after the racially motivated massacre of ten shoppers at a Tops Friendly Market in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York. And these are only the most lethal mass shootings—hundreds more have already occurred in cities across the United States. In this episode, Professor John Donohue, an expert on gun law, joins Rich and Joe to discuss can be done to meet this uniquely American challenge of mass shootings. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Since Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, hundreds of the world’s leading companies, from investment banks to consumer goods, have shuttered their Russian operations. But Law firms have been slower to respond. Join us for a discussion with business law expert Robert Daines who has been leading an effort to expose leading American and British law firms about their status of work for Russian interests. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In an unusual leak from the U.S. Supreme Court, a draft memo shows the Court has decided to overrule Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal throughout the U.S. What does this mean for women seeking abortions in the U.S.? Are other rights, like same-sex marriage under threat? And what does this say about the politicization of the Court? Constitutional law expert Bernadette Meyler joins this episode to discuss these questions and more. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic issues come in all sizes and shapes, from arguing successfully before the Ninth Circuit on their Endangered Species Act/NEPA case against the Forest Service, which implicated forest management issues in the face of drought and wildfire, to going before the Eastern District of California in a wildlife trafficking case. Join co-hosts Joe Bankman and Rich Ford for a discussion with founding director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic Debbie Sivas and 3L students Chris Meyer and SidniFrederick about critical environmental cases—and why they matter. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Shareholders and investors alike are pressuring companies to improve their environmental, social, and governance performance. And an increasing number of funds are designated as ESG. But how do we measure—and verify—ESG? Who performs the audits and do the ratings matter? Join co-hosts Joe Bankman and Rich Ford for a discussion with Professors Paul Brest and Colleen Honigsberg, co-authors of the Measuring Corporate Virtue and Vice: Making ESG Metrics Trustworthy (book chapter of the recently published Frontiers in Social Innovation. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Legacy of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is discussed by Stanford Law School Dean Jenny Martinez, who clerked for Breyer. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Teacher burnout—and resignations—may be leading to a crisis in education. Join Laura Juran, Chief Counsel and Associate Executive Director of the California Teachers Association, for a discussion about the challenges the nation's teachers have faced during the pandemic, when they have been on the frontline during an unprecedented health crisis. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Over 30 state legislatures across the country have introduced bills to limit the discussion of racial history in a wave prompted by the emergence of critical race theory as a subject of political fear-mongering. In this episode, Rich and Joe are joined by Professor Ralph Richard Banks, an expert in race and law, for a discussion about the politicization of critical race theory, book banning, and more Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Matt Haney, San Francisco Board Supervisor, joins Stanford Legal for a discussion about the challenges of homelessness and crime in cities, particularly since the start of the Covid pandemic. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Just as pandemic fatigue is setting in and the Omicron variant is sweeping across the nation—putting a tremendous strain on America’s healthcare infrastructure—the Supreme Court heard arguments in challenges to the Biden administration’s authority to combat the COVID-19. Labor law expert Professor William B. Gould IV joins Joe and Rich to discuss challenges to the administration’s efforts to impose vaccine mandates—and trends in the American labor market during the pandemic. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

When AG Garland put out a call to lawyers, law students, and law schools generally to suit up to deal with the "eviction tsunami" that many are predicting in the coming months, Juliet Brodie , director of the Stanford Community Law Clinic and an expert in tenants’ rights answered the call. In this episode, Joe and Rich discuss evictions, the challenges lower income Americans face in staying in their homes, and how the law has been innovating during Covid-19. Juliet is joined by Lauren Zack, a teaching and litigation fellow working on the eviction projects with the clinic. In this episode, Joe and Rick discuss evictions, the challenges lower income Americans face in staying in their homes, and how the law has been innovating during Covid-19. Juliet is joined by Lauren Zack, a teaching and litigation fellow working on the eviction projects with the clinic. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

It was the stuff of Silicon Valley dreams. Elizabeth Holmes dropped out of Stanford University to launch the blood testing disruptor Theranos and built it to a $9 billion valuation. But the tech adage “fake it until you make it” didn’t quite work for this medical device startup, and charges that the devices didn’t work mounted. Holmes and Ramesh Balwani, her onetime business and romantic partner, were indicted with 12 counts of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. In this episode, Stanford Law School Professor Robert Weisberg, a criminal law expert, discusses the trial, which began in September, the prosecution, the defense, and the larger implications of the case. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In 2007, Erik Jensen, helped launch the Afghanistan Legal Education Project, a collaboration with with Stanford Law School and the American University in Afghanistan to build a high quality legal program for Afghan law students. Today, dozens of Afghan men and women count themselves as graduates—lawyers critical to building the legal infrastructure so badly needed in Afghanistan. But what will happen to the country—and those dedicated to law and civil society—under the new Taliban regime? In this episode, Jensen discusses the abrupt withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan and the prospects of the still struggling country. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Western states are once again in severe drought with water in short supply. And California’s fire season is starting earlier and causing more devastation, with the Dixie fire, the second largest in the state’s history, still growing after destroying almost 750,000 acres. In this episode, a leading national water law expert Buzz Thompson joins us to discuss fires, water, and climate change. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Legal issues surrounding the elderly and mentally incapacitated have been making headlines lately, particularly the conservatorship for popstar Britney Spears. But why are these legal tools used? What are the alternatives? And what rights do people like Britney have? In this episode of Stanford Legal, Michael Gilfix , a leading authority in the field of law, aging, and estate planning, answers these questions and more. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We complain about paying taxes, but appreciate the roads, bridges, safety net, and more that they pay for. But is the U.S. tax system fair? Should the rich pay more, and the poor pay less? Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The 2020 Election continues to have an unprecedented impact on the country, the “big lie” about fraud spread by some media outlets and used by at least 14 states as justification to undo key election laws. Yet since Trump was banned from popular social media platforms, his voice is less prevalent in mainstream America. In this episode, we hear from election law expert Nate Persily about Facebook’s oversight board and its decision to continue the ban on Trump for another two years. Nate also discusses efforts by state legislators to curtail voting laws and why he is sounding the alarm bells for a threatened American democracy. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

While calls to "defund the police" have made headlines, a new Stanford Law report "Safety Beyond Policing: Promoting Care Over Criminalization" explores alternatives to the use of police in sensitive situations such as mental health crises and in schools. Two of the report's co-authors, Professor Robert Weisberg and Stanford Law student Michelle Portillo discuss key questions about policing, shedding light on promising alternatives that have been piloted in a variety of places around the country—alternatives that deploy mental health professionals, saving lives, police resources, and funds. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Imagine serving a life sentence in prison for stealing a floor jack from a tow truck? Many of the clients our guest today, Michael Romano, has represented were drug addicts or homeless when they got caught up in California’s Three Strikes law that forced minimum sentences and locked up thousands of nonviolent offenders for 20, 30 years and more. Romano, the founder of Stanford's Three Strikes and Justice Advocacy Project, has become a leading voice in criminal reform in California and the nation—shining a light on the high cost to both the imprisoned and the taxpayer, who foots the bill. Romano, who was recently appointed to chair the state’s new criminal law and policy reform committee, the California Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, joins Stanford Legal to talk about the criminal justice crisis in American and efforts in California to release nonviolent offenders through reform of the Three Strikes law and other legal reforms. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode David Sklansky, a criminal law expert and former federal prosecutor, discusses his new book A Pattern of Violence: How the Law Classifies Crime and What It Means for Justice, which traces central failures of criminal justice, including mass incarceration and high rates of police violence, to legal ideas about violence—its definition, its causes, and its moral significance. David also discusses the criminal investigations of former president Donald Trump in New York and Georgia. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Modern day fashion says a lot about who we are and the image we project. Join Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford for this episode for a discussion about his new book, Dress Codes, and the history of fashion and its social and political implications. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As deaths from COVID-19 surge to the half million mark, health law expert and Stanford Professor Michelle Mello joins Pam and Joe to discuss the many challenges facing the new Biden administration in getting control of the pandemic in the U.S. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.