https://simplecast.com Stanford Legal Law touches most aspects of life. Here to help make sense of it is the Stanford Legal podcast, where we look at the cases, questions, conflicts, and legal stories that affect us all every day. Pam Karlan studies and teaches a range of constitutional law-related courses with a special focus on what is known as the “law of democracy,”—the law that regulates voting, elections, and the political process. She served as a commissioner on the California Fair Political Practices Commission, an assistant counsel and cooperating attorney for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and (twice) as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. She also co-directs the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, which represents real clients before the highest court in the country, working on important cases including representing Edith Windsor in the landmark case striking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act and Donald Zarda in a case where the Supreme Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBT individuals against discrimination in employment. She has argued before the Court ten times. And Rich Ford’s teaching and writing look at the relationship between law and equality, cities and urban development, popular culture and everyday life. He teaches local government law, employment discrimination, and the often-misunderstood critical race theory. He studied with and advised governments around the world on questions of equality law, lectured at places like the Sorbonne in Paris on the relationship of law and popular culture, served as a commissioner for the San Francisco Housing Commission, and worked with cities on how to manage neighborhood change and volatile real estate markets. He writes about law and popular culture for lawyers, academics, and popular audiences. His latest book is Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History, a legal history of the rules and laws that influence what we wear. Law matters. We hope you’ll listen to new episodes that will drop on Thursdays every two weeks. To learn more, go to https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-podcast/. All rights reserved en Thu, 16 Apr 2026 13:00:00 +0000 Thu, 16 Apr 2026 15:55:38 +0000 higheredpods https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal https://image.simplecastcdn.com/images/165ac7ef-05b7-4e09-951a-1fb92ece14f1/70262a7f-a6c5-4bba-9f2f-00f848d6b34c/3000x3000/stanford-legal-podcast-3.jpg?aid=rss_feed https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ episodic Law touches most aspects of life. Here to help make sense of it is the Stanford Legal podcast, where we look at the cases, questions, conflicts, and legal stories that affect us all every day. Pam Karlan studies and teaches a range of constitutional law-related courses with a special focus on what is known as the “law of democracy,”—the law that regulates voting, elections, and the political process. She served as a commissioner on the California Fair Political Practices Commission, an assistant counsel and cooperating attorney for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and (twice) as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. She also co-directs the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, which represents real clients before the highest court in the country, working on important cases including representing Edith Windsor in the landmark case striking down the federal Defense of Marriage Act and Donald Zarda in a case where the Supreme Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBT individuals against discrimination in employment. She has argued before the Court ten times. And Rich Ford’s teaching and writing look at the relationship between law and equality, cities and urban development, popular culture and everyday life. He teaches local government law, employment discrimination, and the often-misunderstood critical race theory. He studied with and advised governments around the world on questions of equality law, lectured at places like the Sorbonne in Paris on the relationship of law and popular culture, served as a commissioner for the San Francisco Housing Commission, and worked with cities on how to manage neighborhood change and volatile real estate markets. He writes about law and popular culture for lawyers, academics, and popular audiences. His latest book is Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History, a legal history of the rules and laws that influence what we wear. Law matters. We hope you’ll listen to new episodes that will drop on Thursdays every two weeks. To learn more, go to https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-podcast/. Stanford Law School false https://feeds.simplecast.com/_45D2qy7 warrant, stanford law school, urban development, sirius xm, legal podcast, stanford legal, popular culture, voting maps, equality law, jim crow laws, ai law, racial segregation, artificial intelligence, critical race theory, law of democracy, conservatorship, law, affirmative action, cell phone search, legal conflicts, civil rights, law podcast, abortion rights law, employment discrimination, elections, legal developments, gender equality, california fair political practices commission, copyright law, lgbtq+ rights, legal experts, naacp, rich ford, legal topics, machine learning, legal questions, legal rights, legal stories, legal issues, legal history, law school, ukraine, marriage equality, supreme court, stanford school of law, pam karlan, college admissions, u.s. department of justice, supreme court litigation, legal commentary, digital privacy, social media Stanford Law School podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com d9af08eb-a019-4e99-bcfd-12a812733950 Native Nations, Federal Indian Law, and the Birthright Citizenship Case The 14th Amendment to the Constitution says: “all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But on his first day back in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that changed that understanding. According to the President's executive order, going forward, the only people who will be U.S. citizens at birth are people who are born in the United States to parents who are citizens, at least one of whom is a citizen, or at least one of the parents is a legal permanent resident of the United States. And what does all of this mean for Native Americans? 

In this episode, Greg Ablavsky, a Stanford Law professor and scholar of federal Indian law, joins Pam Karlan to discuss President Trump's challenge to birthright citizenship--a case now at the Supreme Court.

The discussion centers on the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Ablavsky explains why federal Indian law has become part of that debate. He traces the distinctive legal status of Native nations within the United States, the historical exception for members of tribal nations, and the way that history appears in seminal cases such as Elk v. Wilkins.  The conversation also looks at the relationship between Elk and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case that recognized birthright citizenship for a child born in the United States to Chinese parents. Along the way, Karlan and Ablavsky break down why history matters to the government’s current effort to argue for new limits on birthright citizenship--and more.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Who qualifies as a U.S. citizen at birth?

(00:03:54) The Origins of the 14th Amendment 

(00:05:58) "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof"

(00:11:42) Citizenship at the Supreme Court

(00:17:03) Native Americans, the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act, and the Presidency

(00:18:49) The Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump v. CASA (Barbara) — Analogies, Originalism, and the Native American

(00:28:31) Practical Chaos, Hard Cases and What the Court Should Do


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 16 Apr 2026 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The 14th Amendment to the Constitution says: “all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But on his first day back in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that changed that understanding. According to the President's executive order, going forward, the only people who will be U.S. citizens at birth are people who are born in the United States to parents who are citizens, at least one of whom is a citizen, or at least one of the parents is a legal permanent resident of the United States. And what does all of this mean for Native Americans? 

In this episode, Greg Ablavsky, a Stanford Law professor and scholar of federal Indian law, joins Pam Karlan to discuss President Trump's challenge to birthright citizenship--a case now at the Supreme Court.

The discussion centers on the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Ablavsky explains why federal Indian law has become part of that debate. He traces the distinctive legal status of Native nations within the United States, the historical exception for members of tribal nations, and the way that history appears in seminal cases such as Elk v. Wilkins.  The conversation also looks at the relationship between Elk and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case that recognized birthright citizenship for a child born in the United States to Chinese parents. Along the way, Karlan and Ablavsky break down why history matters to the government’s current effort to argue for new limits on birthright citizenship--and more.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Who qualifies as a U.S. citizen at birth?

(00:03:54) The Origins of the 14th Amendment 

(00:05:58) "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof"

(00:11:42) Citizenship at the Supreme Court

(00:17:03) Native Americans, the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act, and the Presidency

(00:18:49) The Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump v. CASA (Barbara) — Analogies, Originalism, and the Native American

(00:28:31) Practical Chaos, Hard Cases and What the Court Should Do


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Native Nations, Federal Indian Law, and the Birthright Citizenship Case Stanford Law School 00:32:42 Stanford’s Greg Ablavsky on the history behind the birthright case Stanford’s Greg Ablavsky on the history behind the birthright case stanford law school, john sauer solicitor general, natural born citizen, trump v. casa, reconstruction amendments, pam karlan, immigration executive order, chinese exclusion act, wong kim ark, greg ablavsky, sui generis, chief justice john roberts, federal indian law, human trafficking citizenship, 14th amendment, legal permanent resident, constitutional law, john elk, apportionment clause, constitutional history, quasi-foreign sovereignty, birthright citizenship, trump v. barbara, stanford legal, bright-line citizenship rule, supreme court 2025, subject to the jurisdiction thereof, three-fifths clause, john mccain canal zone, legal history podcast, indian country jurisdiction, elk v. wilkins, slave trade 1808, indian citizenship act 1924, justice amy coney barrett, originalism, citizenship at birth, native american citizenship, aclu birthright citizenship challenge, birthright citizenship executive order, citizenship clause, dred scott v. sandford, citizenship documentation, civil rights act of 1866, marshall trilogy false full 185 90f6ae1e-df35-49b2-a384-ecc58fb99b08 The Politics and Promise of a Billionaire Tax On this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Richard Thompson Ford talks taxes with Darien Shanske, JD '06, a UC Davis law professor and visiting professor at Stanford Law, who helped draft California’s proposed Billionaire Tax Act, which supporters hope to place on the November 2026 ballot. Shanske explains why he believes critics have often attacked a distorted version of the proposal, not the measure itself: a one-time 5% tax on net worth above $1 billion, payable over five years, aimed at helping California respond to widening wealth inequality and cuts to the social safety net. The conversation explores the legal design of the measure, the politics surrounding it, and the larger questions it raises about tax fairness, concentrated wealth, and what tools states should have when public needs are acute.


 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:32) Origins of the Billionaire Tax

(00:05:28) Why a Wealth Tax? 

(00:12:07) Will Billionaires Flee? 

(00:19:06) Legal Challenges, Residency, and Retroactivity 

(00:26:48) The National Picture 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 2 Apr 2026 19:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ On this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Richard Thompson Ford talks taxes with Darien Shanske, JD '06, a UC Davis law professor and visiting professor at Stanford Law, who helped draft California’s proposed Billionaire Tax Act, which supporters hope to place on the November 2026 ballot. Shanske explains why he believes critics have often attacked a distorted version of the proposal, not the measure itself: a one-time 5% tax on net worth above $1 billion, payable over five years, aimed at helping California respond to widening wealth inequality and cuts to the social safety net. The conversation explores the legal design of the measure, the politics surrounding it, and the larger questions it raises about tax fairness, concentrated wealth, and what tools states should have when public needs are acute.


 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:32) Origins of the Billionaire Tax

(00:05:28) Why a Wealth Tax? 

(00:12:07) Will Billionaires Flee? 

(00:19:06) Legal Challenges, Residency, and Retroactivity 

(00:26:48) The National Picture 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Politics and Promise of a Billionaire Tax Stanford Law School 00:31:15 Stanford Law Alum Darien Shanske on Wealth, Fairness, and California’s Proposed Billionaire Tax Stanford Law Alum Darien Shanske on Wealth, Fairness, and California’s Proposed Billionaire Tax tax law professor, david gamage, pandemic fiscal policy, social safety net, obamacare, medicaid expansion, state taxing power, california economy, tax loopholes, emmanuel saez, rob lapsley, income tax, california business roundtable, ballot initiative, property tax, affordable care act, public finance law, budget stability act, wealth inequality, ai startups, venture capital, temporary tax, california ballot measure, silicon valley, brian galle, stanford legal, regressive tax cuts, tax avoidance, wealth tax, fiscal policy, proposition 13, tax reform, carlton v. united states, california income tax, ron conway, billionaire tax act, darien shanske, california supreme court, ipo tax treatment, california billionaires tax, lcalifornia residency, one big beautiful bill act, medicaid, signature gathering, progressive taxation, november 2026 election, tax policy, rich ford false full 184 3f87c868-af7c-4ebb-ba94-e987b4a4d792 Trump's Immigration Raids and State Pushback The Trump administration came in promising mass deportation. What has followed goes well beyond border control to matters of local policing, detention, federal power, and the limits of the law inside the United States. On this episode of Stanford Legal, co-host Professor Richard Thompson Ford talks with immigration expert Jennifer Chacón, the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law, about the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda and the profound consequences it is having in cities and communities across the country. They discuss racial profiling, ignored court orders, pressure on states and localities, and the widening reach of immigration enforcement into everyday civic life. Professor Chacón, author of a casebook on immigration law, elaborates on some of the themes in her recently published paper “The Law of the Immigration Raid.”

Links:

Connect:

 

  • (00:00:00) Immigration Enforcement in 2026
  • (00:03:47) The Economics of a Closed Border
  • (00:09:58) Closing the Border to Asylum
  • (00:10:44) Profiling in Immigration Enforcement
  • (00:16:48) Courts, Defiance, and Detention
  • (00:25:40) Sanctuary, Commandeering, and the Weaponization of Immigration
  • (00:32:26) How States Can Restore the Humane Dimensions of Immigration Law

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 19 Mar 2026 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Trump administration came in promising mass deportation. What has followed goes well beyond border control to matters of local policing, detention, federal power, and the limits of the law inside the United States. On this episode of Stanford Legal, co-host Professor Richard Thompson Ford talks with immigration expert Jennifer Chacón, the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law, about the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda and the profound consequences it is having in cities and communities across the country. They discuss racial profiling, ignored court orders, pressure on states and localities, and the widening reach of immigration enforcement into everyday civic life. Professor Chacón, author of a casebook on immigration law, elaborates on some of the themes in her recently published paper “The Law of the Immigration Raid.”

Links:

Connect:

 

  • (00:00:00) Immigration Enforcement in 2026
  • (00:03:47) The Economics of a Closed Border
  • (00:09:58) Closing the Border to Asylum
  • (00:10:44) Profiling in Immigration Enforcement
  • (00:16:48) Courts, Defiance, and Detention
  • (00:25:40) Sanctuary, Commandeering, and the Weaponization of Immigration
  • (00:32:26) How States Can Restore the Humane Dimensions of Immigration Law

Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump's Immigration Raids and State Pushback Stanford Law School 00:36:06 Jennifer Chacón discusses how immigration crackdowns are reshaping policing and public life Jennifer Chacón discusses how immigration crackdowns are reshaping policing and public life mandatory detention, stanford law school, humanitarian parole, immigration and education, immigration exceptionalism, immigration enforcement, anti-commandeering doctrine, civil detention, minneapolis immigration enforcement, trump second term immigration, due process, immigration law, customs and border protection, jennifer chacón, racial profiling, biden immigration policy, aclu immigration litigation, state immigration policy, ins v. lopez-mendoza, shadow docket, immigrant population united states, venezuelan migration, stanford legal, immigration raids, habeas corpus, ice agents, trump immigration policy, immigration law and social justice, immigration court, legal phantoms, alex pretti, unconstitutional conditions, immigrant rights, ninth circuit, united states v. brignoni-ponce, sanctuary cities, temporary protected status, renée good, exclusionary rule, supreme court, asylum seekers, students for fair admissions, voting rolls immigration, deportation, asylum law, rich ford false full 183 dc1c0c55-b499-47e3-9f4a-eee7aae108e2 Stanford’s Alan Sykes on the Future of Trump’s Tariffs After the IEEPA Case When President Trump declared a national emergency and imposed sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), businesses challenged the move, arguing the president did not have authority under that statute to impose tariffs. The Supreme Court recently agreed. 

On this episode of Stanford Legal, co-host Professor Pamela Karlan sits down with international trade expert Alan Sykes, professor of law and Warren Christopher Professor in the Practice of International Law and Diplomacy, to unpack the Court’s 6–3 decision. Sykes is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems and the author of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements.

At the heart of the case, Sykes explains, was the question of whether a statute that allows the president to “regulate importation” can be stretched to authorize taxes on imports. The majority said no, emphasizing that the Constitution assigns the taxing power to Congress, and that if Congress intended to hand that power over, it would have said so clearly. The conversation explores the statutory arguments, the role of the Major Questions Doctrine, and the unusual alignments among the justices.

But the ruling raises as many questions as it answers, Sykes notes. What happens to billions in tariffs already collected? Do international trade deals struck in the shadow of these tariffs still stand? And with other statutory tools available is this really the end of the tariff saga, or just the next chapter?

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Tariffs and IEEPA

(00:10:53) Statutory text and the history of tariffs

(00:13:54) “Regulate importation” and the Major Questions Doctrine

(00:17:56) Liquidation Timing, finality, and the 314‑day rule

(00:19:11) The Court of International Trade

(00:29:53) From IEEPA to Section 122 and what’s next under Section 301


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tue, 3 Mar 2026 17:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ When President Trump declared a national emergency and imposed sweeping tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), businesses challenged the move, arguing the president did not have authority under that statute to impose tariffs. The Supreme Court recently agreed. 

On this episode of Stanford Legal, co-host Professor Pamela Karlan sits down with international trade expert Alan Sykes, professor of law and Warren Christopher Professor in the Practice of International Law and Diplomacy, to unpack the Court’s 6–3 decision. Sykes is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems and the author of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements.

At the heart of the case, Sykes explains, was the question of whether a statute that allows the president to “regulate importation” can be stretched to authorize taxes on imports. The majority said no, emphasizing that the Constitution assigns the taxing power to Congress, and that if Congress intended to hand that power over, it would have said so clearly. The conversation explores the statutory arguments, the role of the Major Questions Doctrine, and the unusual alignments among the justices.

But the ruling raises as many questions as it answers, Sykes notes. What happens to billions in tariffs already collected? Do international trade deals struck in the shadow of these tariffs still stand? And with other statutory tools available is this really the end of the tariff saga, or just the next chapter?

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Tariffs and IEEPA

(00:10:53) Statutory text and the history of tariffs

(00:13:54) “Regulate importation” and the Major Questions Doctrine

(00:17:56) Liquidation Timing, finality, and the 314‑day rule

(00:19:11) The Court of International Trade

(00:29:53) From IEEPA to Section 122 and what’s next under Section 301


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Stanford’s Alan Sykes on the Future of Trump’s Tariffs After the IEEPA Case Stanford Law School 00:31:04 Supreme Court limits IEEPA tariff power in a 6–3 ruling as Al Sykes and Pam Karlan explain the impact on Congress, trade, and what’s next Supreme Court limits IEEPA tariff power in a 6–3 ruling as Al Sykes and Pam Karlan explain the impact on Congress, trade, and what’s next u.s. trade law, supreme court opinions, legal analysis, customs and import regulation, executive authority over tariffs, discriminatory tariffs by country, pam karlan, tariff history in the united states, international emergency economic powers act, constitutional law, congressional taxing authority, import duties, tariff delegation, statutory interpretation, dissenting opinions, regulate importation, podcast episode on scotus and tariffs, stanford legal podcast, al sykes, section 301 trade actions, ieepa tariffs case, major questions doctrine, section 122 balance of payments tariffs, trade policy, birthright of congress, tariffs as taxes, national security tariffs, article i taxing power, presidential authority limits false full 182 5230db01-27a6-4abf-87de-0a27d22cea64 A Seismic Shift in Climate Law The Environmental Protection Agency recently announced it was rescinding the 2009 endangerment finding, the legal foundation for federal regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The administration has called the move the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. What does it actually do? And what happens next?

On this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Deborah Sivas, an expert in environmental law, joins co-host Pam Karlan to unpack the legal strategy behind the repeal, the role of recent Supreme Court decisions, and what’s likely to unfold in the courts. Among other ramifications, they also explore California’s authority to adopt its own, more aggressive emissions standards and what this latest move by the Trump administration signals for the future of federal climate regulation.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00): The EPA’s rescission of the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding

(00:06:43): Climate science consensus and legal strategy

(00:16:01): The litigation roadmap: process vs. substance

(00:29:53): Wind power on the cusp

(00:30:10): Solar economics and federal land authority


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2026 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Environmental Protection Agency recently announced it was rescinding the 2009 endangerment finding, the legal foundation for federal regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The administration has called the move the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history. What does it actually do? And what happens next?

On this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Deborah Sivas, an expert in environmental law, joins co-host Pam Karlan to unpack the legal strategy behind the repeal, the role of recent Supreme Court decisions, and what’s likely to unfold in the courts. Among other ramifications, they also explore California’s authority to adopt its own, more aggressive emissions standards and what this latest move by the Trump administration signals for the future of federal climate regulation.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00): The EPA’s rescission of the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding

(00:06:43): Climate science consensus and legal strategy

(00:16:01): The litigation roadmap: process vs. substance

(00:29:53): Wind power on the cusp

(00:30:10): Solar economics and federal land authority


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> A Seismic Shift in Climate Law Stanford Law School 00:31:16 Deborah Sivas on the EPA’s Rescission of the Endangerment Finding Deborah Sivas on the EPA’s Rescission of the Endangerment Finding stanford law school, clean air act, wind power, doerr school of sustainability, pam karlan, debbie sivas, loper bright v. raimondo, environmental law clinic, solar energy, renewable energy, chevron deference, environmental policy, ozone, hybrids, public lands, federal lands, stanford legal podcast, epa, major questions doctrine, environmental regulation, greenhouse gases, climate change, permitting, stanford woods institute for the environment, federal administration, chevron u.s.a. v. nrdc, health impacts, vehicle emissions, energy policy, supreme court, electric vehicles, environmental and natural resources law and policy program, environmental law, fuel economy standards false full 181 7f897482-503d-4a3c-b3d3-e61e0364b5a8 Inside the ACLU’s Docket: Anthony Romero on the Front Lines of Civil Rights In a timely conversation about the ACLU’s massive docket of cases, Pam Karlan speaks with Anthony Romero, JD ’90, executive director of the ACLU, about the surge of civil rights and civil liberties battles facing the country right now.

Romero discusses major pieces of litigation spanning immigration, free speech, voting rights, and government accountability. A key focus is the Supreme Court showdown over birthright citizenship, where the Trump administration is attempting to deny citizenship to certain children born in the U.S., a move Romero calls an attack on one of the core promises of the Fourteenth Amendment. They also explore what happens when the government pushes the boundaries of compliance with court rulings and what that means for the rule of law.

Tune in for a compelling conversation about the cases that could help define the next chapter of civil liberties law in the United States.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Introduction and ACLU’s Rapidly Expanding Docket

(02:30) Small but Mighty—ACLU vs. Federal Power

(07:00) Inside a Burgeoning Docket

(11:30) Birthright Citizenship at the Supreme Court

(16:00) Enforcement at Scale and the Rule of Law

(21:00): An Inflection Point in Public Sentiment


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In a timely conversation about the ACLU’s massive docket of cases, Pam Karlan speaks with Anthony Romero, JD ’90, executive director of the ACLU, about the surge of civil rights and civil liberties battles facing the country right now.

Romero discusses major pieces of litigation spanning immigration, free speech, voting rights, and government accountability. A key focus is the Supreme Court showdown over birthright citizenship, where the Trump administration is attempting to deny citizenship to certain children born in the U.S., a move Romero calls an attack on one of the core promises of the Fourteenth Amendment. They also explore what happens when the government pushes the boundaries of compliance with court rulings and what that means for the rule of law.

Tune in for a compelling conversation about the cases that could help define the next chapter of civil liberties law in the United States.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Introduction and ACLU’s Rapidly Expanding Docket

(02:30) Small but Mighty—ACLU vs. Federal Power

(07:00) Inside a Burgeoning Docket

(11:30) Birthright Citizenship at the Supreme Court

(16:00) Enforcement at Scale and the Rule of Law

(21:00): An Inflection Point in Public Sentiment


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Inside the ACLU’s Docket: Anthony Romero on the Front Lines of Civil Rights Stanford Law School 00:34:34 The ACLU’s Anthony Romero unpacks a sweeping docket—from a Supreme Court showdown over birthright citizenship to voting rights and free speech—as the rule of law is tested. The ACLU’s Anthony Romero unpacks a sweeping docket—from a Supreme Court showdown over birthright citizenship to voting rights and free speech—as the rule of law is tested. civil rights, civil liberties law, alien enemies act, pam karlan, nonpartisan advocacy, rule of law, voting rights, border enforcement, government compliance with court rulings, raids and deportations, immigrants’ rights, birthright citizenship, aclu, nationwide injunctions, civil liberties, transgender rights, anthony romero, justice department, stanford legal podcast, trump administration policy, habeas corpus, government accountability, executive branch overreach, free speech, aclu litigation strategy, public sentiment, fourteenth amendment, supreme court, citizenship clause false full 180 0dc3dd01-967d-401b-a496-a0e58ec79f6f The Importance of Critical Thinking and Civil Discourse in Today's Polarized World In a world where confidence is rewarded and humility can feel like a liability, Stanford Law professor Robert MacCoun argues for something radical: fewer unwavering opinions, more critical reflection, and a better way to disagree. On Stanford Legal, MacCoun joins co-hosts Pamela Karlan and Diego Zambrano for a conversation about how “habits of mind” borrowed from science can help citizens, lawyers, and policymakers think more clearly and function more effectively in a pluralistic society.

MacCoun is the James and Patricia Kowal Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, a professor by courtesy in Stanford’s Psychology Department, and the university’s senior associate vice provost for research. Trained as a social psychologist, his work sits at the intersection of law, science, and public policy, with decades of research on decision-making, bias, and the social dynamics that shape how evidence is interpreted. In the episode, he draws on his most recent book, Third Millennium Thinking: Creating Sense in a World of Nonsense, co-authored with Nobel Prize–winning physicist Saul Perlmutter and philosopher John Campbell, to explain why probabilistic thinking, intellectual humility, and what he calls an “opinion diet” are essential tools for modern civic life.
 

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00:00) Introduction and Noise vs. Bias

(00:04:42) The Power of Probabilistic Thinking

(00:12:20) Juries, Community Judgment, and Reasonable Doubt

(00:13:23) Habits of Community

(00:25:08) Motivation, Tools, and Decision Processes

(00:26:14) When Evidence Won’t Settle It


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 5 Feb 2026 20:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In a world where confidence is rewarded and humility can feel like a liability, Stanford Law professor Robert MacCoun argues for something radical: fewer unwavering opinions, more critical reflection, and a better way to disagree. On Stanford Legal, MacCoun joins co-hosts Pamela Karlan and Diego Zambrano for a conversation about how “habits of mind” borrowed from science can help citizens, lawyers, and policymakers think more clearly and function more effectively in a pluralistic society.

MacCoun is the James and Patricia Kowal Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, a professor by courtesy in Stanford’s Psychology Department, and the university’s senior associate vice provost for research. Trained as a social psychologist, his work sits at the intersection of law, science, and public policy, with decades of research on decision-making, bias, and the social dynamics that shape how evidence is interpreted. In the episode, he draws on his most recent book, Third Millennium Thinking: Creating Sense in a World of Nonsense, co-authored with Nobel Prize–winning physicist Saul Perlmutter and philosopher John Campbell, to explain why probabilistic thinking, intellectual humility, and what he calls an “opinion diet” are essential tools for modern civic life.
 

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00:00) Introduction and Noise vs. Bias

(00:04:42) The Power of Probabilistic Thinking

(00:12:20) Juries, Community Judgment, and Reasonable Doubt

(00:13:23) Habits of Community

(00:25:08) Motivation, Tools, and Decision Processes

(00:26:14) When Evidence Won’t Settle It


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Importance of Critical Thinking and Civil Discourse in Today's Polarized World Stanford Law School 00:31:54 Stanford’s Robert MacCoun shows how scientific habits can sharpen judgment and strengthen civil discourse in a polarized society. Stanford’s Robert MacCoun shows how scientific habits can sharpen judgment and strengthen civil discourse in a polarized society. stanford law school, interdisciplinary conversation, face-saving belief revision, pam karlan, diego zambrano, bias from demographics and mentors, science communication, humility in decision-making, public discourse, probabilistic thinking, noise and bias in science, scientific trust, opinion diet, covid-19 opinions, noise vs. bias, open-mindedness, empirical reasoning, third millennium thinking, thinking in probabilities, stanford legal podcast, legal scholarship, belief updating, evidence-based reasoning, robert maccoun, law and psychology, fallible system of trust, critical thinking, decision-making under uncertainty false full 179 1643bdf9-43a1-4e18-82d5-620c16848ae8 How Democracies Collapse from Within Professor Kim Scheppele has spent much of her career watching democracies rise and fall. She went to Hungary in the early 1990s expecting to study democratic optimism after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Instead, decades later, she found herself documenting how constitutional democracy can be dismantled from the inside out.

That experience frames a wide-ranging conversation on the latest episode of Stanford Legal, where host Professor Pam Karlan speaks with Scheppele, the Lawrence S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs at Princeton and a visiting professor at Stanford Law School, about how democracies crumble, and why the United States is not exempt.

Drawing on years of on-the-ground research in Hungary, Russia, and other countries, Scheppele explains a central shift in democratic collapse: it no longer arrives through overt rupture, but through elections followed by legal and constitutional maneuvering. Leaders campaign as democrats, win office, and then use technical changes to the law, including court rules, budgetary controls, and civil-service structures, to weaken checks and rig the system in their favor.

The discussion turns to the United States, examining how party polarization, shifting institutional loyalties, and expanding claims of executive power have made familiar safeguards less reliable than many assumed.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Learning in Wartime: A scholar’s antidote to the “cataract of nonsense”

(00:08:17) Patterns abroad and at home—are U.S. checks in danger?

(00:15:04) Naming the playbook

(00:32:07) More litigation—access, risk, and the pace of change

(00:32:39) Restoring democracy through law


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 22 Jan 2026 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Professor Kim Scheppele has spent much of her career watching democracies rise and fall. She went to Hungary in the early 1990s expecting to study democratic optimism after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Instead, decades later, she found herself documenting how constitutional democracy can be dismantled from the inside out.

That experience frames a wide-ranging conversation on the latest episode of Stanford Legal, where host Professor Pam Karlan speaks with Scheppele, the Lawrence S. Rockefeller Professor of Sociology and International Affairs at Princeton and a visiting professor at Stanford Law School, about how democracies crumble, and why the United States is not exempt.

Drawing on years of on-the-ground research in Hungary, Russia, and other countries, Scheppele explains a central shift in democratic collapse: it no longer arrives through overt rupture, but through elections followed by legal and constitutional maneuvering. Leaders campaign as democrats, win office, and then use technical changes to the law, including court rules, budgetary controls, and civil-service structures, to weaken checks and rig the system in their favor.

The discussion turns to the United States, examining how party polarization, shifting institutional loyalties, and expanding claims of executive power have made familiar safeguards less reliable than many assumed.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Learning in Wartime: A scholar’s antidote to the “cataract of nonsense”

(00:08:17) Patterns abroad and at home—are U.S. checks in danger?

(00:15:04) Naming the playbook

(00:32:07) More litigation—access, risk, and the pace of change

(00:32:39) Restoring democracy through law


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> How Democracies Collapse from Within Stanford Law School 00:36:16 What happens when the legal tools meant to protect democracy are used to weaken it? Kim Scheppele explains. What happens when the legal tools meant to protect democracy are used to weaken it? Kim Scheppele explains. project 2025, democratic erosion, destroying democracy through law, pam karlan, checks and balances, c.s. lewis, autocracy, viktor orbán, rule of law, litigation, kim scheppele, learning in wartime, u.s. politics, the sun also rises, stanford legal, chelm folk tale, executive dominance, importing ideas of autocracy, united states democracy, democratic collapse, exporting democratic ideas, mike campbell, danube institute, restoring democracy through law, constitutional democracy false full 178 c1522f21-c4c0-420e-84a9-c70f544fb9fe Flexing U.S. Power in Venezuela Can the United States arrest a foreign head of state by sending FBI agents—and military troops—into another country? On the latest episode of Stanford Legal,  Professor Pam Karlan sits down with international law expert and Stanford Law lecturer Allen Weiner to discuss the recent extraction of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. Their wide-ranging conversation focuses on the uneasy space where U.S. law collides with the constraints of international law.

Weiner, a former U.S. State Department legal adviser and now director of several international law–and humanitarian-focused programs at Stanford Law School, explains how domestic legal theories advanced to justify Operation Absolute Resolve in contrast with the UN Charter’s ban on the use of force. He situates the episode in a longer arc of U.S. efforts to reconcile military action with international legal limits, including earlier debates over actions in Kosovo and Libya.

The legal questions are substantial, but the stakes ultimately turn on precedent and norms: how U.S. actions are understood by other states, what they signal to rivals such as Russia and China, and whether the international system begins to resemble the logic captured in Thucydides’ Peloponnesian Wars—that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00) Is a threat a use of force? 

(00:16:18) Pressure, coercion, and the non-intervention line 

(00:17:02) Venezuela policy and the specter of escalation 

(00:28:24) Law, power, and the South China Sea 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 8 Jan 2026 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Can the United States arrest a foreign head of state by sending FBI agents—and military troops—into another country? On the latest episode of Stanford Legal,  Professor Pam Karlan sits down with international law expert and Stanford Law lecturer Allen Weiner to discuss the recent extraction of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. Their wide-ranging conversation focuses on the uneasy space where U.S. law collides with the constraints of international law.

Weiner, a former U.S. State Department legal adviser and now director of several international law–and humanitarian-focused programs at Stanford Law School, explains how domestic legal theories advanced to justify Operation Absolute Resolve in contrast with the UN Charter’s ban on the use of force. He situates the episode in a longer arc of U.S. efforts to reconcile military action with international legal limits, including earlier debates over actions in Kosovo and Libya.

The legal questions are substantial, but the stakes ultimately turn on precedent and norms: how U.S. actions are understood by other states, what they signal to rivals such as Russia and China, and whether the international system begins to resemble the logic captured in Thucydides’ Peloponnesian Wars—that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.”

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00) Is a threat a use of force? 

(00:16:18) Pressure, coercion, and the non-intervention line 

(00:17:02) Venezuela policy and the specter of escalation 

(00:28:24) Law, power, and the South China Sea 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Flexing U.S. Power in Venezuela Stanford Law School 00:30:02 Stanford Law’s Allen Weiner explores developments in Venezuela and the role—and limits—of international law Stanford Law’s Allen Weiner explores developments in Venezuela and the role—and limits—of international law legal accountability, fbi arrest in venezuela, comparative law, colombia, presidential war powers, pam karlan, state department legal adviser, maduro indictment, non-intervention principle, allen weiner, venezuela, panama canal hypothetical, prohibition on use of force, international law, legal justification for military action, war powers resolution, executive branch lawyers, fbi extraterritorial authority, stanford legal podcast, department of justice, office of legal counsel, olc opinion 1989, judge advocates general, congressional oversight, humanitarian law, greenland, libya intervention, nicolás maduro, cuba, u.s. strikes against iran, hostilities, international conflict, hague, u.s. foreign policy false full 177 f7f39f65-d016-4bfd-a9eb-c129e66b9abf Best of Stanford Legal: Trump's Pardons What are the legal implications of the unprecedented mass pardoning of the January 6th rioters? What does it say about American rule of law? 

President Biden’s DOJ prosecuted nearly 1,600 of the January 6, 2021, rioters—many for acts of shocking violence against police and government offices. On January 20, newly sworn-in President Trump, in one of his first official acts, issued a sweeping grant of clemency to all of the rioters charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol attack. He pardoned most defendants and commuted the sentences of 14 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, most of whom had been convicted of seditious conspiracy. The response from some of these violent rioters since the pardons has been alarming.

“The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did,” said Enrique Tarrio, the former national Proud Boys leader, sentenced to a 22-year sentence on seditious conspiracy charges, on Alex Jones' podcast soon after his pardon. 

Our guests today are Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou.

Sinnar’s scholarship, including a recent study of hate groups, focuses on the legal treatment of political violence, the procedural dimensions of civil rights litigation, and the role of institutions in protecting individual rights and democratic values in the national security context

Ballou was a lawyer at the Department of Justice for five years. He resigned on January 23 soon after President Trump's pardons. In a New York Times opinion essay, he wrote: “For while some convicted rioters seem genuinely remorseful, and others appear simply ready to put politics behind them, many others are emboldened by the termination of what they see as unjust prosecutions. Freed by the president, they have never been more dangerous.” He graduated from Stanford Law in 2016.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The January 6th Prosecutions and the Pardon Power

(00:06:26) Rewriting History and the Threat of Political Violence 

(00:11:56) The Future of Political Violence in the U.S. 

(17:24) Addressing Militia Violence and Legal Gaps

(21:37) State-Level Prosecutions and Risks of Expanding Criminal Laws

(25:27) Pardons, Political Violence, and Historical Parallels  


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 29 Dec 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ What are the legal implications of the unprecedented mass pardoning of the January 6th rioters? What does it say about American rule of law? 

President Biden’s DOJ prosecuted nearly 1,600 of the January 6, 2021, rioters—many for acts of shocking violence against police and government offices. On January 20, newly sworn-in President Trump, in one of his first official acts, issued a sweeping grant of clemency to all of the rioters charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol attack. He pardoned most defendants and commuted the sentences of 14 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, most of whom had been convicted of seditious conspiracy. The response from some of these violent rioters since the pardons has been alarming.

“The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did,” said Enrique Tarrio, the former national Proud Boys leader, sentenced to a 22-year sentence on seditious conspiracy charges, on Alex Jones' podcast soon after his pardon. 

Our guests today are Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou.

Sinnar’s scholarship, including a recent study of hate groups, focuses on the legal treatment of political violence, the procedural dimensions of civil rights litigation, and the role of institutions in protecting individual rights and democratic values in the national security context

Ballou was a lawyer at the Department of Justice for five years. He resigned on January 23 soon after President Trump's pardons. In a New York Times opinion essay, he wrote: “For while some convicted rioters seem genuinely remorseful, and others appear simply ready to put politics behind them, many others are emboldened by the termination of what they see as unjust prosecutions. Freed by the president, they have never been more dangerous.” He graduated from Stanford Law in 2016.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The January 6th Prosecutions and the Pardon Power

(00:06:26) Rewriting History and the Threat of Political Violence 

(00:11:56) The Future of Political Violence in the U.S. 

(17:24) Addressing Militia Violence and Legal Gaps

(21:37) State-Level Prosecutions and Risks of Expanding Criminal Laws

(25:27) Pardons, Political Violence, and Historical Parallels  


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Best of Stanford Legal: Trump's Pardons Stanford Law School 00:30:37 Political Violence, Hate Groups, and the Rule of Law Political Violence, Hate Groups, and the Rule of Law domestic terrorism, face act pardons, pam karlan, political extremism, political violence, stanford university, state sovereignty, reconstruction history, historical revisionism, paramilitary groups, legal podcast, constitutional law, presidential clemency, jack smith, enrique tarrio, reproductive rights, oath keepers, misinformation, stanford legal, brendan ballou, supreme court trump case, democracy preservation, department of justice, ku klux klan, hate crimes, timothy snyder, shirin sinnar, proud boys, capitol riot prosecutions, january 6th pardons, militia violence, election interference, california state commission on the state of hate, authoritarianism, civil rights litigation, trump pardons, jacob chansley, vigilante groups false full 154 0dfe5be5-dd99-4ee2-8c27-2dd40649d941 Best of Stanford Legal: Suing DOGE A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans’ private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation’s largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.

Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. 

The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rise of Executive Power

(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy
(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government
(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach
(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court
(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 22 Dec 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans’ private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation’s largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.

Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. 

The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rise of Executive Power

(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy
(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government
(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach
(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court
(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Best of Stanford Legal: Suing DOGE Stanford Law School 00:28:38 Urgent legal questions about privacy protections of the nation’s largest collection of personal data and unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley in Washington Urgent legal questions about privacy protections of the nation’s largest collection of personal data and unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley in Washington elon musk, legal processes, trump administration, public sector, federal bureaucracy, pam karlan, legal implications, government influence, russian government, intellectual property, protected category, executive power, silicon valley, chinese government, stanford program in law, private sector, stanford legal, hacking risks, court confrontation, and technology, social security database, cybersecurity practices, imperial presidency, governance reshaping, mark lemley, science, legal challenges, chevron doctrine, supreme court, cybersecurity, transgender status, doge false full 155 3aafea24-0dd9-4e6c-b9e1-92d1ad341cb2 Nationwide Injunctions After CASA When a single federal judge can freeze a president’s policy nationwide, it raises big questions about checks and balances and democratic accountability. That’s one reason nationwide injunctions have become central to some of today’s most consequential legal battles—and why the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA matters.

At a live recording, Stanford Legal host Diego Zambrano sat down with Professor Mila Sohoni, one of the country’s leading scholars on federal courts and administrative law, for a conversation that moved from President Trump’s day-one birthright-citizenship order to the Court’s ruling in CASA, including how lower courts are now navigating the decision’s new, but murky, constraints on nationwide injunctions.

Sohoni breaks the protection these injunctions can offer when sweeping executive actions threaten millions, the risks of empowering individual judges to halt national policy, and the incentives for strategic forum shopping in a polarized era. She also explains how CASA reins in—but doesn’t eliminate—the nationwide injunction, leaving room for broad relief through class actions, universal vacatur, and “complete relief” findings. 

The discussion sheds light on how the legal landscape is shifting after CASA, and why nationwide injunctions continue to shape major clashes between the courts and the executive branch.

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00:00) The Scope of Nationwide Injunctions

(00:12:01) Epistemic and Democratic Arguments Against Nationwide Injunctions

(00:28:54) The CASA Decision

(00:29:37) Legal Basis and Impact of Executive Orders

(00:38:20) Conclusion and Audience Questions


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 11 Dec 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ When a single federal judge can freeze a president’s policy nationwide, it raises big questions about checks and balances and democratic accountability. That’s one reason nationwide injunctions have become central to some of today’s most consequential legal battles—and why the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA matters.

At a live recording, Stanford Legal host Diego Zambrano sat down with Professor Mila Sohoni, one of the country’s leading scholars on federal courts and administrative law, for a conversation that moved from President Trump’s day-one birthright-citizenship order to the Court’s ruling in CASA, including how lower courts are now navigating the decision’s new, but murky, constraints on nationwide injunctions.

Sohoni breaks the protection these injunctions can offer when sweeping executive actions threaten millions, the risks of empowering individual judges to halt national policy, and the incentives for strategic forum shopping in a polarized era. She also explains how CASA reins in—but doesn’t eliminate—the nationwide injunction, leaving room for broad relief through class actions, universal vacatur, and “complete relief” findings. 

The discussion sheds light on how the legal landscape is shifting after CASA, and why nationwide injunctions continue to shape major clashes between the courts and the executive branch.

Links:

Connect:

 

(00:00:00) The Scope of Nationwide Injunctions

(00:12:01) Epistemic and Democratic Arguments Against Nationwide Injunctions

(00:28:54) The CASA Decision

(00:29:37) Legal Basis and Impact of Executive Orders

(00:38:20) Conclusion and Audience Questions


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Nationwide Injunctions After CASA Stanford Law School 00:43:38 Mila Sohoni on the New Legal Landscape Mila Sohoni on the New Legal Landscape trump v. casa, ex parte young injunction, remedial arsenal, access to justice, casa decision, epa emissions standards, judicial activism, executive branch action, diego zambrano, judicial power, court injunctions, mila sohoni, executive power, birthright citizenship, nationwide injunctions, shadow docket, undocumented immigrants, legal controversy, stanford legal, plaintiff protective injunction, universal injunctions, executive orders, federal courts, douglas laycock, originalism, forum shopping, political polarization, government power, supreme court, emergency docket false full 176 964a6c2f-03ec-4bd6-9cc1-46ab10fea025 Crime, Justice, and Trump’s DOJ Over a 35-year career at the Department of Justice, Jonathan Wroblewski, JD ’86, watched the country’s stance on criminal sentencing harden, soften, recalibrate, and shift again. One of his early cases at the DOJ, which involved a cross-burning in rural Georgia, sparked a fascination with sentencing policy that shaped the rest of his career. Today, he is one of the country’s leading experts on sentencing law and policy.

In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Pamela Karlan talks with Wroblewski about crime and punishment, including the evolution of modern sentencing policies. Wroblewski, who has been serving as a visiting instructor at Stanford Law teaching courses on sentencing and AI in criminal justice, also offers a look inside his long career at the DOJ, where Karlan also served two separate stints as a political appointee.

The conversation moves between how crime waves shape public attitudes, why some sentencing reforms take hold while others stall, and what happens inside the DOJ when long-standing norms begin to erode. Wroblewski’s stories, drawn from decades of work across administrations, bring those shifts into sharper focus.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Intro to Jonathan Wroblewski’s Career 

(05:01) Evolution of Sentencing Policies 

(15:01) Shifts in Sentencing Philosophies 

(25:01) Public Perception and Crime Rates 

(35:01) Future Perspectives for Fair and Effective Legal Practices


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 14 Nov 2025 17:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Over a 35-year career at the Department of Justice, Jonathan Wroblewski, JD ’86, watched the country’s stance on criminal sentencing harden, soften, recalibrate, and shift again. One of his early cases at the DOJ, which involved a cross-burning in rural Georgia, sparked a fascination with sentencing policy that shaped the rest of his career. Today, he is one of the country’s leading experts on sentencing law and policy.

In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Pamela Karlan talks with Wroblewski about crime and punishment, including the evolution of modern sentencing policies. Wroblewski, who has been serving as a visiting instructor at Stanford Law teaching courses on sentencing and AI in criminal justice, also offers a look inside his long career at the DOJ, where Karlan also served two separate stints as a political appointee.

The conversation moves between how crime waves shape public attitudes, why some sentencing reforms take hold while others stall, and what happens inside the DOJ when long-standing norms begin to erode. Wroblewski’s stories, drawn from decades of work across administrations, bring those shifts into sharper focus.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Intro to Jonathan Wroblewski’s Career 

(05:01) Evolution of Sentencing Policies 

(15:01) Shifts in Sentencing Philosophies 

(25:01) Public Perception and Crime Rates 

(35:01) Future Perspectives for Fair and Effective Legal Practices


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Crime, Justice, and Trump’s DOJ Stanford Law School 00:33:39 What happens when long-standing norms begin to erode? Jonathan Wroblewski discusses his decades at the DOJ and the forces shaping federal justice What happens when long-standing norms begin to erode? Jonathan Wroblewski discusses his decades at the DOJ and the forces shaping federal justice mandatory minimums, rehabilitation, booker case significance, crime rates, pam karlan, indeterminate sentencing, jonathan wroblewski, rising crime rates, sentencing philosophy, determinate sentencing, public sentiment on sentencing, experienced doj staff, doj, social change impact, department of justice, federal sentencing guidelines, loyalty, public perception, sentencing policies, non-partisan contribution, impactful sentencing decisions, judicial discretion, justice department commitment, administration turnover, presidential influence, booker case false full 175 a042bf0e-137e-4953-8aed-2c99c41f3998 Navigating Uncertainty and Unprecedented Shifts in Federal Health Policy “The amount of chaos that’s been introduced into the federal health policy landscape is unprecedented,” says Michelle Mello, professor at Stanford Law School and the Stanford University School of Medicine.

That turmoil, she explains, has left major gaps in expertise, trust, and leadership—and states are rushing to fill the void. In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Pamela S. Karlan talks with Mello about what this moment means for the future of science, public health, research, and the law.

Mello describes how the hollowing out of career expertise at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has upended vaccine policy and research funding, forcing states into unfamiliar leadership roles. She and Karlan also unpack how shifting scientific guidance during the pandemic eroded public confidence, how politicized grant-making is reshaping the research ecosystem, and state governments’ growing role in creating what she calls a “shadow CDC.”

Despite the turmoil, Mello points to a few bright spots: state-level experimentation could generate valuable evidence of what works and what does not, and there are reassuring signs from the lower courts, she says, which she believes are capable of separating law from politics.

Earlier this year, Mello explored many of these themes in her JAMA Health Forum paper, “The Hard Road Ahead for State Public Health Departments.”

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Health Policy and COVID-19 Vaccines

(00:05:10) The Vaccine Rollout Challenges

(00:10:25) Public Trust and Recommendations

(00:16:40) The Role of the Vaccine Committee

(00:23:55) NIH Grant Process Insight

(00:29:43) MIT's Stance on NIH Compact


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 6 Nov 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ “The amount of chaos that’s been introduced into the federal health policy landscape is unprecedented,” says Michelle Mello, professor at Stanford Law School and the Stanford University School of Medicine.

That turmoil, she explains, has left major gaps in expertise, trust, and leadership—and states are rushing to fill the void. In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Pamela S. Karlan talks with Mello about what this moment means for the future of science, public health, research, and the law.

Mello describes how the hollowing out of career expertise at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has upended vaccine policy and research funding, forcing states into unfamiliar leadership roles. She and Karlan also unpack how shifting scientific guidance during the pandemic eroded public confidence, how politicized grant-making is reshaping the research ecosystem, and state governments’ growing role in creating what she calls a “shadow CDC.”

Despite the turmoil, Mello points to a few bright spots: state-level experimentation could generate valuable evidence of what works and what does not, and there are reassuring signs from the lower courts, she says, which she believes are capable of separating law from politics.

Earlier this year, Mello explored many of these themes in her JAMA Health Forum paper, “The Hard Road Ahead for State Public Health Departments.”

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Health Policy and COVID-19 Vaccines

(00:05:10) The Vaccine Rollout Challenges

(00:10:25) Public Trust and Recommendations

(00:16:40) The Role of the Vaccine Committee

(00:23:55) NIH Grant Process Insight

(00:29:43) MIT's Stance on NIH Compact


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Navigating Uncertainty and Unprecedented Shifts in Federal Health Policy Stanford Law School 00:32:27 Stanford Law’s Michelle Mello discusses how sweeping changes in federal health policy are reshaping public health--and leading states to fill the void Stanford Law’s Michelle Mello discusses how sweeping changes in federal health policy are reshaping public health--and leading states to fill the void public trust in science, public health policy, healthcare access, health policy changes, pam karlan, covid-19 vaccine, nih grant process, political influence in healthcare, vaccine committee, mit response to nih compact, healthcare legislation, healthcare system resilience, affordable care act, vaccine approval process, stanford legal podcast, vaccine equity, scientific research funding, michelle mello, pandemic preparedness, immunization strategy, pandemic response, covid-19 variants, federal health regulations, vaccine hesitancy, vaccine rollout challenges, biomedical research, public health emergencies, vaccine distribution fairness false full 174 a77f8e0e-8436-4497-94fe-f2c252e2a2c0 National Guard or Political Weapon? When the National Guard shows up in American cities, it’s usually after hurricanes, fires, or floods, not political fights. But recent federal deployments have changed the landscape and raised pressing questions about how far a president’s domestic military powers can go. In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Pam Karlan talks with Professor Bernadette Meyler about the growing use of the National Guard for domestic law enforcement and what it reveals about shifting boundaries of presidential power.  

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Overview of National Guard Deployment 

(00:06:01) Changes in Immigration Enforcement 

(00:13:01) Continuous Deployment and Monitoring Elections 

(00:18:01) Training and Law Enforcement Activities of National Guard 

(00:24:31) Presidential Powers and Constraints 

(00:29:38) Ninth Circuit Panel’s Decision and Future Prospects


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 30 Oct 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ When the National Guard shows up in American cities, it’s usually after hurricanes, fires, or floods, not political fights. But recent federal deployments have changed the landscape and raised pressing questions about how far a president’s domestic military powers can go. In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Pam Karlan talks with Professor Bernadette Meyler about the growing use of the National Guard for domestic law enforcement and what it reveals about shifting boundaries of presidential power.  

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Overview of National Guard Deployment 

(00:06:01) Changes in Immigration Enforcement 

(00:13:01) Continuous Deployment and Monitoring Elections 

(00:18:01) Training and Law Enforcement Activities of National Guard 

(00:24:31) Presidential Powers and Constraints 

(00:29:38) Ninth Circuit Panel’s Decision and Future Prospects


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> National Guard or Political Weapon? Stanford Law School 00:30:48 Legal historian and constitutional law scholar Professor Bernadette Meyler cautions that the Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard threatens the “presumption of regularity” that underpins the rule of law Legal historian and constitutional law scholar Professor Bernadette Meyler cautions that the Trump administration’s deployment of the National Guard threatens the “presumption of regularity” that underpins the rule of law congressional authorization, posse comitatus act, pardoning power, immigration enforcement, pam karlan, bernadette meyler, venezuela, national guard deployments, judge advocate general, supreme court rulings, district court factual findings, military domestic law enforcement, insurrection act, federal officials protection, drone strikes, presidential immunity, ninth circuit panel decision, ice, continuous deployment, legal constraints on the president, war on terror, non-state actors, presidential powers, election monitoring false full 173 0346dd44-0146-4352-b61f-30f2238e20d8 Political Enemies and the Weaponization of the DOJ When politics drives prosecutions, what happens to the rule of law? Are we in uncharted waters? Stanford Legal host Professor Pamela Karlan sits down with her colleague criminal justice expert Robert Weisberg to unpack the extraordinary federal indictments of former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James—with more potentially on the way.

Weisberg, the Edwin E. Huddleson, Jr. Professor of Law and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, explains how grand jury indictments normally work, why these cases are unusual, and how selective and vindictive prosecution claims might play out when the evidence of political motivation is broadcast via Truth Social missives. Karlan and Weisberg also discuss how Justice Department norms separating the White House from individual charging decisions have been systematically broken—and why these indictments, built on shaky legal ground and thin narratives, could face serious procedural challenges.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Targeted Prosecutions 

(00:10:00) Understanding Selective vs. Vindictive Prosecution 

(00:20:00) Comey Indictment and Related Current Events 

(00:27:00) John Bolton’s Legal Troubles 

(00:34:00) Potential Challenges for Adam Schiff 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ When politics drives prosecutions, what happens to the rule of law? Are we in uncharted waters? Stanford Legal host Professor Pamela Karlan sits down with her colleague criminal justice expert Robert Weisberg to unpack the extraordinary federal indictments of former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James—with more potentially on the way.

Weisberg, the Edwin E. Huddleson, Jr. Professor of Law and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, explains how grand jury indictments normally work, why these cases are unusual, and how selective and vindictive prosecution claims might play out when the evidence of political motivation is broadcast via Truth Social missives. Karlan and Weisberg also discuss how Justice Department norms separating the White House from individual charging decisions have been systematically broken—and why these indictments, built on shaky legal ground and thin narratives, could face serious procedural challenges.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Targeted Prosecutions 

(00:10:00) Understanding Selective vs. Vindictive Prosecution 

(00:20:00) Comey Indictment and Related Current Events 

(00:27:00) John Bolton’s Legal Troubles 

(00:34:00) Potential Challenges for Adam Schiff 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Political Enemies and the Weaponization of the DOJ Stanford Law School 00:29:38 Pam Karlan and Bob Weisberg unpack the Comey and James indictments, and what they reveal about the rule of law in a politicized justice system Pam Karlan and Bob Weisberg unpack the Comey and James indictments, and what they reveal about the rule of law in a politicized justice system legal analysis, selective prosecution, government indictments, court cases, pam karlan, robert weisberg, legal implications, constitutional law, legal principles, political prosecution, stanford legal, classified documents, legal discussions, james comey, letitia james, judicial process, indictments, vindictive prosecution, stanford criminal justice center, john bolton false full 172 0a5e105d-d269-47c6-8108-3ded49faa9e7 President Trump’s Tariffs and the Separation of Powers at the Supreme Court In April, President Trump declared a national emergency and assumed the power to levy tariffs, introducing uncertainty into global trading by reneging on previously negotiated agreements. One of the attorneys representing the challengers to the president’s decree in Trump v. VOS is Stanford Law Professor Michael McConnell, a constitutional law expert and former Tenth Circuit judge. The case, which the U.S. Supreme Court has expedited, is set to have ramifications well beyond trade. As McConnell wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed: “The tariff litigation is shaping up as the biggest separation-of-powers controversy since the steel seizure case in 1952…Understandably, most of the commentary has focused on the practical ramifications for the president’s trade negotiations and the American economy. But the cases may be even more important for the future of a fundamental component of the Constitution’s architecture: the separation of powers, intended by the founders to prevent any of the government’s three branches from becoming all powerful.” McConnell joins Pam Karlan and Diego Zambrano for a discussion about this important case, exploring whether presidents have the authority to tax through tariffs without clear congressional approval, the historical and constitutional roots of "no taxation without representation," and the seismic ramifications of a redefinition of the limits of executive economic power.

Links:

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 3 Oct 2025 20:21:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In April, President Trump declared a national emergency and assumed the power to levy tariffs, introducing uncertainty into global trading by reneging on previously negotiated agreements. One of the attorneys representing the challengers to the president’s decree in Trump v. VOS is Stanford Law Professor Michael McConnell, a constitutional law expert and former Tenth Circuit judge. The case, which the U.S. Supreme Court has expedited, is set to have ramifications well beyond trade. As McConnell wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed: “The tariff litigation is shaping up as the biggest separation-of-powers controversy since the steel seizure case in 1952…Understandably, most of the commentary has focused on the practical ramifications for the president’s trade negotiations and the American economy. But the cases may be even more important for the future of a fundamental component of the Constitution’s architecture: the separation of powers, intended by the founders to prevent any of the government’s three branches from becoming all powerful.” McConnell joins Pam Karlan and Diego Zambrano for a discussion about this important case, exploring whether presidents have the authority to tax through tariffs without clear congressional approval, the historical and constitutional roots of "no taxation without representation," and the seismic ramifications of a redefinition of the limits of executive economic power.

Links:

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> President Trump’s Tariffs and the Separation of Powers at the Supreme Court Stanford Law School 00:35:36 The biggest separation-of-powers controversy since the steel seizure case in 1952. The biggest separation-of-powers controversy since the steel seizure case in 1952. pam karlan, diego zambrano, tariffs, import regulation, court of international trade, federal judiciary, article i section 8 clause 1, federal lawsuits, presidential authority, presidential emergency powers, trading with the enemy act, national emergencies act, shadow docket, statutory interpretation, executive orders, stanford legal podcast, federal circuit, standing, congressional paralysis, tariff litigation, appellate court, president trump tariffs, congressional power to tax, taxes on imports, national security tariffs, michael mcconnell, unfair trade practices, supreme court, small business plaintiffs, international economic emergency powers act (ieepa), egislative veto, economic impact false full 171 b287f930-95b0-4603-a100-b653f399525b Guns, Money, and Mass Shootings Frequent mass shootings are a distinctly American problem, with news of another tragic shooting grabbing our attention every few weeks. Yet policy change is stalled.

In this episode, we focus on an important reason for the congressional paralysis—the gun lobby. John Donohue, one of the country’s leading experts on the empirical study of law and public policy, and Eric Baldwin, a research fellow at Stanford Law, join us for a discussion about their new research paper, "Another Shooting, Another Contribution From the Gun Lobby." They reveal how both gun rights and gun safety PACs flood competitive districts with donations in the wake of deadly shootings. The result? A high-stakes stalemate that helps preserve the status quo, despite overwhelming public support for measures like universal background checks. With Donohue’s decades of scholarship on crime and policy and Baldwin’s insights into political science and lobbying, the episode offers a timely look at how money and ideology shape one of the country's most polarizing debates and offers an examination of a grim reality: mass shootings have become more frequent, but meaningful reform rarely follows. Against the backdrop of rising political violence, the conversation probes the sometimes-surprising role of campaign donations and interest-group maneuvering in shaping what legislators do—or fail to do—after mass shooting tragedy.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Introductions and The Role of Different Gun Lobby Groups

(10:01) Impact of Mass Shootings on Public Discourse 

(18:01) Political Reactions and Misinformation 

(25:01) Empirical Findings and Study Insights 

(30:01) Potential Changes in Public and Political Attitudes Towards Gun Violence


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 15 Sep 2025 21:35:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Frequent mass shootings are a distinctly American problem, with news of another tragic shooting grabbing our attention every few weeks. Yet policy change is stalled.

In this episode, we focus on an important reason for the congressional paralysis—the gun lobby. John Donohue, one of the country’s leading experts on the empirical study of law and public policy, and Eric Baldwin, a research fellow at Stanford Law, join us for a discussion about their new research paper, "Another Shooting, Another Contribution From the Gun Lobby." They reveal how both gun rights and gun safety PACs flood competitive districts with donations in the wake of deadly shootings. The result? A high-stakes stalemate that helps preserve the status quo, despite overwhelming public support for measures like universal background checks. With Donohue’s decades of scholarship on crime and policy and Baldwin’s insights into political science and lobbying, the episode offers a timely look at how money and ideology shape one of the country's most polarizing debates and offers an examination of a grim reality: mass shootings have become more frequent, but meaningful reform rarely follows. Against the backdrop of rising political violence, the conversation probes the sometimes-surprising role of campaign donations and interest-group maneuvering in shaping what legislators do—or fail to do—after mass shooting tragedy.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Introductions and The Role of Different Gun Lobby Groups

(10:01) Impact of Mass Shootings on Public Discourse 

(18:01) Political Reactions and Misinformation 

(25:01) Empirical Findings and Study Insights 

(30:01) Potential Changes in Public and Political Attitudes Towards Gun Violence


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Guns, Money, and Mass Shootings Stanford Law School 00:30:38 Stanford Law Researchers Discuss How Lobbying Shapes the Political Battlefield Stanford Law Researchers Discuss How Lobbying Shapes the Political Battlefield gun lobby, death penalty, crime rates, guns and politics, political violence, eric baldwin, diego zambrano, john donohue, legislation, school shootings, public safety, political reactions, criminal justice, national rifle association, interest groups, nra, misinformation, public policy, stanford legal podcast, national shooting sports foundation, empirical analysis, president trump, gun owners of america, charlie kirk, mass shootings, political discourse, common-sense measures, gun violence, gun safety regulation false full 170 bd7a3378-ea2f-4ce1-abb2-28acbb8bd9c3 U.S. Risking its Scientific Research Edge? In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Pamela Karlan interviews her Stanford Law School colleague Professor Lisa Larrimore Ouellette about actions by the Trump administration that Ouellette says are undermining scientific research and jeopardizing America’s longstanding global leadership in medicine and innovation. Drawing on an essay she penned for Just Security, Ouellette explains how decades of bipartisan support for federally funded science—an engine of American innovation since World War II—is now at risk. From canceling grants already approved through peer review, to capping essential “indirect cost” reimbursements, she details how these moves threaten not just labs and universities but also patients, whose clinical trials are being abruptly halted.  

Ouellette also highlights a second front in her current scholarship: how drug development policy can be better aligned with public health needs. As a member of a National Academies committee, she recently co-authored a report showing that both private investment and federal funding often fail to prioritize diseases causing the greatest suffering. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Research Funding 

(05:01) The Competitive Grant Process 

(15:01) Addressing Disease Burden 

(20:00) Impacts of Stopped Clinical Trials 

(25:01) The Role of Federal Investment in Innovation 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In this episode of Stanford Legal, host Professor Pamela Karlan interviews her Stanford Law School colleague Professor Lisa Larrimore Ouellette about actions by the Trump administration that Ouellette says are undermining scientific research and jeopardizing America’s longstanding global leadership in medicine and innovation. Drawing on an essay she penned for Just Security, Ouellette explains how decades of bipartisan support for federally funded science—an engine of American innovation since World War II—is now at risk. From canceling grants already approved through peer review, to capping essential “indirect cost” reimbursements, she details how these moves threaten not just labs and universities but also patients, whose clinical trials are being abruptly halted.  

Ouellette also highlights a second front in her current scholarship: how drug development policy can be better aligned with public health needs. As a member of a National Academies committee, she recently co-authored a report showing that both private investment and federal funding often fail to prioritize diseases causing the greatest suffering. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Research Funding 

(05:01) The Competitive Grant Process 

(15:01) Addressing Disease Burden 

(20:00) Impacts of Stopped Clinical Trials 

(25:01) The Role of Federal Investment in Innovation 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> U.S. Risking its Scientific Research Edge? Stanford Law School 00:31:09 Stanford Law’s Lisa Ouellette discusses the rollback of federal support for vital academic research, the challenge of defending U.S. research from political interference, and ensuring drug development meets real-world health needs Stanford Law’s Lisa Ouellette discusses the rollback of federal support for vital academic research, the challenge of defending U.S. research from political interference, and ensuring drug development meets real-world health needs innovation, trump administration, southern district of new york, pam karlan, national science foundation, grant proposals, investment priorities, just security, intellectual property, research funding, lisa larrimore ouellette, public health, disease burden, clinical trials, diversity, indirect costs, national institutes of health, mrna technology, federal court of claims, vaccine research, therapeutic development, equity, basic science, peer review process, market forces, funding allocations, federal investment, and inclusion, unmet medical needs false full 169 149f77b3-aafe-4587-aad7-c15d33e5afa6 Redrawing Democracy At the urging of President Trump, the Texas legislature has launched a mid‑decade redistricting effort aimed at securing additional Republican seats in Congress. If successful, this effort could have far‑reaching implications for representation and governance—and spur other states to try the same. In this episode of Stanford Legal, two of Stanford Law School’s—and the nation’s—leading election law experts sit down to untangle the legal and political stakes of today’s redistricting wars. In their wide‑ranging discussion, Professors Pamela Karlan and Nathaniel Persily shed light on Texas’s push to add five new Republican‑leaning seats, the Supreme Court’s recent decision to re‑argue Louisiana v. Callais—a move that could reshape how the Voting Rights Act is applied—and the broader battles over race, representation, and the future of redistricting in America.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Voting Rights and Gerrymandering 

(05:31)The Legal Landscape of Redistricting

(15:01) The Impact of Partisan Gerrymandering 

(25:31) The Evolving Role of the Judiciary 

(35:01) Future Implications for the Voting Rights Act 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tue, 5 Aug 2025 20:45:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ At the urging of President Trump, the Texas legislature has launched a mid‑decade redistricting effort aimed at securing additional Republican seats in Congress. If successful, this effort could have far‑reaching implications for representation and governance—and spur other states to try the same. In this episode of Stanford Legal, two of Stanford Law School’s—and the nation’s—leading election law experts sit down to untangle the legal and political stakes of today’s redistricting wars. In their wide‑ranging discussion, Professors Pamela Karlan and Nathaniel Persily shed light on Texas’s push to add five new Republican‑leaning seats, the Supreme Court’s recent decision to re‑argue Louisiana v. Callais—a move that could reshape how the Voting Rights Act is applied—and the broader battles over race, representation, and the future of redistricting in America.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00) Voting Rights and Gerrymandering 

(05:31)The Legal Landscape of Redistricting

(15:01) The Impact of Partisan Gerrymandering 

(25:31) The Evolving Role of the Judiciary 

(35:01) Future Implications for the Voting Rights Act 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Redrawing Democracy Stanford Law School 00:44:10 Stanford's Pamela Karlan and Nathaniel Persily on the redistricting push in Texas, recent signals from the Supreme Court about the Voting Rights Act, and the future of voting and redistricting in America Stanford's Pamela Karlan and Nathaniel Persily on the redistricting push in Texas, recent signals from the Supreme Court about the Voting Rights Act, and the future of voting and redistricting in America louisiana, reynolds v. sims, minority representation, election fairness, democratic processes, civil rights legislation, pam karlan, racial implications, 14th amendment, constitutional law, voting rights, equal protection clause, electoral manipulation, future implications, majority minority districts, gerrymandering, disparate impact, nate persily, stanford legal, redistricting, shelby county, partisan gerrymandering, democracy, racial exclusion, earl warren, judicial decisions, legal challenges, supreme court, voting rights act, electoral outcomes false full 168 801d2b70-1be5-41dc-a09c-d532938f57bc Trump’s Executive Orders, Culture Wars, and Civil Rights Trump-era executive orders, police hiring standards, and college admissions all converge in a decades-long debate over disparate impact, one of the most misunderstood yet consequential doctrines in civil rights law. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Ralph Richard Banks, faculty director of the Stanford Center for Racial Justice, joins host Professor Pamela Karlan for a deep dive into how the disparate impact doctrine really works, why it matters, and what’s at stake when it’s attacked in the name of “meritocracy.” From the landmark Griggs case to modern college admissions, Banks dissects the arguments on all sides—showing how this sometimes-vilified legal doctrine not only helps root out discrimination, but can also strengthen, rather than undermine, meritocracy. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction to Executive Orders and Disparate Impact 

(00:03:30) The Function and Impact of Universities in Society 

(00:09:46) Understanding Different Measures of Merit 

(00:13:20) Legacy Preferences and Nepotistic Systems 

(00:18:16) Disparate Impact in Standardized Testing 

(00:23:38) The Future of College Admissions and Rick Banks' Upcoming Book 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 25 Jul 2025 18:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Trump-era executive orders, police hiring standards, and college admissions all converge in a decades-long debate over disparate impact, one of the most misunderstood yet consequential doctrines in civil rights law. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Ralph Richard Banks, faculty director of the Stanford Center for Racial Justice, joins host Professor Pamela Karlan for a deep dive into how the disparate impact doctrine really works, why it matters, and what’s at stake when it’s attacked in the name of “meritocracy.” From the landmark Griggs case to modern college admissions, Banks dissects the arguments on all sides—showing how this sometimes-vilified legal doctrine not only helps root out discrimination, but can also strengthen, rather than undermine, meritocracy. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction to Executive Orders and Disparate Impact 

(00:03:30) The Function and Impact of Universities in Society 

(00:09:46) Understanding Different Measures of Merit 

(00:13:20) Legacy Preferences and Nepotistic Systems 

(00:18:16) Disparate Impact in Standardized Testing 

(00:23:38) The Future of College Admissions and Rick Banks' Upcoming Book 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump’s Executive Orders, Culture Wars, and Civil Rights Stanford Law School 00:33:09 Stanford's Rick Banks on the Doctrine of Disparate Impact and the Surprising Case for Meritocracy Stanford's Rick Banks on the Doctrine of Disparate Impact and the Surprising Case for Meritocracy civil rights, stanford law school, anti-discrimination law, merit, meritocracy, standardized testing, educational equity, equity in education, trump administration, kotch v. river port pilots, pam karlan, julius chambers, stanford graduate school of education, college application processes, the big sort, legacy preferences, stanford center for racial justice, birthright citizenship, standardized tests, disparate impact theory, predicting outcomes, griggs v. duke power, stanford legal, rick banks, executive orders, nepotism, democracy, overcoming obstacles, universities, equality of opportunity, racial justice, college admissions, societal impact, discrimination false full 167 46d8fa33-e56d-40e9-9b16-9c7c83adaad0 Can the Rule of Law Hold? In this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Pam Karlan talks about the growing politicization of the Department of Justice under the Trump administration. Drawing on her experience in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division during both the Obama and Biden administrations, Karlan describes how recent loyalty tests, internal purges, and retaliatory transfers have hollowed out one of the nation’s most critical legal institutions. Karlan explores how the DOJ has historically relied on a “thin layer” of political leadership atop a deep bench of expert, nonpartisan career lawyers—and why that structure is now under threat. She also discusses the DOJ’s broad civil rights mandate, the challenges of a politicized environment, and the legal and moral consequences of eroding prosecutorial independence. The conversation makes the case that what’s happening now is not just a policy shift—it’s an institutional crisis that threatens the rule of law and the very idea of justice in America. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Constraints Under Civil Service Reform Act

(00:05:01) The Impact of Political Agenda on DOJ's Functioning

(00:08:31) Challenges Faced by Career Lawyers

(00:14:16) Interaction Between Political Appointees and Career Lawyers

(00:17:46) Meritocracy and Recruitment in the DOJ
(00:20:01) comparative perspective in understanding the DOJ's special role


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 10 Jul 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In this episode of Stanford Legal, Professor Pam Karlan talks about the growing politicization of the Department of Justice under the Trump administration. Drawing on her experience in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division during both the Obama and Biden administrations, Karlan describes how recent loyalty tests, internal purges, and retaliatory transfers have hollowed out one of the nation’s most critical legal institutions. Karlan explores how the DOJ has historically relied on a “thin layer” of political leadership atop a deep bench of expert, nonpartisan career lawyers—and why that structure is now under threat. She also discusses the DOJ’s broad civil rights mandate, the challenges of a politicized environment, and the legal and moral consequences of eroding prosecutorial independence. The conversation makes the case that what’s happening now is not just a policy shift—it’s an institutional crisis that threatens the rule of law and the very idea of justice in America. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Constraints Under Civil Service Reform Act

(00:05:01) The Impact of Political Agenda on DOJ's Functioning

(00:08:31) Challenges Faced by Career Lawyers

(00:14:16) Interaction Between Political Appointees and Career Lawyers

(00:17:46) Meritocracy and Recruitment in the DOJ
(00:20:01) comparative perspective in understanding the DOJ's special role


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Can the Rule of Law Hold? Stanford Law School 00:35:37 Pam Karlan on the Erosion of Norms at the DOJ Pam Karlan on the Erosion of Norms at the DOJ stanford law school, meritocracy, comparative law, trump administration, legal standards, evidence-based investigations, career lawyers, pam karlan, experienced professionals, prosecutorial decisions, rule of law, political agendas, institutional knowledge, stanford legal, civil procedure, neukom center for the rule of law, civil rights division, doj, public trust, department of justice, political influence, justice robert jackson, legal talent recruitment, doj challenges, law enforcement, doj integrity, legal efficacy, constructive discharge effects, civil service reform act, political appointees false full 166 6a59160d-2770-40c4-a390-13fe8350cc1a Free Speech Under Fire: Greg Lukianoff Discusses the Battle for Free Expression on College Campuses Amid escalating federal pressure on universities, Stanford Law School alum Greg Lukianoff, JD ’00, joins host Professor Pam Karlan for a sharp look at the free speech firestorms engulfing universities like Harvard and Columbia. First Amendment champion, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), and co-author of The Coddling of the American Mind, Lukianoff recently penned an essay for The Atlantic titled “Trump’s Attacks Threaten Much More Than Harvard.” In this episode, Lukianoff expands on his essay, breaking down the Trump administration’s tactics to punish elite institutions, from defunding threats and faculty interference to student visa crackdowns, while also calling out universities themselves for stifling dissent and eroding public trust in higher education.

Links:

Greg Lukianoff  >>> FIRE page

The Canceling of the American Mind >>> web page

The Coddling of the American Mind >>> web page

“Trump’s Attacks Threaten Much More Than Harvard” >>> The Atlantic page

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction of Greg Lukianoff

(00:05:01) Free Speech and Academic Freedom

(00:10:01) Challenges to Free Speech

(00:15:01) Legal Cases and Free Speech

(00:20:01) Free Speech and the Government 

(00:30:01) Future of Free Speech


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 26 Jun 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Amid escalating federal pressure on universities, Stanford Law School alum Greg Lukianoff, JD ’00, joins host Professor Pam Karlan for a sharp look at the free speech firestorms engulfing universities like Harvard and Columbia. First Amendment champion, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), and co-author of The Coddling of the American Mind, Lukianoff recently penned an essay for The Atlantic titled “Trump’s Attacks Threaten Much More Than Harvard.” In this episode, Lukianoff expands on his essay, breaking down the Trump administration’s tactics to punish elite institutions, from defunding threats and faculty interference to student visa crackdowns, while also calling out universities themselves for stifling dissent and eroding public trust in higher education.

Links:

Greg Lukianoff  >>> FIRE page

The Canceling of the American Mind >>> web page

The Coddling of the American Mind >>> web page

“Trump’s Attacks Threaten Much More Than Harvard” >>> The Atlantic page

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction of Greg Lukianoff

(00:05:01) Free Speech and Academic Freedom

(00:10:01) Challenges to Free Speech

(00:15:01) Legal Cases and Free Speech

(00:20:01) Free Speech and the Government 

(00:30:01) Future of Free Speech


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Free Speech Under Fire: Greg Lukianoff Discusses the Battle for Free Expression on College Campuses Stanford Law School 00:33:16 trump administration, greg lukianoff, pam karlan, foundation for individual rights in education, george stephanopoulos, government regulation, media attacks, congress, senate hearings, legal cases, university policies, fire, abc, stanford legal, academic freedom implications, cbs, academic freedom, nate silver, anne selzer, free speech advocacy, legal stories, free speech, first amendment, civil court false full 165 2750f68a-68f2-4bb3-a0ac-9d51d17fac99 The Free Speech Chill In this episode, Stanford Law Professor Evelyn Douek, a First Amendment scholar and permanent U.S. resident, expands on her recent Atlantic essay, “Can I Teach the First Amendment If I Only Have a Green Card?” She reflects on the paradox of teaching constitutional protections for free speech while watching the U.S. government detain or revoke visas for foreign students and other non-citizen residents engaged in protest or student journalism. Douek joins fellow Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan to explore what these developments could mean for the future of American universities, long known for drawing global talent. Their conversation highlights the growing tension between the nation's commitment to free expression and policies that penalize dissent by non-citizens.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Exercising First Amendment Rights

(00:01:53) Writing the Essay

(00:02:27) Teaching the First Amendment

(00:15:25) Freedom of Speech and Religion

(00:16:11) Challenges of Teaching the First Amendment


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 19 Jun 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In this episode, Stanford Law Professor Evelyn Douek, a First Amendment scholar and permanent U.S. resident, expands on her recent Atlantic essay, “Can I Teach the First Amendment If I Only Have a Green Card?” She reflects on the paradox of teaching constitutional protections for free speech while watching the U.S. government detain or revoke visas for foreign students and other non-citizen residents engaged in protest or student journalism. Douek joins fellow Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan to explore what these developments could mean for the future of American universities, long known for drawing global talent. Their conversation highlights the growing tension between the nation's commitment to free expression and policies that penalize dissent by non-citizens.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Exercising First Amendment Rights

(00:01:53) Writing the Essay

(00:02:27) Teaching the First Amendment

(00:15:25) Freedom of Speech and Religion

(00:16:11) Challenges of Teaching the First Amendment


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Free Speech Chill Stanford Law School 00:32:59 Analyzing the impact of government actions on foreign students' First Amendment rights Analyzing the impact of government actions on foreign students' First Amendment rights american universities, inclusivity, chilling effect, pam karlan, foreign students, visa revocations, immigration policy, protests, international students, doctorate, student publications, higher education, stanford legal, academic freedom, speech suppression, government actions, commercial speech, student visa, high value speech, evelyn douek, free speech, political speech, harvard, first amendment, academic community, green card false full 164 84b49546-bd05-4c14-a53d-d811b9fab88e Leveraging Technology to Improve Access to LA Courts The LA Superior Court is the largest single unified trial court in the United States, serving the approximately 10 million residents of Los Angeles County—the cases it handles spanning a wide range of legal matters, from civil cases to criminal cases, family law, and juvenile matters.

As the state and county have grown, so has demand on the legal system. Access to justice—the inability for Americans to find and/or afford legal representation—has been called a crisis. What does that mean? What can be done about it?

Stanford Law School’s Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession and Legal Design Lab released a groundbreaking diagnostic report in April that outlines a blueprint for creating more innovative, modern, and accessible courts. 

The report marks a significant milestone in the unique partnership established in January 2024 between the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (the Court – SCLAC) and Stanford Law School. Created in collaboration with court leadership, frontline court staff, and community partners, the findings of the Stanford report demonstrate the Court’s commitment to enhancing the self-represented litigant experience and its dedication to leading in justice innovation.

Our guests joining Pam Karlan for this episode include Stanford Law Professor David Freeman Engstrom, the co-director of the Rhode Center whose work focuses on access to justice in the millions of low-dollar but highly consequential cases, including debt collection, eviction, foreclosure, and child support actions, that shape the lives of Americans each year;  Margaret Hagan, the executive director of the Legal Design Lab at Stanford Law School whose researches, designs, and develops new ways to make the U.S. civil justice system work better for people; and Daniel Bernal, associate director of research at the Rhode Center whose work explores the intersection of civil procedure and access to justice, with a focus on designing and testing innovations to make state courts work better for people. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introductions and Tour of the LA Superior Court

(00:21:25) Use of Technology and the Pain Points in Court Systems 

(00:27:25) National Implications of Court Innovations 

(00:33:00 Court as a Central Hub for Legal Problem-Solving 

(00:35:04) Collaboration and Future Prospects


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 12 Jun 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The LA Superior Court is the largest single unified trial court in the United States, serving the approximately 10 million residents of Los Angeles County—the cases it handles spanning a wide range of legal matters, from civil cases to criminal cases, family law, and juvenile matters.

As the state and county have grown, so has demand on the legal system. Access to justice—the inability for Americans to find and/or afford legal representation—has been called a crisis. What does that mean? What can be done about it?

Stanford Law School’s Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession and Legal Design Lab released a groundbreaking diagnostic report in April that outlines a blueprint for creating more innovative, modern, and accessible courts. 

The report marks a significant milestone in the unique partnership established in January 2024 between the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (the Court – SCLAC) and Stanford Law School. Created in collaboration with court leadership, frontline court staff, and community partners, the findings of the Stanford report demonstrate the Court’s commitment to enhancing the self-represented litigant experience and its dedication to leading in justice innovation.

Our guests joining Pam Karlan for this episode include Stanford Law Professor David Freeman Engstrom, the co-director of the Rhode Center whose work focuses on access to justice in the millions of low-dollar but highly consequential cases, including debt collection, eviction, foreclosure, and child support actions, that shape the lives of Americans each year;  Margaret Hagan, the executive director of the Legal Design Lab at Stanford Law School whose researches, designs, and develops new ways to make the U.S. civil justice system work better for people; and Daniel Bernal, associate director of research at the Rhode Center whose work explores the intersection of civil procedure and access to justice, with a focus on designing and testing innovations to make state courts work better for people. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introductions and Tour of the LA Superior Court

(00:21:25) Use of Technology and the Pain Points in Court Systems 

(00:27:25) National Implications of Court Innovations 

(00:33:00 Court as a Central Hub for Legal Problem-Solving 

(00:35:04) Collaboration and Future Prospects


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Leveraging Technology to Improve Access to LA Courts Stanford Law School 00:35:43 Stanford researchers help bring innovative solutions to high-volume court, enhancing the self-represented litigant experience and its dedication to leading in justice innovation. Stanford researchers help bring innovative solutions to high-volume court, enhancing the self-represented litigant experience and its dedication to leading in justice innovation. court modernization, pam karlan, court technology, legal services, margaret hagan, eviction dockets, custody disputes, legal technology, david freeman engstrom, digital hub, legal system efficiency, local government partners, murder trials, online dispute resolution, legal problem-solving, digital self-help tools, court collaboration, legal aid partners, filing fairness project, stanford legal, traffic cases, qualitative analysis, court data analysis, community stakeholders, quantitative analysis, los angeles superior court system, court accessibility, eviction cases, court research, legal outcomes, court innovation, legal accessibility, community-based organizations, daniel bernal false full 163 11c29f48-04c0-462d-8d07-1addccea2fda Trump Takes on the Federal Bureaucracy, Putting Administrative Law in the Spotlight On February 19 of this year, President Donald Trump issued one of his first executive orders, Commencing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy, leaving no doubt his aim to reduce its size and scope. As DOGE got to work firing federal workers—and cutting entire agencies, the president also fired heads of agencies—Democratic and Republican—cleaning house of leadership not deemed on side. 

As EO whiplash continues, so does pushback, with many in the public learning about the people behind the cost-cutting and loyalty tests—the federal workers and government agencies helping to make American life run smoothly and safely. What are the legal questions?

Joining this episode is Anne Joseph O'Connell, a leading scholar of U.S. administrative law and the federal bureaucracy. She was a presidentially appointed member of the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an independent federal agency dedicated to improving regulatory procedures, from October 2022 to January 2025. She combines a lawyer's doctrinal acumen and institutional sensibilities with a political scientist's deep understanding of American politics and political theory and an empiricist's rigor about facts in the world. Her scholarship explains how government really works. She has done pioneering and award-winning work on previously unforeseen questions about the problem of vacancies in federal office and about the legal and normative implications of unorthodox government entities such as the U.S. Postal Service or Smithsonian.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Introduction to Anne Joseph O'Connell's background

(00:03:44) Actings in Government

(00:17:04) The Importance of Government Accountability

(00:19:22) The Role of Detailees in Government and The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

(00:27:24) Government Waste and Fraud


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 29 May 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ On February 19 of this year, President Donald Trump issued one of his first executive orders, Commencing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy, leaving no doubt his aim to reduce its size and scope. As DOGE got to work firing federal workers—and cutting entire agencies, the president also fired heads of agencies—Democratic and Republican—cleaning house of leadership not deemed on side. 

As EO whiplash continues, so does pushback, with many in the public learning about the people behind the cost-cutting and loyalty tests—the federal workers and government agencies helping to make American life run smoothly and safely. What are the legal questions?

Joining this episode is Anne Joseph O'Connell, a leading scholar of U.S. administrative law and the federal bureaucracy. She was a presidentially appointed member of the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an independent federal agency dedicated to improving regulatory procedures, from October 2022 to January 2025. She combines a lawyer's doctrinal acumen and institutional sensibilities with a political scientist's deep understanding of American politics and political theory and an empiricist's rigor about facts in the world. Her scholarship explains how government really works. She has done pioneering and award-winning work on previously unforeseen questions about the problem of vacancies in federal office and about the legal and normative implications of unorthodox government entities such as the U.S. Postal Service or Smithsonian.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Introduction to Anne Joseph O'Connell's background

(00:03:44) Actings in Government

(00:17:04) The Importance of Government Accountability

(00:19:22) The Role of Detailees in Government and The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)

(00:27:24) Government Waste and Fraud


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump Takes on the Federal Bureaucracy, Putting Administrative Law in the Spotlight Stanford Law School 00:29:01 african development foundation, trump administration, federal bureaucracy, january 21st firing, federal firings, pam karlan, government capacity, immigration context, empiricist rigor, reagan quip, u.s. administrative law, stanford legal, political offices, white house, department of justice, detailees, government agencies, executive branch, irs data access, memorandum of understanding, department of agriculture, anne joseph o'connell, doge false full 162 b09a8068-56c6-461a-9ef3-df4fc9bce223 AI, Liability, and Hallucinations in a Changing Tech and Law Environment Since ChatGPT came on the scene, numerous incidents have surfaced involving attorneys submitting court filings riddled with AI-generated hallucinations—plausible-sounding case citations that purport to support key legal propositions but are, in fact, entirely fictitious. As sanctions against attorneys mount, it seems clear there are a few kinks in the tech. Even AI tools designed specifically for lawyers can be prone to hallucinations. 

In this episode, we look at the potential and risks of AI-assisted tech in law and policy with two Stanford Law researchers at the forefront of this issue: RegLab Director Professor Daniel Ho and JD/PhD student and computer science researcher Mirac Suzgun. Together with several co-authors, they examine the emerging risks in two recent papers, “Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Models” (Oxford Journal of Legal Analysis, 2024) and the forthcoming “Hallucination-Free?” in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. Ho and Suzgun offer new insights into how legal AI is working, where it’s failing, and what’s at stake.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction to AI in Legal Education 

(00:05:01) AI Tools in Legal Research and Writing

(00:12:01) Challenges of AI-Generated Content 

(00:20:0) Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback

(00:30:01) Audience Q&A


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 15 May 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Since ChatGPT came on the scene, numerous incidents have surfaced involving attorneys submitting court filings riddled with AI-generated hallucinations—plausible-sounding case citations that purport to support key legal propositions but are, in fact, entirely fictitious. As sanctions against attorneys mount, it seems clear there are a few kinks in the tech. Even AI tools designed specifically for lawyers can be prone to hallucinations. 

In this episode, we look at the potential and risks of AI-assisted tech in law and policy with two Stanford Law researchers at the forefront of this issue: RegLab Director Professor Daniel Ho and JD/PhD student and computer science researcher Mirac Suzgun. Together with several co-authors, they examine the emerging risks in two recent papers, “Profiling Legal Hallucinations in Large Language Models” (Oxford Journal of Legal Analysis, 2024) and the forthcoming “Hallucination-Free?” in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies. Ho and Suzgun offer new insights into how legal AI is working, where it’s failing, and what’s at stake.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction to AI in Legal Education 

(00:05:01) AI Tools in Legal Research and Writing

(00:12:01) Challenges of AI-Generated Content 

(00:20:0) Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback

(00:30:01) Audience Q&A


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> AI, Liability, and Hallucinations in a Changing Tech and Law Environment Stanford Law School 00:39:31 stanford law school, ai tools, legal research and writing instructors, mirac suzgun, access to justice, pam karlan, reinforcement learning, ai-generated fact patterns, stanford law and ai society, technology changes, legal hallucinations, stanford law and technology association, legal technology, legal field, responsible ai use, legal ferment, fictitious case citations, legal sanctions, artificial intelligence, dan ho, legal dimensions, legal writing, legal practice future, ai integration, ai in legal education, legal workshops, case citations, legal briefs, legal practice, legal stories, legal professionals, language models, human feedback, circuit split, ai-generated content, stanford legal live, ai-assisted tools, legal conferences, legal research, legal education innovation false full 161 bc276253-036a-440b-895f-79276aa276b9 The Trump Administration and the Rule of Law Under Pressure On March 6, President Trump issued the executive order “Addressing Risk from Perkins Coie LLP,” essentially preventing the firm from doing business with the federal government, stripping its staff of security clearances. It was the first of several presidential orders aimed at law firms that represented clients and/or employed attorneys at odds with Trump.

At the same time, Trump and members of his administration have voiced loud opposition to judges who rule against him and, in what many see as a weaponization of justice, have fired members of the Department of Justice without cause. Even the new Attorney General Pam Bondi is breaking with long held protocol by openly defending the administration, taking a partisan position when defending her decision not to investigate the Signal scandal of top national security officers sharing war plans via the public ap, saying: “If you want to talk about classified information, talk about what was in Hillary Clinton’s home. Talk about the classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage that Hunter Biden had access to.”

Are the norms and practices that have maintained the rule of law in the United States straining under the pressure of the Trump administration?

Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky, a criminal law expert, joins Pam Karlan for a look at the first 100 days of the Trump administration—and the unprecedented number of executive orders targeting rule of law norms. Sklansky, co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center who teaches and writes about policing, prosecution, criminal law, and the law of evidence, is the author, most recently of Criminal Justice in Divided America: Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy, was published earlier this year by Harvard University Press. Earlier he practiced labor law in Washington D.C. and served as a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles.

Links:

Criminal Justice in Divided America >>> Stanford Law page

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rule of Law and Executive Orders

(00:15:01) Legal Profession's Response to Political Pressure

(00:27:01) Impact on Universities and Academic Freedom

(00:37:01) Redefining Pro Bono Work

(00:44:42) The Importance of the Rule of Law


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Wed, 30 Apr 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ On March 6, President Trump issued the executive order “Addressing Risk from Perkins Coie LLP,” essentially preventing the firm from doing business with the federal government, stripping its staff of security clearances. It was the first of several presidential orders aimed at law firms that represented clients and/or employed attorneys at odds with Trump.

At the same time, Trump and members of his administration have voiced loud opposition to judges who rule against him and, in what many see as a weaponization of justice, have fired members of the Department of Justice without cause. Even the new Attorney General Pam Bondi is breaking with long held protocol by openly defending the administration, taking a partisan position when defending her decision not to investigate the Signal scandal of top national security officers sharing war plans via the public ap, saying: “If you want to talk about classified information, talk about what was in Hillary Clinton’s home. Talk about the classified documents in Joe Biden’s garage that Hunter Biden had access to.”

Are the norms and practices that have maintained the rule of law in the United States straining under the pressure of the Trump administration?

Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky, a criminal law expert, joins Pam Karlan for a look at the first 100 days of the Trump administration—and the unprecedented number of executive orders targeting rule of law norms. Sklansky, co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center who teaches and writes about policing, prosecution, criminal law, and the law of evidence, is the author, most recently of Criminal Justice in Divided America: Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy, was published earlier this year by Harvard University Press. Earlier he practiced labor law in Washington D.C. and served as a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles.

Links:

Criminal Justice in Divided America >>> Stanford Law page

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rule of Law and Executive Orders

(00:15:01) Legal Profession's Response to Political Pressure

(00:27:01) Impact on Universities and Academic Freedom

(00:37:01) Redefining Pro Bono Work

(00:44:42) The Importance of the Rule of Law


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Trump Administration and the Rule of Law Under Pressure Stanford Law School 00:46:11 Criminal law expert David Sklansky on DOJ independence, judicial norms, and law firms under attack Criminal law expert David Sklansky on DOJ independence, judicial norms, and law firms under attack legal community, trump administration, political pressure, pam karlan, judicial community, tyranny, rule of law, u.s. supreme court, legal ethics, legal profession, stanford legal, targeting law firms, legal integrity, executive orders, department of justice, academic freedom, free legal services, universities, assistant united states attorney, legal education, pro bono work, fraud cases, david sklansky, civics education, stanford criminal justice center, presidential directives, orwellian theories false full 160 7cdb6b66-9aef-491c-a8ee-d9ad70e3ded0 Trade Wars, Economic Chaos, and Law: Unpacking Trump's Trade Tactics with Alan Sykes Joining Pam for this week's episode is Stanford Law Professor Alan Sykes, a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems whose most recent scholarship is focused on international economic relations. In short, he is an international trade and law expert—and the right person to help us understand today's chaos. The discussion covers the credibility of the United States in international trade negotiations, the feasibility of renegotiating trade deals with multiple countries within a short timeframe, and the unconventional methods employed by the Trump administration. Sykes also highlights the importance of previously negotiated deals and the World Trade Organization—and how the Trump administration has sidelined the organization. This episode offers a comprehensive look at the legal and economic dimensions of Trump's tariffs, making it a must-listen for anyone interested in understanding the complexities of modern trade policies.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview of Trump's Tariffs

(00:04:05) Impact on Imported Goods and Consumers

(00:04:34) Exemptions and Intermediate Goods

(00:05:14) Historical Context of U.S. Tariffs

(00:24:38) Credibility of the United States and the 90-Day Pause


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Wed, 16 Apr 2025 21:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Joining Pam for this week's episode is Stanford Law Professor Alan Sykes, a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems whose most recent scholarship is focused on international economic relations. In short, he is an international trade and law expert—and the right person to help us understand today's chaos. The discussion covers the credibility of the United States in international trade negotiations, the feasibility of renegotiating trade deals with multiple countries within a short timeframe, and the unconventional methods employed by the Trump administration. Sykes also highlights the importance of previously negotiated deals and the World Trade Organization—and how the Trump administration has sidelined the organization. This episode offers a comprehensive look at the legal and economic dimensions of Trump's tariffs, making it a must-listen for anyone interested in understanding the complexities of modern trade policies.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview of Trump's Tariffs

(00:04:05) Impact on Imported Goods and Consumers

(00:04:34) Exemptions and Intermediate Goods

(00:05:14) Historical Context of U.S. Tariffs

(00:24:38) Credibility of the United States and the 90-Day Pause


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trade Wars, Economic Chaos, and Law: Unpacking Trump's Trade Tactics with Alan Sykes Stanford Law School 00:32:52 President Trump's tariffs are upending world trade and causing unprecedented upheaval in the financial and diplomatic sectors, with close allies questioning the reliability of the U.S. The wild stock and bond markets rollercoaster ride continues, despite the April 9 rollback of most tariffs. President Trump's tariffs are upending world trade and causing unprecedented upheaval in the financial and diplomatic sectors, with close allies questioning the reliability of the U.S. The wild stock and bond markets rollercoaster ride continues, despite the April 9 rollback of most tariffs. law firms, trade deals, tariffs on china, trade agreements, global trade, alan sykes, pam karlan, financial markets, international trade practices, government officials, economic impact of tariffs, nafta, trump tariffs, diplomatic upheavals, international trade, diplomatic relations, imported goods, law and economics, stanford legal, comprehensive trade deals, u.s.-canada free trade agreement, security clearances, financial upheavals, commerce department, trade negotiations, uncompensated legal work, government contracting, stock market impact, international trade law, bilateral trade agreements false full 159 130c90d5-0c42-481c-926e-321d74a6935d Trump’s Forced Deportations to El Salvador Prisons, Detentions, and Fear on College Campuses Do asylum seekers in the U.S. have rights? Can the U.S. government forcibly deport them to a prison in El Salvador without due process? What about green card holders attending college? Since taking office, President Trump has focused on legal and undocumented immigrants alike, from Venezuelan asylum seekers to visa and green card college students—invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport some, and even defying court orders. In this episode, Stanford Law immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón joins Rich Ford for a discussion about these unprecedented actions while also addressing the broader implications for human rights and the U.S.'s role as a refuge for persecuted individuals—and the potential for America's diminished international reputation and influence in the world.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) : Introduction of guest Jennifer Chacón and Unprecedented Actions

(00:09:00): Redefinition of Wartime Acts and Due Process

(00:17:56): Legal Frameworks and Immigration Detention

(00:18:36): Aggressive Tactics and Legal Boundaries

(00:31:55): Vision of the United States and Future Outlook

(00:32:54): Vigilance and Civic Engagement


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 28 Mar 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Do asylum seekers in the U.S. have rights? Can the U.S. government forcibly deport them to a prison in El Salvador without due process? What about green card holders attending college? Since taking office, President Trump has focused on legal and undocumented immigrants alike, from Venezuelan asylum seekers to visa and green card college students—invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport some, and even defying court orders. In this episode, Stanford Law immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón joins Rich Ford for a discussion about these unprecedented actions while also addressing the broader implications for human rights and the U.S.'s role as a refuge for persecuted individuals—and the potential for America's diminished international reputation and influence in the world.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) : Introduction of guest Jennifer Chacón and Unprecedented Actions

(00:09:00): Redefinition of Wartime Acts and Due Process

(00:17:56): Legal Frameworks and Immigration Detention

(00:18:36): Aggressive Tactics and Legal Boundaries

(00:31:55): Vision of the United States and Future Outlook

(00:32:54): Vigilance and Civic Engagement


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump’s Forced Deportations to El Salvador Prisons, Detentions, and Fear on College Campuses Stanford Law School 00:33:43 university system, aggressive tactics, rendition, alien enemies act, unpopular speech, trump administration, el salvador, immigration law, guantanamo, u.s. district judge james boasberg, ideological grounds, public concerns, stanford legal, civic engagement, immigration detention, lawful authority, doj, non-citizens, lawful permanent residents, national security threats, deportable, asylum system, immigration cases, statutory authority, jennifer chacon, deportation, elected officials, venezuelan gang members, rich ford false full 158 699f5c82-601f-4145-b3b2-139768bd53b6 Accountability in Government: Glenn Fine on the Crucial Role of Inspectors General, the Government's Watchdogs How do we prevent or catch mismanagement, corruption, and waste of taxpayers' dollars in federal agencies? On January 24, 2025, days into his second administration, President Trump fired Inspectors General from 17 different federal agencies, including the Department of Labor. If no one is watching, does that mean there's nothing to see?

In this episode Pam Karlan is joined by Glenn Fine, a former Inspector General of both the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense. Glenn highlights the extensive work involved in detecting and deterring waste, fraud, and abuse within these massive agencies. He discusses the differences between the DOJ and DOD, emphasizing the unique challenges and the importance of understanding each agency's culture and operations. Through detailed examples, including politicized hiring at the DOJ and a tragic incident at the Bureau of Prisons, he illustrates the breadth and impact of the investigations conducted by Inspectors General—and the essential function of these watchdogs in maintaining integrity and accountability within federal agencies. Earlier in his career, Glenn served as an Assistant United States Attorney in Washington D.C., where he handled criminal cases, including more than 35 jury trials. He also worked in private practice in two law firms.  He is the author of the book Watchdogs: Inspectors General and the Battle for Honest and Accountable Government, with a foreword by General Jim Mattis. He currently is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and serves as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University—and as a visiting lecturer at Stanford Law School.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Introduction and Overview of the Inspector General's Role

(00:03:52) The Impact of Inspector General Reports

(00:04:39) Notable Investigations at DOJ and DOD

(00:15:56) The Role of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service

(00:17:23) Coordinating COVID-19 Relief Oversight

(00:27:59) Importance of the IG's role in maintaining government accountability


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ How do we prevent or catch mismanagement, corruption, and waste of taxpayers' dollars in federal agencies? On January 24, 2025, days into his second administration, President Trump fired Inspectors General from 17 different federal agencies, including the Department of Labor. If no one is watching, does that mean there's nothing to see?

In this episode Pam Karlan is joined by Glenn Fine, a former Inspector General of both the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense. Glenn highlights the extensive work involved in detecting and deterring waste, fraud, and abuse within these massive agencies. He discusses the differences between the DOJ and DOD, emphasizing the unique challenges and the importance of understanding each agency's culture and operations. Through detailed examples, including politicized hiring at the DOJ and a tragic incident at the Bureau of Prisons, he illustrates the breadth and impact of the investigations conducted by Inspectors General—and the essential function of these watchdogs in maintaining integrity and accountability within federal agencies. Earlier in his career, Glenn served as an Assistant United States Attorney in Washington D.C., where he handled criminal cases, including more than 35 jury trials. He also worked in private practice in two law firms.  He is the author of the book Watchdogs: Inspectors General and the Battle for Honest and Accountable Government, with a foreword by General Jim Mattis. He currently is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and serves as an Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University—and as a visiting lecturer at Stanford Law School.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00)  Introduction and Overview of the Inspector General's Role

(00:03:52) The Impact of Inspector General Reports

(00:04:39) Notable Investigations at DOJ and DOD

(00:15:56) The Role of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service

(00:17:23) Coordinating COVID-19 Relief Oversight

(00:27:59) Importance of the IG's role in maintaining government accountability


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Accountability in Government: Glenn Fine on the Crucial Role of Inspectors General, the Government's Watchdogs Stanford Law School 00:28:18 convictions, evidence gathering, pam karlan, naval criminal investigative service, witness interviews, recovered funds, congress, disciplinary actions, government oversight, bureau of prisons, ncis, podcast, attorney general ashcroft, defense criminal investigative service, stanford legal, continuous improvement, watchdogs, waste and abuse detection, agency operations, general jim mattis, doj, dod, department of justice, agency improvement, inspectors general, legal discussions, ig audit, glenn fine, investigations, recommendations, politicized hiring, department of defense, semi-annual report, dcis, search warrants false full 157 de500075-1f8e-4608-870c-9c57cf259983 Gaza Conflict: Governance, Rebuilding, and Legal Challenges International Law expert Allen Weiner joins Pam for a comprehensive overview of the legal challenges and humanitarian concerns in one of the world's most contentious regions, looking at the Israel/Gaza conflict and the delicate balance between military strategy and civilian safety. Allen and Pam explore the principles of proportionality in warfare, highlighting the legal and ethical considerations of targeting high-level military commanders in civilian areas. They then discuss President Trump's controversial proposal for Gaza's future and its plan to transform the region into a resort. The conversation also touches on the ICJ indictments against Palestinian and Israeli leaders, the role of satellite imagery in legal research, and the broader implications of governance and security in Gaza. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview of Gaza Conflict 

(00:04:20) Proportionality in Warfare 

(00:19:50) The Day After Phenomenon 

(00:28:22) Governance and Security of Gaza 

(00:29:11) Conclusion and Call to Action 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 6 Mar 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ International Law expert Allen Weiner joins Pam for a comprehensive overview of the legal challenges and humanitarian concerns in one of the world's most contentious regions, looking at the Israel/Gaza conflict and the delicate balance between military strategy and civilian safety. Allen and Pam explore the principles of proportionality in warfare, highlighting the legal and ethical considerations of targeting high-level military commanders in civilian areas. They then discuss President Trump's controversial proposal for Gaza's future and its plan to transform the region into a resort. The conversation also touches on the ICJ indictments against Palestinian and Israeli leaders, the role of satellite imagery in legal research, and the broader implications of governance and security in Gaza. 

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview of Gaza Conflict 

(00:04:20) Proportionality in Warfare 

(00:19:50) The Day After Phenomenon 

(00:28:22) Governance and Security of Gaza 

(00:29:11) Conclusion and Call to Action 


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Gaza Conflict: Governance, Rebuilding, and Legal Challenges Stanford Law School 00:29:39 gaza conflict, trump administration, gaza rebuilding, civilian harm, pam karlan, proportionality in warfare, gaza security, stanford center on international conflict and negotiation, allen weiner, gaza governance, gaza resort plan, stanford program in international and comparative law, hamas, stanford humanitarian program, international law, dresden, humanitarian concerns, stanford legal, gaza military advantage, jus in bello, ceasefire, legal perspectives, military strategy, gaza legal challenges, ethical considerations, jus ad bellum, palestinian authority, israel, gaza humanitarian issues, military operations, civilian safety, gaza destruction, hostages, gaza civilian impact false full 156 3fc05793-073e-4bf7-9ac1-85b094f03329 Suing DOGE: Musk, Trump, and an Imperial Presidency A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans’ private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation’s largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.

Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. 

The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rise of Executive Power

(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy
(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government
(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach
(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court
(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 20 Feb 2025 21:15:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans’ private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation’s largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.

Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. 

The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The Rise of Executive Power

(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy
(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government
(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach
(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court
(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Suing DOGE: Musk, Trump, and an Imperial Presidency Stanford Law School 00:28:38 Urgent legal questions about privacy protections of the nation’s largest collection of personal data and unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley in Washington Urgent legal questions about privacy protections of the nation’s largest collection of personal data and unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley in Washington elon musk, legal processes, trump administration, public sector, federal bureaucracy, pam karlan, legal implications, government influence, russian government, intellectual property, protected category, executive power, silicon valley, chinese government, stanford program in law, private sector, stanford legal, hacking risks, court confrontation, and technology, social security database, cybersecurity practices, imperial presidency, governance reshaping, mark lemley, science, legal challenges, chevron doctrine, supreme court, cybersecurity, transgender status, doge false full 155 e71f7eb9-4d4d-445b-aa4b-50578e91cfaa Trump's Pardons: Political Violence, Hate Groups, and the Rule of Law What are the legal implications of the unprecedented mass pardoning of the January 6th rioters? What does it say about American rule of law? 

President Biden’s DOJ prosecuted nearly 1,600 of the January 6, 2021, rioters—many for acts of shocking violence against police and government offices. On January 20, newly sworn-in President Trump, in one of his first official acts, issued a sweeping grant of clemency to all of the rioters charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol attack. He pardoned most defendants and commuted the sentences of 14 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, most of whom had been convicted of seditious conspiracy. The response from some of these violent rioters since the pardons has been alarming.

“The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did,” said Enrique Tarrio, the former national Proud Boys leader, sentenced to a 22-year sentence on seditious conspiracy charges, on Alex Jones' podcast soon after his pardon. 

Our guests today are Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou.

Sinnar’s scholarship, including a recent study of hate groups, focuses on the legal treatment of political violence, the procedural dimensions of civil rights litigation, and the role of institutions in protecting individual rights and democratic values in the national security context

Ballou was a lawyer at the Department of Justice for five years. He resigned on January 23 soon after President Trump's pardons. In a New York Times opinion essay, he wrote: “For while some convicted rioters seem genuinely remorseful, and others appear simply ready to put politics behind them, many others are emboldened by the termination of what they see as unjust prosecutions. Freed by the president, they have never been more dangerous.” He graduated from Stanford Law in 2016.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The January 6th Prosecutions and the Pardon Power

(00:06:26) Rewriting History and the Threat of Political Violence 

(00:11:56) The Future of Political Violence in the U.S. 

(17:24) Addressing Militia Violence and Legal Gaps

(21:37) State-Level Prosecutions and Risks of Expanding Criminal Laws

(25:27) Pardons, Political Violence, and Historical Parallels  


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 6 Feb 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ What are the legal implications of the unprecedented mass pardoning of the January 6th rioters? What does it say about American rule of law? 

President Biden’s DOJ prosecuted nearly 1,600 of the January 6, 2021, rioters—many for acts of shocking violence against police and government offices. On January 20, newly sworn-in President Trump, in one of his first official acts, issued a sweeping grant of clemency to all of the rioters charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol attack. He pardoned most defendants and commuted the sentences of 14 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, most of whom had been convicted of seditious conspiracy. The response from some of these violent rioters since the pardons has been alarming.

“The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did,” said Enrique Tarrio, the former national Proud Boys leader, sentenced to a 22-year sentence on seditious conspiracy charges, on Alex Jones' podcast soon after his pardon. 

Our guests today are Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou.

Sinnar’s scholarship, including a recent study of hate groups, focuses on the legal treatment of political violence, the procedural dimensions of civil rights litigation, and the role of institutions in protecting individual rights and democratic values in the national security context

Ballou was a lawyer at the Department of Justice for five years. He resigned on January 23 soon after President Trump's pardons. In a New York Times opinion essay, he wrote: “For while some convicted rioters seem genuinely remorseful, and others appear simply ready to put politics behind them, many others are emboldened by the termination of what they see as unjust prosecutions. Freed by the president, they have never been more dangerous.” He graduated from Stanford Law in 2016.

Links:

Connect:

(00:00:00) The January 6th Prosecutions and the Pardon Power

(00:06:26) Rewriting History and the Threat of Political Violence 

(00:11:56) The Future of Political Violence in the U.S. 

(17:24) Addressing Militia Violence and Legal Gaps

(21:37) State-Level Prosecutions and Risks of Expanding Criminal Laws

(25:27) Pardons, Political Violence, and Historical Parallels  


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump's Pardons: Political Violence, Hate Groups, and the Rule of Law Stanford Law School 00:30:37 domestic terrorism, face act pardons, pam karlan, political extremism, political violence, stanford university, state sovereignty, reconstruction history, historical revisionism, paramilitary groups, legal podcast, constitutional law, presidential clemency, jack smith, enrique tarrio, reproductive rights, oath keepers, misinformation, stanford legal, brendan ballou, supreme court trump case, democracy preservation, department of justice, ku klux klan, hate crimes, timothy snyder, shirin sinnar, proud boys, capitol riot prosecutions, january 6th pardons, militia violence, election interference, california state commission on the state of hate, authoritarianism, civil rights litigation, trump pardons, jacob chansley, vigilante groups false full 154 01af7591-36d3-4d8c-9c47-269ffbd75222 Criminal Justice in Divided America: Can Democracy Survive a Broken Justice System? Criminal law expert and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky joins Pam Karlan to discuss his book Criminal Justice in Divided America: Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy, published in January. In this episode, they explore what he sees as the failures of America’s criminal justice system—from overly harsh sentences and prosecutorial abuses to the under-utilization of the jury system—that don’t just harm individuals, but erode the very foundations of democratic governance. They also examine the rise and fall of community policing, the role of mental health in police encounters, and the impact of jury service on civic engagement, offering insights into how criminal justice shapes political and social landscapes while proposing steps toward reform.

Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, teaches and writes about policing, prosecution, criminal law and the law of evidence at Stanford Law, where he is also the faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Criminal Justice and the Erosion of Democracy
Pam Karlan welcomes professor David Sklansky and explains the link between the crises of criminal justice and democracy, discussing how failures in criminal law and policy have undermined democratic values. The conversation touches on racial disparities, equal protection, and how the criminal justice system has contributed to public distrust in government institutions.

(00:05:15) Chapter 2: Policing and Polarization
Karlan and Sklansky delve into the historical role of policing in fueling political polarization, particularly during the rise of crime as a central political issue in the late 20th century. Sklansky highlights the impact of police abuse on public confidence, the Republican Party's pivot toward tough-on-crime policies, and how bipartisan approaches to policing briefly improved public trust.

(00:09:12) Chapter 3: The Rise and Fall of Community Policing
The discussion focuses on community policing as a promising reform effort that ultimately fell short. Sklansky critiques its limited engagement with younger residents and those affected by police violence. He explains how the movement's failure to address systemic issues, like excessive police violence, eroded its credibility and relevance in modern reform conversations.

(00:14:15) Chapter 4: Guns, Policing, and Mental Health Crises
The discussion explores the connection between America's lax gun laws and police killings, highlighting the role of training and the unique challenges posed by mental health crises. Sklansky addresses the need for better collaboration between police and other services while emphasizing the importance of proper training in de-escalation.

(00:19:00) Chapter 5: Small Police Departments and Training Challenges
Karlan and Sklansky examine the implications of having too many decentralized police departments in the U.S. They discuss issues like poor training, rehiring problematic officers, and the proliferation of SWAT teams. Sklansky offers insights on potential reforms and the influence of state and federal coordination in improving policing.

(00:21:32) Chapter 6: The Role of Juries in Democracy
Karlan and Sklansky delve into the jury system as a cornerstone of democracy, discussing its impact on civic engagement, cross-sectional representation, and public trust. They highlight the need for systemic changes to improve accessibility, fair cross-section representation, and community participation in jury duty.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Criminal law expert and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky joins Pam Karlan to discuss his book Criminal Justice in Divided America: Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy, published in January. In this episode, they explore what he sees as the failures of America’s criminal justice system—from overly harsh sentences and prosecutorial abuses to the under-utilization of the jury system—that don’t just harm individuals, but erode the very foundations of democratic governance. They also examine the rise and fall of community policing, the role of mental health in police encounters, and the impact of jury service on civic engagement, offering insights into how criminal justice shapes political and social landscapes while proposing steps toward reform.

Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, teaches and writes about policing, prosecution, criminal law and the law of evidence at Stanford Law, where he is also the faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Criminal Justice and the Erosion of Democracy
Pam Karlan welcomes professor David Sklansky and explains the link between the crises of criminal justice and democracy, discussing how failures in criminal law and policy have undermined democratic values. The conversation touches on racial disparities, equal protection, and how the criminal justice system has contributed to public distrust in government institutions.

(00:05:15) Chapter 2: Policing and Polarization
Karlan and Sklansky delve into the historical role of policing in fueling political polarization, particularly during the rise of crime as a central political issue in the late 20th century. Sklansky highlights the impact of police abuse on public confidence, the Republican Party's pivot toward tough-on-crime policies, and how bipartisan approaches to policing briefly improved public trust.

(00:09:12) Chapter 3: The Rise and Fall of Community Policing
The discussion focuses on community policing as a promising reform effort that ultimately fell short. Sklansky critiques its limited engagement with younger residents and those affected by police violence. He explains how the movement's failure to address systemic issues, like excessive police violence, eroded its credibility and relevance in modern reform conversations.

(00:14:15) Chapter 4: Guns, Policing, and Mental Health Crises
The discussion explores the connection between America's lax gun laws and police killings, highlighting the role of training and the unique challenges posed by mental health crises. Sklansky addresses the need for better collaboration between police and other services while emphasizing the importance of proper training in de-escalation.

(00:19:00) Chapter 5: Small Police Departments and Training Challenges
Karlan and Sklansky examine the implications of having too many decentralized police departments in the U.S. They discuss issues like poor training, rehiring problematic officers, and the proliferation of SWAT teams. Sklansky offers insights on potential reforms and the influence of state and federal coordination in improving policing.

(00:21:32) Chapter 6: The Role of Juries in Democracy
Karlan and Sklansky delve into the jury system as a cornerstone of democracy, discussing its impact on civic engagement, cross-sectional representation, and public trust. They highlight the need for systemic changes to improve accessibility, fair cross-section representation, and community participation in jury duty.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Criminal Justice in Divided America: Can Democracy Survive a Broken Justice System? Stanford Law School 00:30:57 In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, to discuss his new book and the failures of America’s criminal justice system In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, to discuss his new book and the failures of America’s criminal justice system democratic party crime policy, police violence, mental health deinstitutionalization, how criminal justice helped break american democracy, judicial oversight, democratic processes, property owners in community policing, stanford criminal justice system, donald trump election, pam karlan, democracy erosion, mental health crisis, criminal justice in divided america, cell phone police violence evidence, swat teams, excessive police force, democratic citizenship, book discussion, crime politics, decentralized police departments, police training, criminal justice crisis, bipartisan community policing, oklahoma sheriff case, democracy crisis, race diversity in juries, fair cross section, stanford legal podcast, republican party extremism, small police departments, democratic engagement, american institutions confidence, police killings in the u.s., jury diversity, community policing, fines and fees, jury summons, restructuring policing, jury deliberations, law enforcement reform, jury service, supreme court concealed carry, policing failures, plea bargains, david sklansky, u.s. criminal justice policy failures, u.s. gun laws, crack cocaine sentencing disparity, equal protection, racial discrimination in law, public trust in government, police reform false full 153 7d216b6e-887b-4b69-8e7e-b2c216fe4805 Special Counsel Smith's Report on Trump's Interference in the 2020 Election In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, for a wide-ranging discussion of Smith’s report, the evidence against the president-elect, and more.

In the early hours of January 14, 2024 the Department of Justice released its long-awaited election interference report against President-elect Donald Trump. It was a long and winding road to that moment—and one marked, ultimately, by justice delayed. 

In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee criminal investigations by the Justice Department into former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents. The two cases were brought in different jurisdictions—with charges for the classified documents case filed in Florida and the elections case in Washington, D.C. 

After false starts, the blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on July 1, 2024 that former President Trump is entitled to some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and the subsequent re-election of Trump in November, Smith and the DOJ dropped both cases. (Publication of Smith’s report regarding the documents case is delayed due to pending charges against co-conspirators.)
 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Role of Special Prosecutors

Pam Karlan and David Sklansky discuss the history and purpose of special prosecutors, their use in politically sensitive cases, and the implications of their reports. Sklansky explains the transition from independent counsels to special counsels and highlights examples like the Mueller Report and investigations into Hunter Biden.

(00:05:01) Chapter 2: Insights from Jack Smith’s Report

The conversation shifts to Jack Smith's report on Donald Trump. Karlan and Sklansky explore the evidence presented, its connection to the January 6th events, and the debates around releasing such reports. Karlan questions the timing of appointing a special counsel, given much was already public knowledge.

(00:08:25) Chapter 3: Prosecution Outcomes and Future Implications

Karlan and Sklansky discuss the slow progress of Trump’s investigation compared to other January 6th prosecutions. They also cover Trump’s promise to pardon convicted January 6th defendants, the fate of unnamed co-conspirators, and the ethical questions surrounding Todd Blanche’s involvement at the DOJ.
 

(00:12:16) Chapter 4: Decisions and Legal Strategies in Trump’s Prosecution

Karlan and Sklansky discuss the decision not to charge Donald Trump with insurrection, focusing instead on charges like fraud and voter suppression. They analyze why the special counsel avoided certain charges and the challenges of applying existing statutes to unprecedented events.

(00:16:30) Chapter 5: The Supreme Court’s Role and the Impact on Prosecution

The conversation explores delays caused by the Supreme Court, including its handling of presidential immunity. Karlan and Sklansky explain how these rulings affected timelines and created legal ambiguities that could influence appeals and the overall process.

(00:19:00) Chapter 6: Restoring Trust in Criminal Justice and Democracy

Karlan and Sklansky shift focus to broader implications for democracy, discussing how Trump’s prosecutions might deepen distrust in institutions. They consider paths to reform, including bipartisan efforts to reinforce the rule of law and community policing. The episode concludes with reflections on lessons from past legal leaders and the enduring relevance of Robert Jackson’s warnings about prosecutorial overreach.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, for a wide-ranging discussion of Smith’s report, the evidence against the president-elect, and more.

In the early hours of January 14, 2024 the Department of Justice released its long-awaited election interference report against President-elect Donald Trump. It was a long and winding road to that moment—and one marked, ultimately, by justice delayed. 

In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee criminal investigations by the Justice Department into former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents. The two cases were brought in different jurisdictions—with charges for the classified documents case filed in Florida and the elections case in Washington, D.C. 

After false starts, the blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on July 1, 2024 that former President Trump is entitled to some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and the subsequent re-election of Trump in November, Smith and the DOJ dropped both cases. (Publication of Smith’s report regarding the documents case is delayed due to pending charges against co-conspirators.)
 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Role of Special Prosecutors

Pam Karlan and David Sklansky discuss the history and purpose of special prosecutors, their use in politically sensitive cases, and the implications of their reports. Sklansky explains the transition from independent counsels to special counsels and highlights examples like the Mueller Report and investigations into Hunter Biden.

(00:05:01) Chapter 2: Insights from Jack Smith’s Report

The conversation shifts to Jack Smith's report on Donald Trump. Karlan and Sklansky explore the evidence presented, its connection to the January 6th events, and the debates around releasing such reports. Karlan questions the timing of appointing a special counsel, given much was already public knowledge.

(00:08:25) Chapter 3: Prosecution Outcomes and Future Implications

Karlan and Sklansky discuss the slow progress of Trump’s investigation compared to other January 6th prosecutions. They also cover Trump’s promise to pardon convicted January 6th defendants, the fate of unnamed co-conspirators, and the ethical questions surrounding Todd Blanche’s involvement at the DOJ.
 

(00:12:16) Chapter 4: Decisions and Legal Strategies in Trump’s Prosecution

Karlan and Sklansky discuss the decision not to charge Donald Trump with insurrection, focusing instead on charges like fraud and voter suppression. They analyze why the special counsel avoided certain charges and the challenges of applying existing statutes to unprecedented events.

(00:16:30) Chapter 5: The Supreme Court’s Role and the Impact on Prosecution

The conversation explores delays caused by the Supreme Court, including its handling of presidential immunity. Karlan and Sklansky explain how these rulings affected timelines and created legal ambiguities that could influence appeals and the overall process.

(00:19:00) Chapter 6: Restoring Trust in Criminal Justice and Democracy

Karlan and Sklansky shift focus to broader implications for democracy, discussing how Trump’s prosecutions might deepen distrust in institutions. They consider paths to reform, including bipartisan efforts to reinforce the rule of law and community policing. The episode concludes with reflections on lessons from past legal leaders and the enduring relevance of Robert Jackson’s warnings about prosecutorial overreach.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Special Counsel Smith's Report on Trump's Interference in the 2020 Election Stanford Law School 00:30:04 In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, for a wide-ranging discussion of Smith’s report, the evidence against the president-elect, and more. In this episode, Pam Karlan is joined by Stanford Law School Professor David Sklansky, a leading criminal law expert, for a wide-ranging discussion of Smith’s report, the evidence against the president-elect, and more. federal prosecutors, democracy and criminal justice, fraud case, mueller report, joe biden document retention, pam karlan, presidential pardons, presidential transition, impartiality, doj policies, rule of law, criminal justice in divided america, prosecutorial power, jack smith, defrauding the united states, january 6, special prosecutors, edward levi, house select committee, david weiss, obstruction of justice, trump re-election committee, benjamin civiletti, todd blanche, donald trump, conspiracy against the united states, attorney general, legal uncertainty, stanford legal podcast, hunter biden investigation, capitol riots, department of justice, democracy in crisis, special counsel reports, co-conspirators, georgia election case, second trump administration, southern district of florida, voter rights, community policing, retention of government documents, presidential immunity, robert jackson, volume 1 report, independent counsel, supreme court, david sklansky, authoritarianism, hunter biden prosecution, insurrection, criminal justice system, criminal prosecutions, federal prosecutions false full 152 60fb0171-2c17-4568-b588-1cb2fb2a7d60 California Burning: LA Fires, Climate Change, and Insurance Nightmares with Environmental Lawyer Debbie Sivas The fires in Los Angeles, fueled by drought and the notorious Santa Ana winds, have wreaked devastation on the largest county in the United States, taking at least 10 lives and destroying thousands of structures as of January 10—with much of the Los Angeles metropolis, suburban neighborhoods like Pasadena and Pacific Palisades engulfed in smoke, and tens of thousands of residents without homes. In this episode, environmental law expert Deborah Sivas joins Pam Karlan for a discussion of California's fire crisis, examining how climate change and urban development are making residents more susceptible to the dangers of fires. They also look at air quality, rebuilding challenges, insurance strains, and the broader implications for urban planning, labor, and environmental recovery, highlighting the urgent need for sustainable solutions in an era of intensifying climate impacts.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction, the Santa Ana Winds, and Fire Dynamics
Host Pam Karlan introduces environmental expert Deborah Sivas. The two discuss the Santa Ana winds, their origins, and their role in fueling wildfires. They explore the interaction of high winds, parched landscapes, and the growing impact of climate change on fire frequency and intensity.

(00:06:49) Chapter 2: Urban Fires and the Wildland-Urban Interface

The conversation shifts to the challenges of wildfires in urban and suburban areas. Sivas explains fire ignition sources, the difficulty of containment, and the need for defensible spaces. She highlights the vulnerability of areas at the wildland-urban interface and discusses practical steps to reduce fire risk, including vegetation management and retrofitting structures.

(00:12:37) Chapter 3: Air Quality and the Broader Impacts of Fires
Sivas and Karlan examine the devastating effects of wildfire smoke on air quality, especially in densely populated regions like Los Angeles. They discuss how urban fires release toxic pollutants and disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. The chapter emphasizes the broader environmental and health consequences of wildfires in an era of climate change.

(00:16:46) Chapter 4: Climate Change, Insurance Challenges, and Recovery Efforts
The conversation shifts to the economic challenges posed by climate disasters, focusing on California’s wildfire insurance crisis. Sivas explains private insurance limitations, the state's FAIR program, and rebuilding challenges, including rising construction costs and environmental cleanup.

(00:23:17) Chapter 5: Firefighting, Displacement, and Economic Impact
Karlan and Sivas explore the complexities of wildfire response, including the reliance on inmate labor and firefighting logistics. They also discuss displacement, long-term housing issues, and the socioeconomic toll on affected communities and businesses.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 10 Jan 2025 21:14:11 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The fires in Los Angeles, fueled by drought and the notorious Santa Ana winds, have wreaked devastation on the largest county in the United States, taking at least 10 lives and destroying thousands of structures as of January 10—with much of the Los Angeles metropolis, suburban neighborhoods like Pasadena and Pacific Palisades engulfed in smoke, and tens of thousands of residents without homes. In this episode, environmental law expert Deborah Sivas joins Pam Karlan for a discussion of California's fire crisis, examining how climate change and urban development are making residents more susceptible to the dangers of fires. They also look at air quality, rebuilding challenges, insurance strains, and the broader implications for urban planning, labor, and environmental recovery, highlighting the urgent need for sustainable solutions in an era of intensifying climate impacts.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction, the Santa Ana Winds, and Fire Dynamics
Host Pam Karlan introduces environmental expert Deborah Sivas. The two discuss the Santa Ana winds, their origins, and their role in fueling wildfires. They explore the interaction of high winds, parched landscapes, and the growing impact of climate change on fire frequency and intensity.

(00:06:49) Chapter 2: Urban Fires and the Wildland-Urban Interface

The conversation shifts to the challenges of wildfires in urban and suburban areas. Sivas explains fire ignition sources, the difficulty of containment, and the need for defensible spaces. She highlights the vulnerability of areas at the wildland-urban interface and discusses practical steps to reduce fire risk, including vegetation management and retrofitting structures.

(00:12:37) Chapter 3: Air Quality and the Broader Impacts of Fires
Sivas and Karlan examine the devastating effects of wildfire smoke on air quality, especially in densely populated regions like Los Angeles. They discuss how urban fires release toxic pollutants and disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. The chapter emphasizes the broader environmental and health consequences of wildfires in an era of climate change.

(00:16:46) Chapter 4: Climate Change, Insurance Challenges, and Recovery Efforts
The conversation shifts to the economic challenges posed by climate disasters, focusing on California’s wildfire insurance crisis. Sivas explains private insurance limitations, the state's FAIR program, and rebuilding challenges, including rising construction costs and environmental cleanup.

(00:23:17) Chapter 5: Firefighting, Displacement, and Economic Impact
Karlan and Sivas explore the complexities of wildfire response, including the reliance on inmate labor and firefighting logistics. They also discuss displacement, long-term housing issues, and the socioeconomic toll on affected communities and businesses.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> California Burning: LA Fires, Climate Change, and Insurance Nightmares with Environmental Lawyer Debbie Sivas Stanford Law School 00:29:43 In this episode, Professor Deborah Sivas joins Pam Karlan for a discussion on California's fire crisis, examining how climate change and urban development are making residents more susceptible to the dangers of fires. In this episode, Professor Deborah Sivas joins Pam Karlan for a discussion on California's fire crisis, examining how climate change and urban development are making residents more susceptible to the dangers of fires. vegetation clearance, sba disaster loans, air quality, environmental impact of wildfires, paradise wildfire, wildfire containment, wildfire preparedness, santa ana winds, defensible space, pam karlan, route 66, wildfire aerial firefighting, northeastern california, urban fires, urban environmental hazards, fire preparedness, national monuments, disaster relief, plastic pollution in fires, wildfire retrofitting, wildfire rebuilding, los angeles notebook, california fires, ember-driven fires, particulate emissions, firestorm winds, wooden fences, migrant labor in construction, pasadena fire, wildfire ignition, wildfire debris cleanup, smoke pollution, fair program, stanford legal, wildfire mitigation, palos verdes, economic impact of wildfires, purple air, wildfire debris, los angeles fires, smoke-proof housing, water pressure in firefighting, insurance market crisis, president biden, fire season, disaster displacement, climate change, urban interface, firefighting challenges, wildfire insurance, wildfire forensics, deborah sivas, wildfire claims, home rebuilding challenges, climate crisis, cal fire, pacific palisades fire, altadena fire, mojave desert false full 151 2dfdb566-9ef6-47a7-b864-d0be7d771d2c Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Policy Shifts under Trump: A Tutorial on the Global Economy and Trade Just weeks before he was elected president of the United States, during a conversation at the Economic Club of Chicago, Donald Trump declared, “The most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff.’ And it’s my favorite word.” As the president-elect takes to the bully pulpit, leaders of nations threatened with new tariffs are calling Trump or even flying down to Mar-a-Lago, as Canadian President Trudeau did recently, to argue their case.  Stanford Law Professor Alan O. Sykes joins Pam and Rich for this episode to help make sense of the fascinating world of trade, tariffs, and the global economy. Al is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems whose most recent scholarship is focused on international economic relations. His writing and teaching have encompassed international trade, torts, contracts, insurance, antitrust, international investment law and economic analysis of law. He is the author most recently of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements.


 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Explanation of Tariffs 
Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce Professor Alan Sykes, a leading expert in international trade law, to explore the basics of tariffs. They discuss what tariffs are, how they function like a tax on imports, and who ultimately bears the cost. Sykes explains the economic complexities, such as elasticity of demand and supply, and highlights how tariffs impact U.S. consumers and foreign producers.

They discuss how tariffs often fail to significantly increase manufacturing jobs and the potential downsides of retaliation and supply chain disruptions.

(00:08:36) Chapter 2: Policy Implications and Optimal Tariff Strategies 
Alan Sykes unpacks the policy decisions behind tariffs, such as balancing national security concerns and economic efficiency. Sykes explains the concept of "optimal tariffs" and critiques proposals like 100% tariffs, arguing for targeted approaches such as subsidies for sensitive industries. The hosts highlight the distinction between product-specific measures and country-focused tariffs in maintaining supply chain resilience.

 

(00:12:28) Chapter 3: The Evolution of U.S. Free Trade Policy 

The group explores the post-World War II consensus around free trade and how it has shifted in recent years. Alan Sykes outlines bipartisan changes to U.S. trade policy, the impact of the "China shock," and the shift towards an "America First" approach under both Trump and Biden administrations.

(00:16:43) Chapter 4: Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Public Misunderstandings 

The discussion delves into the politics of tariffs and their economic implications. Alan Sykes explains why tariffs remain politically popular despite their economic inefficiency, the mechanics of trade wars, and the historical example of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. They also discuss how tariffs and retaliation, such as restrictions on rare earth elements, could affect U.S. industries.

(00:23:26) Chapter 5: Multilateral Trade Agreements and National Security 

Alan Sykes traces the history of multilateral trade institutions, focusing on the GATT, WTO, and USMCA. Sykes explains the U.S.’s recent retreat from WTO commitments, the renegotiation of NAFTA, and the controversial use of national security clauses to justify tariffs and sanctions. The conversation closes with insights on the implications of these shifts for allies and adversaries alike.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 19 Dec 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Just weeks before he was elected president of the United States, during a conversation at the Economic Club of Chicago, Donald Trump declared, “The most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff.’ And it’s my favorite word.” As the president-elect takes to the bully pulpit, leaders of nations threatened with new tariffs are calling Trump or even flying down to Mar-a-Lago, as Canadian President Trudeau did recently, to argue their case.  Stanford Law Professor Alan O. Sykes joins Pam and Rich for this episode to help make sense of the fascinating world of trade, tariffs, and the global economy. Al is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems whose most recent scholarship is focused on international economic relations. His writing and teaching have encompassed international trade, torts, contracts, insurance, antitrust, international investment law and economic analysis of law. He is the author most recently of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements.


 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Explanation of Tariffs 
Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce Professor Alan Sykes, a leading expert in international trade law, to explore the basics of tariffs. They discuss what tariffs are, how they function like a tax on imports, and who ultimately bears the cost. Sykes explains the economic complexities, such as elasticity of demand and supply, and highlights how tariffs impact U.S. consumers and foreign producers.

They discuss how tariffs often fail to significantly increase manufacturing jobs and the potential downsides of retaliation and supply chain disruptions.

(00:08:36) Chapter 2: Policy Implications and Optimal Tariff Strategies 
Alan Sykes unpacks the policy decisions behind tariffs, such as balancing national security concerns and economic efficiency. Sykes explains the concept of "optimal tariffs" and critiques proposals like 100% tariffs, arguing for targeted approaches such as subsidies for sensitive industries. The hosts highlight the distinction between product-specific measures and country-focused tariffs in maintaining supply chain resilience.

 

(00:12:28) Chapter 3: The Evolution of U.S. Free Trade Policy 

The group explores the post-World War II consensus around free trade and how it has shifted in recent years. Alan Sykes outlines bipartisan changes to U.S. trade policy, the impact of the "China shock," and the shift towards an "America First" approach under both Trump and Biden administrations.

(00:16:43) Chapter 4: Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Public Misunderstandings 

The discussion delves into the politics of tariffs and their economic implications. Alan Sykes explains why tariffs remain politically popular despite their economic inefficiency, the mechanics of trade wars, and the historical example of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. They also discuss how tariffs and retaliation, such as restrictions on rare earth elements, could affect U.S. industries.

(00:23:26) Chapter 5: Multilateral Trade Agreements and National Security 

Alan Sykes traces the history of multilateral trade institutions, focusing on the GATT, WTO, and USMCA. Sykes explains the U.S.’s recent retreat from WTO commitments, the renegotiation of NAFTA, and the controversial use of national security clauses to justify tariffs and sanctions. The conversation closes with insights on the implications of these shifts for allies and adversaries alike.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Policy Shifts under Trump: A Tutorial on the Global Economy and Trade Stanford Law School 00:29:01 In this episode, Stanford Law Professor Alan O. Sykes joins Pam and Rich for this episode to help make sense of the fascinating world of trade, tariffs, and the global economy. In this episode, Stanford Law Professor Alan O. Sykes joins Pam and Rich for this episode to help make sense of the fascinating world of trade, tariffs, and the global economy. chips act, free trade, rare earth elements, wto, global trade, pam karlan, industrial policy, economic efficiency, national security, semiconductor manufacturing, economic policy, tariffs, trump tariffs, income tax, subsidy policies, alan o. sykes, international trade, sales tax, u.s. trade policy, optimal tariff, donald trump, u.s. manufacturing, stanford legal, u.s. exports, reagan administration, trade war, global economy, multilateral trade, smoot-hawley tariff, taiwan semiconductors, payroll tax, retaliatory tariffs, trade retaliation, supply chain vulnerabilities, global supply chains, u.s.-mexico-canada agreement, semiconductor production, manufacturing employment, trade, protectionist policies, rich ford false full 150 a6d34234-760a-43ce-a463-dcb9d90e26e0 The Presidential Pardon Power, from Biden and Trump to Ancient Kings Presidential pardons are in the headlines again after President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter. But the vast majority of presidents have used this awesome power, which was enshrined in the Constitution at the founding of the country and dates back to 7th Century English monarchs. What are the issues at play with modern presidential pardons? What does history tell us about this practice? Our guest this week is Stanford Law Professor Bernie Meyler, a scholar of British and American constitutional law and of law and the humanities and author of the book Theaters of Pardoning. She joins Pam and Rich for a discussion of high-profile pardons like Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s allies to broader issues of mercy, justice reform, the implications of pardons in polarized politics, their historical roots, and ideas for reform.
 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins and Evolution of the Pardoning Power
Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford welcome guest Bernie Meyler. The discussion opens with a look at the historical roots of the pardoning power, tracing its lineage from the divine rights of kings in England to its adaptation in American democracy. Key examples include early English judicial pardons, debates at the U.S. Constitutional Convention, and George Washington's use during the Whiskey Rebellion. The chapter closes with insights into President Trump's controversial approach to pardons, likened to monarchical practices of wielding power above the law.

(00:05:04) Chapter 2: Legal Boundaries and Contemporary Issues in Pardoning
This chapter examines the legal limits of the president's pardoning power, such as the inability to pardon state crimes, and the various forms pardons can take. The conversation pivots to notable recent pardons, including Hunter Biden's, sparking a discussion about blanket pardons versus specific ones and their implications on guilt and historical accountability.

(00:14:24) Chapter 3: Pardons, Polarization, and Public Perception 

The discussion shifts to the broader context of pardons, their declining use, and the influence of public opinion. The hosts analyze the risks of granting pardons and compare historical uses of the power, such as Washington’s Whiskey Rebellion pardons, to modern examples like January 6th.

(00:21:02) Chapter 4: Reforming the Pardon Process in a Divided Society 

The group explores potential reforms to the pardon process, suggesting ways to make it more democratic and transparent. Meyler discusses citizen panels and their role in ensuring fairness, while reflecting on the challenges of polarized politics.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fri, 6 Dec 2024 18:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Presidential pardons are in the headlines again after President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter. But the vast majority of presidents have used this awesome power, which was enshrined in the Constitution at the founding of the country and dates back to 7th Century English monarchs. What are the issues at play with modern presidential pardons? What does history tell us about this practice? Our guest this week is Stanford Law Professor Bernie Meyler, a scholar of British and American constitutional law and of law and the humanities and author of the book Theaters of Pardoning. She joins Pam and Rich for a discussion of high-profile pardons like Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s allies to broader issues of mercy, justice reform, the implications of pardons in polarized politics, their historical roots, and ideas for reform.
 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins and Evolution of the Pardoning Power
Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford welcome guest Bernie Meyler. The discussion opens with a look at the historical roots of the pardoning power, tracing its lineage from the divine rights of kings in England to its adaptation in American democracy. Key examples include early English judicial pardons, debates at the U.S. Constitutional Convention, and George Washington's use during the Whiskey Rebellion. The chapter closes with insights into President Trump's controversial approach to pardons, likened to monarchical practices of wielding power above the law.

(00:05:04) Chapter 2: Legal Boundaries and Contemporary Issues in Pardoning
This chapter examines the legal limits of the president's pardoning power, such as the inability to pardon state crimes, and the various forms pardons can take. The conversation pivots to notable recent pardons, including Hunter Biden's, sparking a discussion about blanket pardons versus specific ones and their implications on guilt and historical accountability.

(00:14:24) Chapter 3: Pardons, Polarization, and Public Perception 

The discussion shifts to the broader context of pardons, their declining use, and the influence of public opinion. The hosts analyze the risks of granting pardons and compare historical uses of the power, such as Washington’s Whiskey Rebellion pardons, to modern examples like January 6th.

(00:21:02) Chapter 4: Reforming the Pardon Process in a Divided Society 

The group explores potential reforms to the pardon process, suggesting ways to make it more democratic and transparent. Meyler discusses citizen panels and their role in ensuring fairness, while reflecting on the challenges of polarized politics.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Presidential Pardon Power, from Biden and Trump to Ancient Kings Stanford Law School 00:26:20 In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by Professor Bernie Meyler for a discussion of high-profile pardons like Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s allies to broader issues of mercy, justice reform, the implications of pardons in polarized politics, their historical roots, and ideas for reform. In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by Professor Bernie Meyler for a discussion of high-profile pardons like Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s allies to broader issues of mercy, justice reform, the implications of pardons in polarized politics, their historical roots, and ideas for reform. theaters of pardoning, amnesty vs. pardon, pam karlan, trump pardoning philosophy, u.s. constitutional law, legal regimes, article two of the constitution, michigan citizen panel, presidential authority, thomas jefferson on pardoning, federal vs. state crimes, democratic legitimacy, post-civil war pardons, george washington whiskey rebellion, public forgiveness, federal clemency, law and humanities, stanford legal podcast, historical pardons, pardon transparency, january 6th insurrection, mark rich, limitations period for federal crimes, government corruption, clinton pardons, criminal justice reform, judicial discretion, presidential pardon power, 17th-century england sovereignty, pardon reform, political polarization, clemency powers, constitutional amendments, hunter biden pardon, pardon implications, divine right of kings, bernie meyler, public opinion, criminal justice system, british constitutional law, gerald ford and nixon pardon, rich ford false full 149 7df116d4-474e-420f-bb4c-4819963c01d4 Exploring AI in Healthcare: Legal, Regulatory, and Safety Challenges Artificial Intelligence holds the potential to transform much of our lives and healthcare professions are embracing it for everything from cost savings to diagnostics. But who is to blame when AI assisted healthcare goes wrong? How is the law developing to balance the benefits and risks? In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. They examine AI’s potential to enhance diagnostics and streamline workflows while addressing the ethical, legal, and safety challenges this new technology can bring. The conversation highlights the urgency of adapting regulatory frameworks, the complexities of liability among hospitals, developers, and practitioners, and the need for rigorous testing to ensure patient safety as AI integration in healthcare advances.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Understanding AI in Medicine
The episode begins with a broad introduction to AI's applications in medicine. Neel Guha explains generative AI systems and their rapid advancement, including practical applications like chatbots, imaging, and decision-making tools. Michelle Mello highlights AI's widespread integration, from diagnostic tools like radiological imaging and predictive algorithms to administrative uses that aim to reduce physician burnout.

(00:07:04) Chapter 2: The Benefits and Risks of AI in Healthcare
The group explores the advantages of AI in medicine, such as enhanced diagnostic precision, reduced administrative burdens, and improved patient outcomes. Michelle Mello identifies potential risks, like automation bias, where reliance on AI might lead to unchecked errors, highlighting the tension between time-saving tools and maintaining human oversight.

(00:08:22) Chapter 3: Legal Challenges and Liability in AI-Driven Medicine
The conversation turns to the legal implications of AI in healthcare. Neel Guha outlines scenarios where AI contributes to patient harm, discussing negligence claims, product liability, and the complexity of determining accountability. Michelle Mello and the hosts analyze how liability standards might evolve, comparing AI's systematic errors to human fallibility and addressing the interplay of human-AI collaboration in preventing mistakes.

(00:14:47) Chapter 4: The Challenges of AI and Transparency in Decision-Making
The group explores parallels between medical and anti-discrimination fields in understanding machine learning's opaque decision-making. Neel Guha delves into the evolution of AI systems from rule-based programming to complex machine learning, emphasizing challenges in identifying points of failure across stakeholders like hospitals, physicians, and developers.

(00:17:35) Chapter 5: Regulation and Liability of AI in Healthcare
Michelle Mello discusses the regulatory framework for AI as a medical device, comparing outdated 1976-era regulations to modern challenges. The conversation shifts to gaps in tort liability and the risks of developers limiting their liability through contracts. Proposals for redistributing liability to incentivize better private governance are examined alongside the need for robust AI quality assurance akin to crash tests or clinical trials.

(00:23:13) Chapter 6: The Road Ahead: Balancing Innovation and Safety
The speakers analyze the distinct challenges of regulating AI across diverse healthcare environments. Neel Guha and Michelle Mello discuss adapting evaluation practices to align with AI's real-world complexities. Optimism prevails as Michelle highlights AI’s potential to address critical issues like diagnostic delays, advocating for guardrails to ensure safety without stifling innovation. The episode concludes with reflections on Stanford's interdisciplinary approach to these pressing issues.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 21 Nov 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Artificial Intelligence holds the potential to transform much of our lives and healthcare professions are embracing it for everything from cost savings to diagnostics. But who is to blame when AI assisted healthcare goes wrong? How is the law developing to balance the benefits and risks? In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. They examine AI’s potential to enhance diagnostics and streamline workflows while addressing the ethical, legal, and safety challenges this new technology can bring. The conversation highlights the urgency of adapting regulatory frameworks, the complexities of liability among hospitals, developers, and practitioners, and the need for rigorous testing to ensure patient safety as AI integration in healthcare advances.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Understanding AI in Medicine
The episode begins with a broad introduction to AI's applications in medicine. Neel Guha explains generative AI systems and their rapid advancement, including practical applications like chatbots, imaging, and decision-making tools. Michelle Mello highlights AI's widespread integration, from diagnostic tools like radiological imaging and predictive algorithms to administrative uses that aim to reduce physician burnout.

(00:07:04) Chapter 2: The Benefits and Risks of AI in Healthcare
The group explores the advantages of AI in medicine, such as enhanced diagnostic precision, reduced administrative burdens, and improved patient outcomes. Michelle Mello identifies potential risks, like automation bias, where reliance on AI might lead to unchecked errors, highlighting the tension between time-saving tools and maintaining human oversight.

(00:08:22) Chapter 3: Legal Challenges and Liability in AI-Driven Medicine
The conversation turns to the legal implications of AI in healthcare. Neel Guha outlines scenarios where AI contributes to patient harm, discussing negligence claims, product liability, and the complexity of determining accountability. Michelle Mello and the hosts analyze how liability standards might evolve, comparing AI's systematic errors to human fallibility and addressing the interplay of human-AI collaboration in preventing mistakes.

(00:14:47) Chapter 4: The Challenges of AI and Transparency in Decision-Making
The group explores parallels between medical and anti-discrimination fields in understanding machine learning's opaque decision-making. Neel Guha delves into the evolution of AI systems from rule-based programming to complex machine learning, emphasizing challenges in identifying points of failure across stakeholders like hospitals, physicians, and developers.

(00:17:35) Chapter 5: Regulation and Liability of AI in Healthcare
Michelle Mello discusses the regulatory framework for AI as a medical device, comparing outdated 1976-era regulations to modern challenges. The conversation shifts to gaps in tort liability and the risks of developers limiting their liability through contracts. Proposals for redistributing liability to incentivize better private governance are examined alongside the need for robust AI quality assurance akin to crash tests or clinical trials.

(00:23:13) Chapter 6: The Road Ahead: Balancing Innovation and Safety
The speakers analyze the distinct challenges of regulating AI across diverse healthcare environments. Neel Guha and Michelle Mello discuss adapting evaluation practices to align with AI's real-world complexities. Optimism prevails as Michelle highlights AI’s potential to address critical issues like diagnostic delays, advocating for guardrails to ensure safety without stifling innovation. The episode concludes with reflections on Stanford's interdisciplinary approach to these pressing issues.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Exploring AI in Healthcare: Legal, Regulatory, and Safety Challenges Stanford Law School 00:48:19 In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. stanford law school, patient safety, product liability, healthcare ai, neel guha, pam karlan, generative ai, stanford ai research, medical errors, medical device regulation, medical malpractice, software as a medical device, predictive ai, patient harm litigation, health insurance ai, ai regulation, liability in ai, ai in medicine, hospital ai integration, stanford medical school, fda regulation, ai in diagnostics, interdisciplinary collaboration, automation bias, stanford legal podcast, medical ai tools, ai quality assurance, michelle mello, tort liability, physician burnout, legal challenges, human-machine interaction, future of ai in healthcare, rich ford false full 148 2d955016-7a6d-4dce-b065-5c698979a92a Crime, the Opioid Crisis, and Gun Violence: New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin on How Action at the State Level Is Making a Difference Matt Platkin, who was the youngest-ever AG in the country when he was appointed in 2022, discusses some of his public safety initiatives such as the ARRIVE Together program, which pairs mental health professionals with law enforcement to improve responses to mental health crises. Among other pressing issues facing New Jersey, Platkin also addresses his state's comprehensive approach to gun violence, which focuses on data-driven crime enforcement, community violence prevention, and legal accountability for firearm manufacturers.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Role and Challenges of State Attorneys General 

Show Notes: Host Rich Ford introduces Matt Platkin, Attorney General of New Jersey, and dives into the multifaceted role and responsibilities of state attorneys general, especially in enforcing public safety and overseeing large-scale law enforcement. Platkin shares insights on the expectations and hurdles faced by AGs, highlighting the critical role they play in protecting communities.

(00:03:42) Chapter 2: Innovative Crisis Intervention Programs 

The discussion shifts to the "ARRIVE Together" program, a pioneering mental health and law enforcement collaboration aimed at de-escalating crisis situations. Platkin explains how pairing officers with mental health professionals in crisis response has drastically reduced force incidents and arrests in New Jersey. He also touches on the broader need for mental health resources, noting how training and interdisciplinary cooperation contribute to more effective, compassionate responses.

(00:09:10) Chapter 3: Public Health Approaches to Opioid and Gun Crises 

Platkin outlines New Jersey's proactive strategies to tackle the opioid and gun violence epidemics, focusing on diversion programs, community partnerships, and civil enforcement. He discusses the impactful results of addressing these issues as public health crises, noting the state’s success in reducing both opioid fatalities and gun-related violence through data-driven enforcement, community engagement, and targeted litigation against non-compliant businesses.

(00:17:34) Chapter 4: Interstate Coordination and the Role of AGs in Federal Litigation

Attorney General Matt Platkin explains the importance of collaboration among state attorneys general, including bipartisan efforts in federal litigation. He shares examples of major joint cases, such as those against Meta and Apple, and discusses how AGs coordinate on issues that transcend state lines, often through bipartisan associations.

(00:20:14) Chapter 5: The Evolution and Influence of the New Jersey Supreme Court

Pam Karlan asks Platkin about New Jersey’s innovative Supreme Court. Platkin delves into the unique aspects of New Jersey’s government structure, including the influential role of the state Supreme Court in affordable housing and school funding cases. He shares insights on recent judicial reforms and the impact of balanced partisan representation on the court.

(00:25:08) Chapter 6: Path to Public Service and Career Reflections
Platkin recounts his journey from law school to Attorney General, sharing pivotal moments like working on Cory Booker’s campaign and volunteering in San Antonio. He reflects on how early career risks and public service aspirations shaped his path, highlighting the impact of his experiences on his leadership in New Jersey’s government.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 7 Nov 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Matt Platkin, who was the youngest-ever AG in the country when he was appointed in 2022, discusses some of his public safety initiatives such as the ARRIVE Together program, which pairs mental health professionals with law enforcement to improve responses to mental health crises. Among other pressing issues facing New Jersey, Platkin also addresses his state's comprehensive approach to gun violence, which focuses on data-driven crime enforcement, community violence prevention, and legal accountability for firearm manufacturers.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Role and Challenges of State Attorneys General 

Show Notes: Host Rich Ford introduces Matt Platkin, Attorney General of New Jersey, and dives into the multifaceted role and responsibilities of state attorneys general, especially in enforcing public safety and overseeing large-scale law enforcement. Platkin shares insights on the expectations and hurdles faced by AGs, highlighting the critical role they play in protecting communities.

(00:03:42) Chapter 2: Innovative Crisis Intervention Programs 

The discussion shifts to the "ARRIVE Together" program, a pioneering mental health and law enforcement collaboration aimed at de-escalating crisis situations. Platkin explains how pairing officers with mental health professionals in crisis response has drastically reduced force incidents and arrests in New Jersey. He also touches on the broader need for mental health resources, noting how training and interdisciplinary cooperation contribute to more effective, compassionate responses.

(00:09:10) Chapter 3: Public Health Approaches to Opioid and Gun Crises 

Platkin outlines New Jersey's proactive strategies to tackle the opioid and gun violence epidemics, focusing on diversion programs, community partnerships, and civil enforcement. He discusses the impactful results of addressing these issues as public health crises, noting the state’s success in reducing both opioid fatalities and gun-related violence through data-driven enforcement, community engagement, and targeted litigation against non-compliant businesses.

(00:17:34) Chapter 4: Interstate Coordination and the Role of AGs in Federal Litigation

Attorney General Matt Platkin explains the importance of collaboration among state attorneys general, including bipartisan efforts in federal litigation. He shares examples of major joint cases, such as those against Meta and Apple, and discusses how AGs coordinate on issues that transcend state lines, often through bipartisan associations.

(00:20:14) Chapter 5: The Evolution and Influence of the New Jersey Supreme Court

Pam Karlan asks Platkin about New Jersey’s innovative Supreme Court. Platkin delves into the unique aspects of New Jersey’s government structure, including the influential role of the state Supreme Court in affordable housing and school funding cases. He shares insights on recent judicial reforms and the impact of balanced partisan representation on the court.

(00:25:08) Chapter 6: Path to Public Service and Career Reflections
Platkin recounts his journey from law school to Attorney General, sharing pivotal moments like working on Cory Booker’s campaign and volunteering in San Antonio. He reflects on how early career risks and public service aspirations shaped his path, highlighting the impact of his experiences on his leadership in New Jersey’s government.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Crime, the Opioid Crisis, and Gun Violence: New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin on How Action at the State Level Is Making a Difference Stanford Law School 00:47:58 In this episode, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin discusses the role of the state AG and his approach to enforcing the law and promoting justice in New Jersey. In this episode, New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin discusses the role of the state AG and his approach to enforcing the law and promoting justice in New Jersey. civil rights, cory booker campaign, public interest law, san antonio city council, litigation coordination, new jersey public health, matt platkin, pam karlan, mental health crisis, meta complaint, governor phil murphy, public safety, arrive together program, new jersey gun laws, gun safety laws, bipartisan litigation, abbott case, community-based violence intervention, second amendment, opioid crisis, nra, community engagement, national association of attorneys general, public trust, stanford legal podcast, federal litigation, affordable housing, bipartisan support, new jersey supreme court, federal court strategy, state attorneys general, new jersey attorney general, state government, consumer protection, criminal justice reform, mount laurel case, ghost guns, apple antitrust, new jersey constitution, supreme court, gun violence, tiktok case, public service, rich ford false full 147 5fdf813a-36d8-4f52-af91-bb611ef3bef9 Racism in Property Deeds: Stanford Team Develops AI Tool to Identify and Map Racial Covenants Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate with host Rich Ford. Though unenforceable since 1948, these clauses are a lingering reminder of housing segregation and racism in the United States, as Professor Ho's own experience of discovering a covenant barring Asians from purchasing his home highlights. The conversation also looks at legislative efforts to remove the covenants and an innovative AI tool developed by Stanford's RegLab that helps counties identify and redact these covenants, streamlining the process while preserving the historical record.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to Racial Covenants and AB 1466
Host Rich Ford introduces the episode, guests Professor Dan Ho and SLS student Mirac Suzgun, and the topic of racial covenants in real estate. They discuss the persistence of racially restrictive covenants, despite being declared unenforceable by the Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kramer (1948), and highlight California’s AB 1466 law, which aims to address the issue.

(00:04:00) Chapter 2: The Role of AI in Redacting Racial Covenants
Dan Ho explains how Santa Clara County faced the challenge of identifying and redacting racial covenants from millions of historical deed records. The conversation shifts to the AI tool developed by Stanford’s RegLab, which automates the identification of racially discriminatory language in property documents. Mirac Suzgun elaborates on the stages of the AI tool, including OCR and machine learning, to help counties meet their legal obligations.

(00:10:01) Chapter 3: Historical Context and Persistence of Racial Covenants
Rich Ford and Dan Ho delve into the history of racial covenants, explaining their rise after the Buchanan decision (1917) and their persistence even after the Shelley v. Kramer ruling. They discuss how these covenants, though unenforceable, served as a community signaling function, reinforcing housing segregation for decades.

(00:16:13) Chapter 4: The Legacy of Racial Covenants

Rich Ford and Mirac Suzgun discuss the evolution of state-sponsored race segregation and the role of private covenants in perpetuating housing discrimination. They emphasize how these covenants, often embedded in property deeds, remain binding on homeowners, illustrating the historical entrenchment of racial segregation in real estate.

(00:18:48) Chapter 5: Uncovering Historical Data and Responsibility

Dan Ho shares findings from a study revealing the prevalence of racial covenants in Santa Clara County. The discussion highlights the significant responsibility of a small number of developers in enforcing these covenants, contrasting this with the example of Joseph Eichler, who resisted such practices and promoted housing reform.

(00:23:11) Chapter 6: Utilizing Technology for Social Justice

The conversation shifts to the innovative tools developed to identify and address racial covenants in property records. The hosts explore the implications of these discoveries for understanding historical injustices and the importance of retaining historical records while advocating for modern social justice initiatives, plus closing remarks.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 24 Oct 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate with host Rich Ford. Though unenforceable since 1948, these clauses are a lingering reminder of housing segregation and racism in the United States, as Professor Ho's own experience of discovering a covenant barring Asians from purchasing his home highlights. The conversation also looks at legislative efforts to remove the covenants and an innovative AI tool developed by Stanford's RegLab that helps counties identify and redact these covenants, streamlining the process while preserving the historical record.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to Racial Covenants and AB 1466
Host Rich Ford introduces the episode, guests Professor Dan Ho and SLS student Mirac Suzgun, and the topic of racial covenants in real estate. They discuss the persistence of racially restrictive covenants, despite being declared unenforceable by the Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kramer (1948), and highlight California’s AB 1466 law, which aims to address the issue.

(00:04:00) Chapter 2: The Role of AI in Redacting Racial Covenants
Dan Ho explains how Santa Clara County faced the challenge of identifying and redacting racial covenants from millions of historical deed records. The conversation shifts to the AI tool developed by Stanford’s RegLab, which automates the identification of racially discriminatory language in property documents. Mirac Suzgun elaborates on the stages of the AI tool, including OCR and machine learning, to help counties meet their legal obligations.

(00:10:01) Chapter 3: Historical Context and Persistence of Racial Covenants
Rich Ford and Dan Ho delve into the history of racial covenants, explaining their rise after the Buchanan decision (1917) and their persistence even after the Shelley v. Kramer ruling. They discuss how these covenants, though unenforceable, served as a community signaling function, reinforcing housing segregation for decades.

(00:16:13) Chapter 4: The Legacy of Racial Covenants

Rich Ford and Mirac Suzgun discuss the evolution of state-sponsored race segregation and the role of private covenants in perpetuating housing discrimination. They emphasize how these covenants, often embedded in property deeds, remain binding on homeowners, illustrating the historical entrenchment of racial segregation in real estate.

(00:18:48) Chapter 5: Uncovering Historical Data and Responsibility

Dan Ho shares findings from a study revealing the prevalence of racial covenants in Santa Clara County. The discussion highlights the significant responsibility of a small number of developers in enforcing these covenants, contrasting this with the example of Joseph Eichler, who resisted such practices and promoted housing reform.

(00:23:11) Chapter 6: Utilizing Technology for Social Justice

The conversation shifts to the innovative tools developed to identify and address racial covenants in property records. The hosts explore the implications of these discoveries for understanding historical injustices and the importance of retaining historical records while advocating for modern social justice initiatives, plus closing remarks.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Racism in Property Deeds: Stanford Team Develops AI Tool to Identify and Map Racial Covenants Stanford Law School 00:30:00 In this episode, Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate. In this episode, Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate. stanford law school, mistral model, mirac suzgun, california housing laws, racial deed restrictions, rick brooks, signaling function, ai model, reglab, racial covenants, real estate ethics, racially discriminatory language, federal housing administration, housing reform, housing discrimination, housing market segregation, ai tool, deed records, fair housing act 1968, california ab 1466, santa clara county, buchanan decision, dan ho, mapping prejudice project, racial covenants removal, national association of real estate boards, stanford legal podcast, racial steering, historical property records, social justice technology, housing segregation, hugging face platform, carol rose, real estate, racially restrictive covenants, machine learning, santa clara county clerk-recorder's office, racial exclusion, ocr, shelley v. kramer, zoning laws, joseph eichler, property development, rich ford false full 146 421519f0-e701-4127-b83e-4961b6018df0 Killing in Self Defense: The Legal Complexities of Abuse-Related Crimes and the Impact of Intimate Partner Violence on Women's Criminal Convictions How are victims of intimate partner violence meant to protect themselves—and, often, their children—without winding up dead, in hospital, or prison? It’s a situation that many find themselves in. Approximately 15 percent of women in the United States are victims of intimate partner violence, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. But the legal system is not set up to help them. In this episode the executive director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Debbie Mukamal, and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes join Pam and Rich to discuss the Center's new study “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence,” that offers groundbreaking data and personal stories from women currently in prison because of intimate partner violence. They also touch on the systemic failures in the justice system in handling these complex cases. 

 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introductions and Goals of the Research 

Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss how the project on women incarcerated for killing their abusers began during the pandemic, sparked by a lack of national data on these cases with Debbie Mukamal and SLS student Jacqueline Lewittes. Mukamal explains how her team's long-standing relationships with the California Department of Corrections facilitated their research access despite COVID-19 restrictions.

(00:04:12) Chapter 2: Research Design and Challenges 

The team outlines the complexities of designing the study, including broadening the focus beyond intimate partner killings and overcoming barriers like accessing reliable court records. They explain how they relied on direct interviews and used validated tools like the Danger Assessment and Composite Abuse Scale to assess the severity of abuse.

(00:08:42) Chapter 3: Striking Findings and Legal Implications 

Explore key findings, including the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries among respondents and the failure of self-defense laws to protect abused women. Jacqueline highlights a specific case that illustrates how memory loss due to abuse complicates self-defense claims, underscoring the systemic legal failures.

(00:18:30) Chapter 4: The Role of Intimate Partner Violence in Homicide Cases

The group delves into the startling statistics of women convicted of homicide in connection to intimate partner violence. Debbie Mukamal discusses how nearly 74% of women in their study had experienced abuse at the time of the offense, breaking down the subcategories of cases, from those who killed their abuser to others involving child fatalities.

(00:21:25) Chapter 5: Systemic Failures in Protecting Abuse Victims

Examine the various ways in which the legal system fails to protect women who are victims of abuse. From denied protective orders to mistreatment by police and ineffective legal defense, the discussion highlights the failures at multiple levels and the resulting harsh sentences.

(00:23:55) Chapter 6: Law Reform and the Impact of Trauma on Legal Culpability

This segment focuses on potential legal reforms, including changes to homicide statutes and the need for better understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in abuse survivors. Debbie Mukamal and Pam Karlan discuss the implications of TBI on a woman’s ability to recall facts, and how reforms could better account for their experiences.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 10 Oct 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ How are victims of intimate partner violence meant to protect themselves—and, often, their children—without winding up dead, in hospital, or prison? It’s a situation that many find themselves in. Approximately 15 percent of women in the United States are victims of intimate partner violence, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. But the legal system is not set up to help them. In this episode the executive director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Debbie Mukamal, and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes join Pam and Rich to discuss the Center's new study “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence,” that offers groundbreaking data and personal stories from women currently in prison because of intimate partner violence. They also touch on the systemic failures in the justice system in handling these complex cases. 

 

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introductions and Goals of the Research 

Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss how the project on women incarcerated for killing their abusers began during the pandemic, sparked by a lack of national data on these cases with Debbie Mukamal and SLS student Jacqueline Lewittes. Mukamal explains how her team's long-standing relationships with the California Department of Corrections facilitated their research access despite COVID-19 restrictions.

(00:04:12) Chapter 2: Research Design and Challenges 

The team outlines the complexities of designing the study, including broadening the focus beyond intimate partner killings and overcoming barriers like accessing reliable court records. They explain how they relied on direct interviews and used validated tools like the Danger Assessment and Composite Abuse Scale to assess the severity of abuse.

(00:08:42) Chapter 3: Striking Findings and Legal Implications 

Explore key findings, including the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries among respondents and the failure of self-defense laws to protect abused women. Jacqueline highlights a specific case that illustrates how memory loss due to abuse complicates self-defense claims, underscoring the systemic legal failures.

(00:18:30) Chapter 4: The Role of Intimate Partner Violence in Homicide Cases

The group delves into the startling statistics of women convicted of homicide in connection to intimate partner violence. Debbie Mukamal discusses how nearly 74% of women in their study had experienced abuse at the time of the offense, breaking down the subcategories of cases, from those who killed their abuser to others involving child fatalities.

(00:21:25) Chapter 5: Systemic Failures in Protecting Abuse Victims

Examine the various ways in which the legal system fails to protect women who are victims of abuse. From denied protective orders to mistreatment by police and ineffective legal defense, the discussion highlights the failures at multiple levels and the resulting harsh sentences.

(00:23:55) Chapter 6: Law Reform and the Impact of Trauma on Legal Culpability

This segment focuses on potential legal reforms, including changes to homicide statutes and the need for better understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in abuse survivors. Debbie Mukamal and Pam Karlan discuss the implications of TBI on a woman’s ability to recall facts, and how reforms could better account for their experiences.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Killing in Self Defense: The Legal Complexities of Abuse-Related Crimes and the Impact of Intimate Partner Violence on Women's Criminal Convictions Stanford Law School 00:29:59 In this episode, Stanford Law’s Debbie Mukamal and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes discuss the Stanford Criminal Justice Center’s findings from their report “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence.” In this episode, Stanford Law’s Debbie Mukamal and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes discuss the Stanford Criminal Justice Center’s findings from their report “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence.” protective orders, substance abuse, fatal peril study, pandemic impacts, pam karlan, composite abuse scale, defense work, domestic violence, criminal liability, women in prison, failure to protect, child protection, aiding and abetting, empirical research, manslaughter, intimate partner homicide, commutation policies, criminal justice, traumatic brain injuries, homicide cases, battered woman syndrome, california department of corrections, self-defense statute, sentencing reforms, new jersey executive order, jacqueline lewittes, abuser killing, mercy killings, self-defense law, legal advocacy, stanford legal podcast, debbie mukamal, criminal legal system failures, murder, systemic failures, gender violence, criminal justice reform, traumatic brain injury, intimate partner violence, abuse-related homicides, stanford criminal justice center, rich ford false full 145 5c311623-0241-4e5b-8ce7-ad0983f4e804 Challenging Originalism: Putting the Electoral College, Presidential Immunity, and Recent SCOTUS Decisions into Historical Context Is the president above the law? Is the Electoral College democratic? In this episode, historian Jonathan Gienapp critiques the mainstream use of originalism, arguing that it often neglects crucial historical context, overlooking the complexities of original public understanding. The conversation dives into recent court cases, highlighting tensions between historical interpretation and contemporary judicial practices. This is clearly illustrated in Gienapp’s discussion of the Electoral College—a uniquely American invention. He explains the historical roots of the Electoral College, the Framers' intentions, and the criticisms it faces today. He also sheds light on how the Electoral College emerged as a compromise among less desirable options and the historical context surrounding its establishment, including issues of accountability and regional interests. The conversation also touches on ongoing debates about potential reforms, public sentiment toward a national popular vote, and the challenges of amending the Constitution in today's contentious political landscape. Join us for an enlightening discussion that bridges history with contemporary constitutional debates.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Flaws of Originalism
Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss the key issues with modern originalism, focusing on how originalists often overlook the historical context necessary to truly capture the Constitution’s original meaning with historian Jonathan Gienapp. Gienapp critiques the flexibility of originalist interpretations, especially when applied to complex constitutional concepts like freedom of speech and executive power.

(00:04:33) Chapter 2: Public Meaning vs. Original Intent
Rich Ford explores the tension between public meaning and original intent in originalist theory. Gienapp explains how, despite attempts to distinguish them, the two often overlap in practice. The discussion highlights the inconsistency in how originalists pick and choose historical evidence to support their interpretations.

(00:07:47) Chapter 3: Judicial Interpretation in Practice: Rahimi and Trump Cases
Pam Karlan brings up recent court cases, including United States v. Rahimi and Trump v. United States, where originalist judges either struggled with historical evidence or avoided it altogether. Gienapp notes the irony of originalists relying on minimal historical analysis when it contradicts their desired outcomes.

(00:12:04) Chapter 4: The Framers' Vision of the Presidency

Jonathan Gienapp discusses the historical foundations of the American presidency, emphasizing the founding generation's rejection of monarchy and the importance of presidential accountability. He highlights the debate at the Constitutional Convention regarding the balance between a strong executive and ensuring that executive power remains accountable to the people.

(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Originalism and Constitutional Interpretation

Jonathan Gienapp delves into the complexities of originalism as a judicial philosophy. He explains the tension between the rhetoric of originalism and its inconsistent application in Supreme Court decisions. He argues for either a more serious commitment to originalism or a recognition of constitutional pluralism, where history is used alongside other interpretative methods.

(00:21:39) Chapter 6: The Origins and Challenges of the Electoral College

Exploration of the creation of the Electoral College, discussing how it emerged not as a perfect solution but as a compromise to address competing concerns about legislative selection, popular votes, and regional interests. Gienapp examines past and present efforts to reform the Electoral College and explains why it persists despite criticism.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 26 Sep 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Is the president above the law? Is the Electoral College democratic? In this episode, historian Jonathan Gienapp critiques the mainstream use of originalism, arguing that it often neglects crucial historical context, overlooking the complexities of original public understanding. The conversation dives into recent court cases, highlighting tensions between historical interpretation and contemporary judicial practices. This is clearly illustrated in Gienapp’s discussion of the Electoral College—a uniquely American invention. He explains the historical roots of the Electoral College, the Framers' intentions, and the criticisms it faces today. He also sheds light on how the Electoral College emerged as a compromise among less desirable options and the historical context surrounding its establishment, including issues of accountability and regional interests. The conversation also touches on ongoing debates about potential reforms, public sentiment toward a national popular vote, and the challenges of amending the Constitution in today's contentious political landscape. Join us for an enlightening discussion that bridges history with contemporary constitutional debates.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Flaws of Originalism
Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss the key issues with modern originalism, focusing on how originalists often overlook the historical context necessary to truly capture the Constitution’s original meaning with historian Jonathan Gienapp. Gienapp critiques the flexibility of originalist interpretations, especially when applied to complex constitutional concepts like freedom of speech and executive power.

(00:04:33) Chapter 2: Public Meaning vs. Original Intent
Rich Ford explores the tension between public meaning and original intent in originalist theory. Gienapp explains how, despite attempts to distinguish them, the two often overlap in practice. The discussion highlights the inconsistency in how originalists pick and choose historical evidence to support their interpretations.

(00:07:47) Chapter 3: Judicial Interpretation in Practice: Rahimi and Trump Cases
Pam Karlan brings up recent court cases, including United States v. Rahimi and Trump v. United States, where originalist judges either struggled with historical evidence or avoided it altogether. Gienapp notes the irony of originalists relying on minimal historical analysis when it contradicts their desired outcomes.

(00:12:04) Chapter 4: The Framers' Vision of the Presidency

Jonathan Gienapp discusses the historical foundations of the American presidency, emphasizing the founding generation's rejection of monarchy and the importance of presidential accountability. He highlights the debate at the Constitutional Convention regarding the balance between a strong executive and ensuring that executive power remains accountable to the people.

(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Originalism and Constitutional Interpretation

Jonathan Gienapp delves into the complexities of originalism as a judicial philosophy. He explains the tension between the rhetoric of originalism and its inconsistent application in Supreme Court decisions. He argues for either a more serious commitment to originalism or a recognition of constitutional pluralism, where history is used alongside other interpretative methods.

(00:21:39) Chapter 6: The Origins and Challenges of the Electoral College

Exploration of the creation of the Electoral College, discussing how it emerged not as a perfect solution but as a compromise to address competing concerns about legislative selection, popular votes, and regional interests. Gienapp examines past and present efforts to reform the Electoral College and explains why it persists despite criticism.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Challenging Originalism: Putting the Electoral College, Presidential Immunity, and Recent SCOTUS Decisions into Historical Context Stanford Law School 00:32:15 In this episode, Stanford historian Jonathan Gienapp, a leading expert on the founding of the United States, takes a critical look at the Electoral College, presidential immunity, and Constitutional Originalists. In this episode, Stanford historian Jonathan Gienapp, a leading expert on the founding of the United States, takes a critical look at the Electoral College, presidential immunity, and Constitutional Originalists. the heller decision, alexander hamilton, cafeteria originalism, pam karlan, state constitutions, constitutional convention, united states v. rahimi, historical context, u.s. history, congress, monarchy rejection, electoral cabals, non-delegation doctrine, prosecution of presidents, historian's brief, electoral process, the bruen decision, winner-take-all model, james madison, domestic violence restraining orders, pluralism, framers' intent, federalist 70, constitutional originalism, executive power, ratification debates, jack balkin, electoral reform, second amendment, slavery, impeachment, edmund randolph, constitutional text, public opinion polls, constitutional rights, demagoguery, representation compromise, stanford legal podcast, founding era, public meaning theory, legislative powers, high crimes and misdemeanors, freedom of speech, original intent, continental republic, originalism, jonathan gienapp, charles pinckney, gouverneur morris, trump v. united states, presidential immunity, constitutional interpretation, public meaning, national popular vote, constitutional amendments, james wilson, history of presidential selection, presidential accountability, rich ford, amy coney barrett false full 144 f9b3e672-77c1-4de0-8a9a-4757a194ef79 Election Stress Test: Can America's Electoral System Weather 2024? As the 2024 presidential election approaches, Nate Persily forecasts complications along with it.

Persily, a Stanford law professor and a leading expert in election law and administration, says the coming election cycle could pose unprecedented challenges for voters and election officials alike. “We are at a stage right now where there's a lot of anxiety about election administration,” he says. “There's a significant share of the population that's completely lost confidence in our system of elections.”

With nearly every state having altered its election laws since 2020 and a significant turnover in election administrators, Persily says the stage is set for a potentially bumpy ride this November. As voter confusion and AI-powered disinformation loom overhead, Persily says the integrity of our democracy may well depend on our collective ability to weather this less-than-perfect storm.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Challenges Ahead for the November Election 

Nate Persily outlines the primary concerns for the upcoming election, including voter confusion, changes in election laws, and the pressures faced by election officials.

(00:03:27) Chapter 2: Decentralization and Election Administration 

The panel discusses the challenges of managing a national election run by numerous local jurisdictions, including issues with certification and varying local procedures.

(00:05:44)  Chapter 3: The Evolving Election Timeline 

Persily, Karlan, and Ford explore how election day has expanded into an extended voting period, covering early and mail-in voting, and the implications for counting and certification.

(00:17:41) Chapter 4: Technology, Disinformation, and Media Influence 

Examines the impact of technology and disinformation, including deep fakes and misinformation about voting procedures, and their effects on public trust.

(00:23:37) Chapter 5: Building Confidence in the Electoral Process 

Persily discusses strategies to bolster confidence in the election process, emphasizing support for election officials and the role of local leaders in maintaining trust.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 12 Sep 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ As the 2024 presidential election approaches, Nate Persily forecasts complications along with it.

Persily, a Stanford law professor and a leading expert in election law and administration, says the coming election cycle could pose unprecedented challenges for voters and election officials alike. “We are at a stage right now where there's a lot of anxiety about election administration,” he says. “There's a significant share of the population that's completely lost confidence in our system of elections.”

With nearly every state having altered its election laws since 2020 and a significant turnover in election administrators, Persily says the stage is set for a potentially bumpy ride this November. As voter confusion and AI-powered disinformation loom overhead, Persily says the integrity of our democracy may well depend on our collective ability to weather this less-than-perfect storm.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Challenges Ahead for the November Election 

Nate Persily outlines the primary concerns for the upcoming election, including voter confusion, changes in election laws, and the pressures faced by election officials.

(00:03:27) Chapter 2: Decentralization and Election Administration 

The panel discusses the challenges of managing a national election run by numerous local jurisdictions, including issues with certification and varying local procedures.

(00:05:44)  Chapter 3: The Evolving Election Timeline 

Persily, Karlan, and Ford explore how election day has expanded into an extended voting period, covering early and mail-in voting, and the implications for counting and certification.

(00:17:41) Chapter 4: Technology, Disinformation, and Media Influence 

Examines the impact of technology and disinformation, including deep fakes and misinformation about voting procedures, and their effects on public trust.

(00:23:37) Chapter 5: Building Confidence in the Electoral Process 

Persily discusses strategies to bolster confidence in the election process, emphasizing support for election officials and the role of local leaders in maintaining trust.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Election Stress Test: Can America's Electoral System Weather 2024? Stanford Law School 00:26:52 In this episode, election law expert Nate Persily shares why new election laws, novice election administrators, and voter confusion could make for a turbulent 2024 election with hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford. In this episode, election law expert Nate Persily shares why new election laws, novice election administrators, and voter confusion could make for a turbulent 2024 election with hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford. voter confusion, voter confidence, deepfakes, mail voting, early voting, pam karlan, electoral system, help america vote act, campaign finance, voting rights, voter id, nate persily, technology in elections, polarization, provisional ballots, voter trust, stanford legal, redistricting, certification of results, election process, ai in elections, election night projections, legal stories, post-insurrection election, 2020 election, election security, election officials, political parties, electoral college, decentralized election system, election administration, election challenges, rich ford false full 143 eb2f06c2-5199-4fe4-b1ed-50dc15b66625 High Court, High Stakes: The Massive Weight of Recent Supreme Court Rulings The Supreme Court's latest term was marked by decisions of enormous consequence. However, the way the Court has communicated about these rulings far undersells the gravity they carry.

While “expressing itself in extremely modest terms,” Professor Jeffrey Fisher says, the current Supreme Court has “[handed] down decisions that have enormously consequential effects for our democracy, people's rights, and everything in between.” He and Assistant Professor Easha Anand, co-directors of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, agree that these recent decisions could reshape American law and politics for years to come.

In this episode of Stanford Legal with host Pam Karlan, Fisher, and Anand take a critical look at recent Supreme Court rulings on abortion, gun rights, tech platforms, and the power of federal agencies, examining the Court's evolving approach and considering the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and the rule of law.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Supreme Court Term and Key Cases

Pam Karlan is joined by Professors Jeff Fisher and Easha Anand to discuss the past term at the Supreme Court, constitutional law and Supreme Court practice, highlighting key cases and themes from the term. They explore how the court's conservative majority shapes the docket and the role of Justices Barrett and Jackson in developing their judicial voices.

(00:06:56) Chapter 2: High-Profile Cases: Guns, Abortion, and Administrative Law

Examine major cases, including gun rights in Rahimi v. United States and Cargill v. Garland, abortion-related cases, and the pivotal Loper Bright decision affecting the administrative state. They analyze the court's reasoning and the broader implications of these rulings.

(00:15:28) Chapter 3: The Court's Evolving Role and Methodology

Discussion of the broader implications of the Supreme Court's evolving approach to its docket and decision-making processes, particularly in relation to the administrative state and the impact of recent rulings on future cases.

(00:19:14) Chapter 4: The Supreme Court and Technology Cases

They delve into the significant technology cases that were brought before the Supreme Court this term. They discuss how the Court addressed state laws from Florida and Texas aimed at restricting content moderation by big tech companies, marking the first time the First Amendment was applied to social media platforms. The discussion highlights the tension between traditional legal frameworks and the evolving digital landscape, with a focus on the implications of these rulings for the future of free speech online.

(00:24:10) Chapter 5: Trump and the Supreme Court: Balancing Power and Immunity

The group explores the complex legal landscape surrounding former President Donald Trump's involvement in Supreme Court cases. Easha Anand provides an in-depth analysis of the Trump v. United States case, where the Court examined the extent of presidential immunity concerning acts related to the 2020 election. The discussion also touches on the broader implications of the Court's rulings on Trump’s legal challenges, including how these decisions might shape future presidential conduct and accountability.

(00:29:27) Chapter 6: Supreme Court’s Role in Protecting Democracy

Pam Karlan and Jeff Fisher discuss the Supreme Court's role in safeguarding democratic processes. They analyze the Court's reluctance to engage deeply in political matters, such as the January 6th prosecution and political gerrymandering, highlighting the tension between judicial restraint and the need to protect democratic values. The chapter concludes with reflections on the broader implications of these decisions for the future of U.S. democracy, particularly in the context of voting rights and election integrity.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Supreme Court's latest term was marked by decisions of enormous consequence. However, the way the Court has communicated about these rulings far undersells the gravity they carry.

While “expressing itself in extremely modest terms,” Professor Jeffrey Fisher says, the current Supreme Court has “[handed] down decisions that have enormously consequential effects for our democracy, people's rights, and everything in between.” He and Assistant Professor Easha Anand, co-directors of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, agree that these recent decisions could reshape American law and politics for years to come.

In this episode of Stanford Legal with host Pam Karlan, Fisher, and Anand take a critical look at recent Supreme Court rulings on abortion, gun rights, tech platforms, and the power of federal agencies, examining the Court's evolving approach and considering the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and the rule of law.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Supreme Court Term and Key Cases

Pam Karlan is joined by Professors Jeff Fisher and Easha Anand to discuss the past term at the Supreme Court, constitutional law and Supreme Court practice, highlighting key cases and themes from the term. They explore how the court's conservative majority shapes the docket and the role of Justices Barrett and Jackson in developing their judicial voices.

(00:06:56) Chapter 2: High-Profile Cases: Guns, Abortion, and Administrative Law

Examine major cases, including gun rights in Rahimi v. United States and Cargill v. Garland, abortion-related cases, and the pivotal Loper Bright decision affecting the administrative state. They analyze the court's reasoning and the broader implications of these rulings.

(00:15:28) Chapter 3: The Court's Evolving Role and Methodology

Discussion of the broader implications of the Supreme Court's evolving approach to its docket and decision-making processes, particularly in relation to the administrative state and the impact of recent rulings on future cases.

(00:19:14) Chapter 4: The Supreme Court and Technology Cases

They delve into the significant technology cases that were brought before the Supreme Court this term. They discuss how the Court addressed state laws from Florida and Texas aimed at restricting content moderation by big tech companies, marking the first time the First Amendment was applied to social media platforms. The discussion highlights the tension between traditional legal frameworks and the evolving digital landscape, with a focus on the implications of these rulings for the future of free speech online.

(00:24:10) Chapter 5: Trump and the Supreme Court: Balancing Power and Immunity

The group explores the complex legal landscape surrounding former President Donald Trump's involvement in Supreme Court cases. Easha Anand provides an in-depth analysis of the Trump v. United States case, where the Court examined the extent of presidential immunity concerning acts related to the 2020 election. The discussion also touches on the broader implications of the Court's rulings on Trump’s legal challenges, including how these decisions might shape future presidential conduct and accountability.

(00:29:27) Chapter 6: Supreme Court’s Role in Protecting Democracy

Pam Karlan and Jeff Fisher discuss the Supreme Court's role in safeguarding democratic processes. They analyze the Court's reluctance to engage deeply in political matters, such as the January 6th prosecution and political gerrymandering, highlighting the tension between judicial restraint and the need to protect democratic values. The chapter concludes with reflections on the broader implications of these decisions for the future of U.S. democracy, particularly in the context of voting rights and election integrity.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> High Court, High Stakes: The Massive Weight of Recent Supreme Court Rulings Stanford Law School 00:39:51 In this episode, Professors Jeffrey Fisher and Easha Anand discuss recent Supreme Court rulings and the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and the rule of law. In this episode, Professors Jeffrey Fisher and Easha Anand discuss recent Supreme Court rulings and the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and the rule of law. digital rights, social media immunity, jeff fisher, florida and texas laws, domestic violence restraining order, bruin case, pam karlan, easha anand, confrontation clause, abortion rights, ramos v. louisiana, melendez-diaz v. massachusetts, constitutional law, alexander against south carolina case, january 6th prosecution, trump legal issues, chevron deference, obergefell v. hodges, criminal justice, second amendment, special counsel jack smith, justice kagan, loper bright decision, communications decency act, political gerrymandering, stanford legal podcast, federal courts, fourth amendment, section 230, public officials on social media, federal agencies, riley v. california, supreme court cases, content moderation, trump v. united states, presidential immunity, first amendment, riley case, rucho case, rahimi v. united states, emtala, crawford v. washington, colorado case, same-sex marriage false full 142 170511eb-9dfb-472d-b034-33913feca904 How Lawyers Can Undermine Russian Sanctions and Ukraine War Effort The bedrock of the legal profession is a commitment to upholding the rule of law. Unfortunately, as Stanford Law researchers discover in the complex world of international sanctions, lawyers can often facilitate non-compliance and evasion.

It’s been two years since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. And yet, businesses are still skirting sanctions imposed on Russia. As Erik Jensen, director of the Rule of Law Program at Stanford Law School, and law students Sarah Manney and Kyrylo Korol explore in this episode of Stanford Legal, lawyers could be playing a critical role in enabling Russian Oligarchs’ evasive maneuvers.

With hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan, the three guests explore the intricate relationship between legal practice and international sanctions, discussing insights from their research, the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, and potential solutions for safeguarding the rule of law.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview

Kyrylo Korol discusses the responsibility of lawyers to uphold democracy and the impact of their actions on the profession. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the topic of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the international response.

(00:01:33) Chapter 2: Genesis of the Policy Lab

Erik Jensen explains the inception of the Policy Lab focusing on sanctions against Russia, including the motivation from an S-Term course and subsequent student enthusiasm.

(00:03:16) Chapter 3: Kyrylo Korol's Personal Motivation

Kyrylo Korol shares his dual perspective as a Ukrainian and American lawyer, emphasizing the need to keep the discussion on Russia's war against Ukraine alive and his personal drive to support Ukraine.

(00:05:32) Chapter 4: Focus of the Policy Lab

The team discusses the main areas of their research, including the role of Russian oligarchs in the war and the involvement of legal professionals in facilitating sanctions evasion.

(00:12:57) Chapter 5: Comparative Analysis and Legal Frameworks

The conversation shifts to the comparative study of how different countries regulate lawyers concerning sanctions and money laundering, and the ethical obligations of U.S. lawyers with Sarah Manney.

(00:21:25) Chapter 6: Challenges and Implications for the Legal Profession

The team delves into the implications of their findings for the legal profession, discussing the balance between upholding legal privileges and preventing abuse, and addressing systemic risks and de-risking issues.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 15 Aug 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The bedrock of the legal profession is a commitment to upholding the rule of law. Unfortunately, as Stanford Law researchers discover in the complex world of international sanctions, lawyers can often facilitate non-compliance and evasion.

It’s been two years since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. And yet, businesses are still skirting sanctions imposed on Russia. As Erik Jensen, director of the Rule of Law Program at Stanford Law School, and law students Sarah Manney and Kyrylo Korol explore in this episode of Stanford Legal, lawyers could be playing a critical role in enabling Russian Oligarchs’ evasive maneuvers.

With hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan, the three guests explore the intricate relationship between legal practice and international sanctions, discussing insights from their research, the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, and potential solutions for safeguarding the rule of law.

Connect:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview

Kyrylo Korol discusses the responsibility of lawyers to uphold democracy and the impact of their actions on the profession. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the topic of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the international response.

(00:01:33) Chapter 2: Genesis of the Policy Lab

Erik Jensen explains the inception of the Policy Lab focusing on sanctions against Russia, including the motivation from an S-Term course and subsequent student enthusiasm.

(00:03:16) Chapter 3: Kyrylo Korol's Personal Motivation

Kyrylo Korol shares his dual perspective as a Ukrainian and American lawyer, emphasizing the need to keep the discussion on Russia's war against Ukraine alive and his personal drive to support Ukraine.

(00:05:32) Chapter 4: Focus of the Policy Lab

The team discusses the main areas of their research, including the role of Russian oligarchs in the war and the involvement of legal professionals in facilitating sanctions evasion.

(00:12:57) Chapter 5: Comparative Analysis and Legal Frameworks

The conversation shifts to the comparative study of how different countries regulate lawyers concerning sanctions and money laundering, and the ethical obligations of U.S. lawyers with Sarah Manney.

(00:21:25) Chapter 6: Challenges and Implications for the Legal Profession

The team delves into the implications of their findings for the legal profession, discussing the balance between upholding legal privileges and preventing abuse, and addressing systemic risks and de-risking issues.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> How Lawyers Can Undermine Russian Sanctions and Ukraine War Effort Stanford Law School 00:27:37 In this episode, lecturer Erik Jensen and Stanford Law and Policy Lab students Sarah Manny and Kyrylo Korol expose how attorney-client privilege can undermine the rule of law. In this episode, lecturer Erik Jensen and Stanford Law and Policy Lab students Sarah Manny and Kyrylo Korol expose how attorney-client privilege can undermine the rule of law. stanford law school, sanctions evasion, economic sanctions, policy lab, international working group, wealth managers, civil representation, sarah manny, wartime, pam karlan, kyrylo korol, legal services, regulated industries, international transactions, ukrainian supreme court, legislation, rule of law, freeman spogli institute, global witness investigation, frank vogel, financial crimes enforcement network, freezing russian assets, enforcement, weaponizing privileges, bill taylor, financial institutions, creole coral, financial services, financial agents, rule of law program, professional ethics, effectiveness of sanctions, criminal representation, international law, money laundering, due diligence, confidentiality, comparative study, stanford legal, shell company ownership, sanctions, 2022 invasion, attorney-client privilege, recession, transactional work, erik jensen, american law school, russian wealth, enablers act, safeguard democracy, legal reform, regulatory compliance, suspicious activity report, shell companies, financial action task force, compliance, legal stories, ukraine, cross-border legal issues, professional responsibility, trump's ukraine case, economic instability, russia, european bank for reconstruction and development, policy lab project, russian oligarchs, ukrainian civil society, rich ford false full 141 66cac73e-8caf-432c-9d00-1cce2f286ee6 The Future of Environmental Regulation Following SCOTUS’ Overruling of the Chevron Doctrine 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:

Links:

(00:00:00)  Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview

Pam 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 Interpretations

Examination 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 Doctrine

Analysis 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 Implications

Detailed 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.

]]> Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(00:00:00)  Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview

Pam 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 Interpretations

Examination 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 Doctrine

Analysis 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 Implications

Detailed 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.

]]> The Future of Environmental Regulation Following SCOTUS’ Overruling of the Chevron Doctrine Stanford Law School 00:27:54 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Debbie Sivas on recent Supreme Court decisions affecting environmental and administrative law. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Debbie Sivas on recent Supreme Court decisions affecting environmental and administrative law. clean air act, swipe fees, conservative legal movement, nitrous oxide, doerr school of sustainability, pam karlan, debbie sivas, judicial deference, legal scholars, clean energy jobs, environmental law clinic, corner post case, chevron deference, rulemaking process, federal plan, public health, emergency stay, climate change litigation, chevron 1984 case, nitrogen oxide, luke cole chair, shadow docket, loeb or wright decision, dc circuit, reagan administration, good neighbor provision, administrative state, ohio against epa case, major questions doctrine, environmental regulation, non delegation doctrine, supreme court, agency interpretation, administrative law, west virginia case, clean power plan, rich ford, regulatory churn false full 140 b8cf573b-4fb5-4c3f-9274-659a87ebe8e4 David Sklansky on Judge Cannon's Controversial Case Dismissal and Trump's Legal Battles 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview

Introduction 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 Rationale

Discussion 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 Context

Examination 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 Rulings

Review 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 Accountability

Discussion 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 Implications

Analysis 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.

]]> Thu, 18 Jul 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Overview

Introduction 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 Rationale

Discussion 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 Context

Examination 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 Rulings

Review 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 Accountability

Discussion 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 Implications

Analysis 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.

]]> David Sklansky on Judge Cannon's Controversial Case Dismissal and Trump's Legal Battles Stanford Law School 00:34:32 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor David Sklansky on Judge Cannon's decision and former president Donald Trump's legal battles. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor David Sklansky on Judge Cannon's decision and former president Donald Trump's legal battles. 11th circuit decision, trump new york conviction, hunter biden case, pam karlan, trump immunity claims, special counsel appointment, per curiam decision, nixon immunity case, chevron deference rollback, criminal procedure, executive power, separation of powers, jack smith appointment, manhattan conviction, trump legal challenges, election interference case, stanford legal podcast, administrative state, classified documents case, supreme court immunity decision, federal statutes, accountability, mar-a-lago search, judge cannon dismissal, unitary executive theory, special master appointment, former president trump charges, appeal prospects, david sklansky, selective prosecution claims, rich ford false full 139 b0b2bd12-76d9-4825-b635-854d30dc8360 Jennifer Chacón Discusses the Failures of U.S. Immigration Policy and How the Law is Developing 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:

Links:

(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 Action

Jennifer 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.

]]> Thu, 4 Jul 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(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 Action

Jennifer 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.

]]> Jennifer Chacón Discusses the Failures of U.S. Immigration Policy and How the Law is Developing Stanford Law School 00:28:20 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Jennifer Chacón on how immigration policy intersects with law. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Jennifer Chacón on how immigration policy intersects with law. legalization program, federal enforcement, trump administration, pam karlan, obama raids, executive order, immigration policy, border crisis, long-term residents, senate bill 744, work authorization, jennifer chacón, border enforcement, legal solutions, racial and ethnic identity, asylum, legal status, department of homeland security, immigration legislation, unaccompanied minors, parole in place, stanford legal, obama administration, civic engagement, texas litigation, immigration reform, deferred action for childhood arrivals (daca), consular processing, southern california, bipartisan support, central america, president biden, prosecutorial discretion, family ties, state government, legal phantoms, comprehensive immigration reform, deferred action for parents of lawful permanent residents and citizens (dapa), citizenship, executive action, humanitarian reasons, 1986 immigration reform and control act, administrative procedures act, local government, rich ford, social belonging, green card false full 138 436a04d0-2635-40a9-b292-32360c91c939 Former Federal Judge Michael McConnell Discusses Presidential Immunity and Trump Cases with Pam Karlan 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.

]]> Thu, 20 Jun 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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.

]]> Former Federal Judge Michael McConnell Discusses Presidential Immunity and Trump Cases with Pam Karlan Stanford Law School 00:31:30 Join Pam for a discussion with Professor Michael McConnell on presidential immunity, the Constitution, and former president Trump's cases. Join Pam for a discussion with Professor Michael McConnell on presidential immunity, the Constitution, and former president Trump's cases. presidential duties, 2016 campaign, private acts, george washington, trump administration, pam karlan, presidential crimes, grand juries, richard nixon, constitutional law center, hyper-partisan times, congress, private crimes, world war ii, jack smith, government disruption, political abuse, presidential prosecution, justice alito, civil case, hillary clinton, executive power, president's oversight board, united states court of appeals for the 10th circuit, doj prosecutions, damages liability, justice brennan, attorney general, dc circuit, solicitor general, roosevelt administration, stanford legal podcast, president trump, election fraud, founding fathers, executive and judicial branches, prosecutorial discretion, vice president bribery, prosecutorial overreach, nixon against fitzgerald, executive branch, presidential immunity, fake electors, political accountability, justice barrett, michael mcconnell, supreme court oral argument, supreme court, ulysses grant, office of management and budget, prosecutorial function, special prosecutor function false full 137 502a403b-2b8a-4f86-bec7-5c7e1eeb295f Justice for All? Why We Have an Access to Justice Gap in America—And What to Do About It 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:

Links:

Chapter 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.

]]> Thu, 6 Jun 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

Chapter 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.

]]> Justice for All? Why We Have an Access to Justice Gap in America—And What to Do About It Stanford Law School 00:34:57 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professors Nora Freeman Engstrom and David Freeman Engstrom on access to justice for all. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professors Nora Freeman Engstrom and David Freeman Engstrom on access to justice for all. tort law, legal problems, access to justice, pam karlan, contingency fee, legal services, civil cases, evictions, david freeman engstrom, family law, state courts, legal capacity, legal ethics, artificial intelligence, mortgage foreclosure, consumer credit industry., personal injury, civil procedure, attorney fees, technology in debt collection, debt collection, default judgments, regulatory regimes, deborah rhode center on the legal profession, nora freeman engstrom, administrative law, legal aid, child support enforcement, law and technology false full 136 acbffedf-25fa-4ace-9c7a-f2ce4868859a The Legacy of Brown v. BOE: Success or Failure? 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Significance of Brown vs. Board of Education
Introduction 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 Brown
Exploration 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 Role
Discussion 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 Segregation
Analysis 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 Integration
Examination 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 Quality
Debate 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 Solutions
Reflection 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 Solutions
Call 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.

]]> Thu, 23 May 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Significance of Brown vs. Board of Education
Introduction 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 Brown
Exploration 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 Role
Discussion 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 Segregation
Analysis 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 Integration
Examination 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 Quality
Debate 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 Solutions
Reflection 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 Solutions
Call 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.

]]> The Legacy of Brown v. BOE: Success or Failure? Stanford Law School 00:31:29 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Rick Banks about the successes and failures of Brown v. Board of Education. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Rick Banks about the successes and failures of Brown v. Board of Education. socioeconomic integration, economic inequality, local jurisdictions, school segregation, racial equity, school funding disparities, pam karlan, educational quality, supreme court decisions., legislative resistance, desegregation efforts, brown v. board of education, educational experimentation, educational outcomes, equal protection clause, thurgood marshall, jim crow, public schools, racial inequality, modern civil rights movement, loving v. virginia, court orders, primary and secondary schools, southern manifesto, choice programs, strict scrutiny, empirical evidence, charter schools, integrated schooling, miscegenation laws, rick banks, desegregation, civil rights movement, milliken case, education reform, san antonio v. rodriguez, school integration, federal constitutional right to education, fair housing act, vouchers, public school system, supreme court, voting rights act, civil rights act, rich ford, educational disparities false full 135 ac8f3119-5c15-49ea-8f1c-733bd03311e7 Stanford's David Sklansky on Trump's Many Trials 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:

Links:

[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Progress and Impact of the New York Trial

  • Discussion 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 Order

  • Trump'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 Complexity

  • Discussion 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.

]]> Thu, 9 May 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Progress and Impact of the New York Trial

  • Discussion 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 Order

  • Trump'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 Complexity

  • Discussion 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.

]]> Stanford's David Sklansky on Trump's Many Trials Stanford Law School 00:27:42 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor David Sklansky the many trials of former president Trump. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor David Sklansky the many trials of former president Trump. trial efficiency, state prosecution, trial scheduling, jury instruction, civil cases, january 6th incident., presidential interference, donald trump trials, witness testimony, hush money payments, department of justice, prosecution strategy, jury selection, trial timeline, jury conviction, retrial, immunity from prosecution, trial delays, trial strategy, trial theory, extramarital flings, trial verdict, rich ford, stormy daniels, pam karlan, trial progress, trial speed, falsification of business records, contempt order, supreme court ruling, underlying crime, gag order, hung jury, david sklansky, criminal contempt, new york case false full 134 807282ab-d2c1-4003-a0b9-49a09bd1a38f AI in Government and Governing AI: A Discussion with Stanford’s RegLab 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:

Links:

[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Setting the Stage

  • Mention 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 IRS

  • Explanation 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 Perspective

  • Christie 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 Justice

  • Pam 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 Directions

  • Optimism 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.

]]> Thu, 25 Apr 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Setting the Stage

  • Mention 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 IRS

  • Explanation 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 Perspective

  • Christie 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 Justice

  • Pam 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 Directions

  • Optimism 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.

]]> AI in Government and Governing AI: A Discussion with Stanford’s RegLab Stanford Law School 00:32:07 Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Daniel Ho and Christie Lawrence, JD ’24, from Stanford's RegLab on governing AI. Join Pam and Rich for a discussion with Professor Daniel Ho and Christie Lawrence, JD ’24, from Stanford's RegLab on governing AI. ai talent, consumer privacy., doj civil rights division, public service, european union, biden administration, state legislation, irs collaboration, government governance, algorithmic discrimination, disparities, proprietary systems, information technology, cases mentioned, legacy technology, privacy harms, nuclear missile safety, tax administration, open innovation ecosystem, ai trustworthiness, government approach, legal practice, stanford legal, government accountability, procurement challenges, machine learning, ai expertise, rich ford, immigration reform, pam karlan, bias in ai, intergovernmental personnel act, daniel ho, ai policy, ai phds, reg lab, executive orders, bail and detention hearings, government technology, social justice issues, tax evasion, claims adjudication, government talent exchange, technology acceleration, governance, government ai procurement, risks of ai, digital infrastructure, legislative proposals, risk assessment, department of labor, taxpayers audit, irs overhaul, ai regulation, chatgpt release false full 133 3ee31cf2-4c9a-4fca-a672-cf48fc93e6c0 Representing Clients at the Supreme Court 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Setting the Stage

  • Easha 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 Approach

  • Gareth 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 Case

  • Gareth 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 Arguments

  • Easha 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 Moments

  • Easha 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.

]]> Thu, 11 Apr 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Setting the Stage

  • Easha 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 Approach

  • Gareth 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 Case

  • Gareth 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 Arguments

  • Easha 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 Moments

  • Easha 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.

]]> Representing Clients at the Supreme Court Stanford Law School 00:37:14 Stanford Law Professor Easha Anand, along with Gareth Fowler, JD '24, share impactful stories from their work with the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic. Stanford Law Professor Easha Anand, along with Gareth Fowler, JD '24, share impactful stories from their work with the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic. stanford supreme court clinic, supreme court petition, probable cause, legal issues, police officers, cases, appellate cases, oral argument, ohio, stanford resources, briefs, legal rule, supreme court argument, fourth amendment rights, police misconduct, arrest warrant, whistleblowers, stanford name, sarbanes oxley act, napoleon, united states government, rich ford, pam karlan, jeff fisher, conflicts, easha anand, litigation clinic, appellate lawyer, legal stories, reputation restoration, u.s. supreme court, sixth circuit, reputation, client representation, questions, cert granted, yasha chiavarini, felony money laundering charge, stanford law school, podcast, gareth fowler, stanford legal., third-year law student false full 132 9f1e1ab8-29de-4f91-9595-c8e13d9c33df "Beware Euphoria: Unraveling America's Drug War" 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:

Links:

(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 Incarceration

  • Rich 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 Remarks

  • Rich 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.

]]> Thu, 28 Mar 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(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 Incarceration

  • Rich 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 Remarks

  • Rich 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.

]]> "Beware Euphoria: Unraveling America's Drug War" Stanford Law School 00:30:43 Dive into the complex history of America's drug war with George Fisher, former Massachusetts Attorney General and acclaimed scholar of criminal law. Dive into the complex history of America's drug war with George Fisher, former Massachusetts Attorney General and acclaimed scholar of criminal law. racial animus, alcohol prohibition, michelle alexander, drug laws, evidence law, drug prosecutions, opium dens, drug-related crimes, marijuana prohibition, criminal prosecution, new jim crow, cocaine laws, beware euphoria, plea bargaining, racial disparities, bible belt, schedule i drug, controlled substances act, drug prohibition history, rich ford, stanford legal podcast., legalization efforts, medical cannabis, cannabis legalization, marijuana marketing, george fisher, mass incarceration, criminal law, racial myths, oregon decriminalization reversal, stanford law school, backlash against legalization, far west states, america's war on drugs, nixon administration, marijuana potency, criminal justice system false full 131 11bf34f7-6040-4d47-a3e4-8c8a94acc607 Bill Gould on Dartmouth Basketball and the Changing Game of Unions and College Athletics 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:

Links:

 

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Intersection of Sports and Labor Law

  • Pam 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-Athlete

  • William 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 Athletics

  • Gould 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 Sports

  • Karlan 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 Perspectives

  • The 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 Ahead

  • In 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.

]]> Thu, 14 Mar 2024 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

 

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Intersection of Sports and Labor Law

  • Pam 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-Athlete

  • William 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 Athletics

  • Gould 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 Sports

  • Karlan 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 Perspectives

  • The 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 Ahead

  • In 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.

]]> Bill Gould on Dartmouth Basketball and the Changing Game of Unions and College Athletics Stanford Law School 00:33:16 From the Dartmouth College men's basketball team's union election to the broader challenges facing university athletics, Pam Karlan along with guest labor law expert and former NLRB chair William Gould IV discuss the complex issues shaping the law and the future of collegiate sports. From the Dartmouth College men's basketball team's union election to the broader challenges facing university athletics, Pam Karlan along with guest labor law expert and former NLRB chair William Gould IV discuss the complex issues shaping the law and the future of collegiate sports. conservative supreme court, labor management relations., ncaa, employment relationship, national labor relations board, sports law, dartmouth college men's basketball team, name, image, william b. gould iv, student athletes, dartmouth case, stanford legal, labor law scholar, pam karlan, university athletics, alston decision, workers' rights, antitrust law, northwestern case, collective bargaining, ivy league, higher education institutions, supreme court, student workers, admissions policies, likeness (nil), title ix, union election, litigator false full 129 875a112a-dec1-48ce-99e4-2bc23879518a Are Frozen Embryos Children? A Discussion of the Alabama Decision on Embryo Rights and the Future of IVF Pregnancies in the US 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court Ruling

  • Hank 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 Decision

  • Discussion 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 Embryos

  • Hank 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 Concerns

  • Analysis 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 Reproduction

  • Show 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 Predictions

  • Hank 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.

]]> Thu, 29 Feb 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court Ruling

  • Hank 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 Decision

  • Discussion 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 Embryos

  • Hank 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 Concerns

  • Analysis 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 Reproduction

  • Show 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 Predictions

  • Hank 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.

]]> Are Frozen Embryos Children? A Discussion of the Alabama Decision on Embryo Rights and the Future of IVF Pregnancies in the US Stanford Law School 00:34:37 When does life begin? Rich and Pam talk to bioethics and law expert Hank Greely about the recent decision by the Alabama Supreme Court that has sent shockwaves through the fertility treatment community. When does life begin? Rich and Pam talk to bioethics and law expert Hank Greely about the recent decision by the Alabama Supreme Court that has sent shockwaves through the fertility treatment community. dobbs case, university of alabama, frozen embryos, ivf provider, wrongful death cases, theological conceptions, ivf legislation, hank greely, abortion legislation, alabama jurisprudence, embryos, reproductive liberty, zygotes, stanford legal podcast, fertility treatment, reproductive freedom, unborn children, embryo freezing, rich ford, pam karlan, federal rules of civil procedure, supreme court opinion, alabama supreme court decision, political implications., ivf clinics, embryo destruction, fetal personhood, civil appellate court, wrongful death statute, trial court, alabama supreme court, pro-life movement, embryo protection, senator tuberville, in vitro fertilization, roe v. wade false full 130 eddec02d-515d-4fc1-8b0a-3cace1c5251b Tackling Mass Incarceration in the US 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:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tackling Mass Incarceration in the US Stanford Law School 00:30:01 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?  We hear from 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. 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?  We hear from 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. false full 128 bcf9d66e-c4c2-432e-9cc1-9b96a02a5b58 The Constitution, Trump, and the Struggles of US Courts to Interpret History with Jack Rakove 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:

Links:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 1 Feb 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Jack Rakove, Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Company) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Constitution, Trump, and the Struggles of US Courts to Interpret History with Jack Rakove Jack Rakove, Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Company 00:25:47 Pulitzer Prize winning historian Jack Rakove discusses the U.S. Constitution, originalism, charges against former president Donald Trump, and the role of historians in constitutional litigation. Pulitzer Prize winning historian Jack Rakove discusses the U.S. Constitution, originalism, charges against former president Donald Trump, and the role of historians in constitutional litigation. us constitution, trump, rakove, stanford, impeachment, january 6, originalism, insurrection, primary ballots, pulitzer prize winner, criminal, constitutional litigation, donald trump, historian, colorado false full 127 7d649aca-624a-4d5d-867c-19332772ab1c Droughts, Failing Infrastructure, and Water 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:

Links:

Chapter 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 Today

The 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 Rights

Australia'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.

]]> Thu, 18 Jan 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Rich Ford, Pam Karlan, Podium Podcast Company, Barton "Buzz" H. Thompson Jr.) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Links:

Chapter 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 Today

The 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 Rights

Australia'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.

]]> Droughts, Failing Infrastructure, and Water Rich Ford, Pam Karlan, Podium Podcast Company, Barton "Buzz" H. Thompson Jr. 00:28:04 How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis. How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis. resource recovery, paul milgrom, water entitlements, environmental protection, legal evolution, water distribution, adaptive water systems, safe drinking water, water markets, tradable water rights, water security, environmental conservation, freshwater scarcity, sustainable solutions, climate change impact, stanford legal, liquid asset: how business and government can partner to solve the freshwater crisis, water allocation, water policy, water systems, market-oriented rights, rich ford, pam karlan, water allocation paradigm, water equity, global water crisis, aging infrastructure, infrastructure overhaul, legal reform, water law, barton h. thompson jr., liquid asset book, buzz thompson, 21st-century water rights, water challenges, water access, infrastructure challenges, stanford law school, prior appropriation system, murray-darling basin water management, sustainable water false full 126 4dbde9b8-13b9-4810-99b7-762b30a2b1b8 Does Inequity in U.S. Patent Inventorship Matter? A Discussion on Inequality in the Patent System and how it Impacts Innovation 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Patent System Overview

The 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 System

Disparities within the patent system, and discussion on the lower representation of women and minorities in obtaining patents.

(00:07:15) The Innovator-Inventor Gap

Exploring the gap between authorship on scientific papers and recognition as patent inventors & potential mechanisms causing it.

(00:11:15)  Impact of Patent Recognition

The significance of being listed as a patent inventor: impact on career, earnings, and professional reputation. 

(00:13:33) Innovation Type with Diverse Inventorship

Insights into the potential shift in innovation focus due to diversity within inventor teams.

 (00:14:54) Addressing Inequity: Policy Reforms

Challenges 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 Challenges

Speculations 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.

]]> Thu, 4 Jan 2024 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Company, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction and Patent System Overview

The 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 System

Disparities within the patent system, and discussion on the lower representation of women and minorities in obtaining patents.

(00:07:15) The Innovator-Inventor Gap

Exploring the gap between authorship on scientific papers and recognition as patent inventors & potential mechanisms causing it.

(00:11:15)  Impact of Patent Recognition

The significance of being listed as a patent inventor: impact on career, earnings, and professional reputation. 

(00:13:33) Innovation Type with Diverse Inventorship

Insights into the potential shift in innovation focus due to diversity within inventor teams.

 (00:14:54) Addressing Inequity: Policy Reforms

Challenges 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 Challenges

Speculations 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.

]]> Does Inequity in U.S. Patent Inventorship Matter? A Discussion on Inequality in the Patent System and how it Impacts Innovation Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Company, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette 00:21:37 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. 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. career impact, innovation equity, innovation landscape, patents, inclusion in patents, patent accessibility, inequities, diversity, equity, ai in patents, intellectual property, ai-generated ideas, transformative change, patent credit allocation, unconscious biases, rich ford, pam karlan, patent system, patent examination, gender disparities, policy reforms, recognition bias, legal hurdles, racial minorities, inclusive patenting, professional advancement, improving equity in patent inventorship, lisa ouellette, innovation, innovation potential, patent application process, low-income backgrounds, underrepresented groups, stanford legal., societal implications false full 125 197ff60b-a977-4a5f-a77a-e877ee73b363 Texas Abortion Restrictions, Medicated Abortions, and Reproduction Rights in a Post-Roe US  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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Rich Ford introduces the episode and highlights the significant changes in abortion laws over recent years. 

(00:01:08) Current Legal Context

Pam 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 Case

Focus 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 States

The 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 Scenarios

Discussion 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 Challenges

Insights 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 Dynamics

Exploration 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 Narratives

Discussion 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 Activism

The 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 Arenas

Examples 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.

]]> Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Co.) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/  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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Rich Ford introduces the episode and highlights the significant changes in abortion laws over recent years. 

(00:01:08) Current Legal Context

Pam 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 Case

Focus 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 States

The 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 Scenarios

Discussion 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 Challenges

Insights 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 Dynamics

Exploration 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 Narratives

Discussion 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 Activism

The 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 Arenas

Examples 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.

]]> Texas Abortion Restrictions, Medicated Abortions, and Reproduction Rights in a Post-Roe US Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Co. 00:30:23 Less than two years on, we are seeing how overturning Roe v. Wade is playing out as women navigate a divided country with a patchwork of reproductive rights. We hear from co-host Pam Karlan, an expert in reproductive law, about the Texas case and reproductive rights in the US after Roe was overturned. Less than two years on, we are seeing how overturning Roe v. Wade is playing out as women navigate a divided country with a patchwork of reproductive rights. We hear from co-host Pam Karlan, an expert in reproductive law, about the Texas case and reproductive rights in the US after Roe was overturned. state politics, dobbs case, state restrictions, abortion rights, medical abortions, nationwide bans, women's reproductive rights, activism and advocacy, stanford legal, interstate travel, reproductive freedom, texas abortion laws, women's healthcare, rich ford, state referendums, pam karlan, commerce clause, planned parenthood v. casey, federal legislation, federal intervention, judicial interpretation, legal landscape, legislative filibuster, political polarization, supreme court decisions, surgical abortions, judicial activism, kate cox, political controversy, constitutional rights, constitutional amendments, healthcare access, roe v. wade, societal implications false full 124 a84c889a-bb08-4f4e-b2ba-3cc3dfdefa77 Mass Shootings and Guns: Examining the Court’s Interpretation of the Right to Bear Arms and the Consequences of Gun Laws in the US 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:

Chapters:

(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 America
The 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 Case
Analyzing 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 Party
Exploring 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 Proliferation
John 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.

]]> Thu, 7 Dec 2023 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, John Donohue, Podium Podcast Co.) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Chapters:

(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 America
The 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 Case
Analyzing 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 Party
Exploring 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 Proliferation
John 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.

]]> Mass Shootings and Guns: Examining the Court’s Interpretation of the Right to Bear Arms and the Consequences of Gun Laws in the US Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, John Donohue, Podium Podcast Co. 00:28:53 Explore recent 2nd Amendment Supreme Court cases, the evolution of gun laws, and the implications of increased gun accessibility in the U.S. with John Donohue, an expert on firearms and the law. Explore recent 2nd Amendment Supreme Court cases, the evolution of gun laws, and the implications of increased gun accessibility in the U.S. with John Donohue, an expert on firearms and the law. weapon lethality, societal impacts of guns, firearms legislation, impulsive suicides and guns, gun control debates, stanford legal podcast, societal consequences of gun proliferation, second amendment jurisprudence, rich ford, pam karlan, expanded gun ownership, gun lobby evolution, new york state rifle & pistol association v. bruen, impact on homicides, community policing, john donahue, second amendment interpretation, assault weapons, access to firearms, mass shootings, gun safety measures, gun proliferation, nra, law enforcement and guns, constitutional rights, united states v. rahimi, supreme court rulings false full 123 eab5de01-79fe-4634-aeec-77dc8b7a8fc5 From Sumptuary Laws to Senate Suits: Dress Codes in History and Today 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Pam 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 Drama

The 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 Office

Analysis 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 Messages

Examination of the message behind politicians & tech industry dress choices to send a message

(00:09:47) The Personal Side of Dress Codes

Rich 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 Ages

Discussion 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 Campuses

Exploration 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 Attire

Examination 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 Challenges

In-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 Codes

Reflection 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 Perspective

Exploration 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.

]]> Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Co., Pam Karlan) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Pam 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 Drama

The 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 Office

Analysis 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 Messages

Examination of the message behind politicians & tech industry dress choices to send a message

(00:09:47) The Personal Side of Dress Codes

Rich 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 Ages

Discussion 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 Campuses

Exploration 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 Attire

Examination 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 Challenges

In-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 Codes

Reflection 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 Perspective

Exploration 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.

]]> From Sumptuary Laws to Senate Suits: Dress Codes in History and Today Rich Ford, Podium Podcast Co., Pam Karlan 00:27:37 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. 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. fashion trends, gender identity, personal expression, how the laws of fashion made history', senate dress code, equality, equality, civil rights, fashion and law, societal norms, sumptuary laws, stanford law, discrimination, identity politics, stanford legal, rich ford, social justice, pam karlan, gender, 'dress codes, legal history, dress codes, religious freedom, legal cases, roles, workplace, cultural significance, gender equality false full 122 e5aaa80e-e800-4ff4-8414-112f005bef36 Stanford Legal Podcast Trailer: Law Matters, we're here to help make sense of it 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 13 Nov 2023 19:39:30 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Stanford Legal Podcast Trailer: Law Matters, we're here to help make sense of it Pam Karlan, Rich Ford 00:03:49 Make sure you're following the podcast to get new episodes as they drop. And "hit the bell" in Spotify. Make sure you're following the podcast to get new episodes as they drop. And "hit the bell" in Spotify. voting maps, pam karlin, stanford's supreme court litigation clinic, indictments, employment discrimination, chat gpt, podcast trailer, jim crow laws, california fair political practices commission, new episodes thursdays, siriusxm, subscribe stanford legal, podcast app, election law, teaser episode, follow, chat gpt legal status, critical race theory, conservatorship, law and democracy, britney spears, subscribe, american law, naacp legal defense fund, social media influence, college admissions, stanford legal podcast, law and popular culture, stanford legal, law and equality, local government law, gender equality in law, abortion law, rich ford, russian business laws, legal commentary, pam karlan, ukraine, new technologies, dress codes book, legal stories, copyright law, lgbt legal issues, legal questions, u.s. legal system, on-demand legal podcast, new episodes, ai hiring, supreme court, stanford criminal justice center, convicted criminals, copyright, legal podcast, russian business, criminal law, u.s. department of justice, prison sentences, abortion decision, affirmative action, donald trump, machine learning and law, legal cases, stanford law school, social media and elections, elections, trailer, joe bankman, relaunch, david sklansky, ai regulation, american law firms, legal rights false trailer 9739ce56-001e-43a9-a8e1-48a9b8ed6145 Expert Insights on Trump Indictments from David Sklansky 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Rich 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 Charges

Analysis 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 Strategies

Prediction 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 Cases

Sklansky discusses the particular challenges the judges are facing presiding over these trials.

(00:15:04) Ensuring an Unbiased Jury

Discussion 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 Codefendants

Analysis of co-defendants in the cases, highlighting the New York and Georgia indictments. 

(00:22:24) Strategic Implications of Conviction

Discussion on how trial outcomes may influence co-defendants' decisions & their repeated testimonies and its impact on legal proceedings.

(00:24:18) Legal Representation Challenges

Examination 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 Future

Discussion 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.

]]> Thu, 9 Nov 2023 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Rich Ford, David Sklansky, Pam Karlan, Podium Podcasts) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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:

Chapters:

(00:00:00) Introduction

Rich 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 Charges

Analysis 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 Strategies

Prediction 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 Cases

Sklansky discusses the particular challenges the judges are facing presiding over these trials.

(00:15:04) Ensuring an Unbiased Jury

Discussion 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 Codefendants

Analysis of co-defendants in the cases, highlighting the New York and Georgia indictments. 

(00:22:24) Strategic Implications of Conviction

Discussion on how trial outcomes may influence co-defendants' decisions & their repeated testimonies and its impact on legal proceedings.

(00:24:18) Legal Representation Challenges

Examination 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 Future

Discussion 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.

]]> Expert Insights on Trump Indictments from David Sklansky Rich Ford, David Sklansky, Pam Karlan, Podium Podcasts 00:28:17 The many indictments against Donald Trump have left many scratching their heads. Here to help make sense of it is former prosecutor and criminal law expert David Alan Sklansky. The many indictments against Donald Trump have left many scratching their heads. Here to help make sense of it is former prosecutor and criminal law expert David Alan Sklansky. judicial system analysis, high-profile trials, david alan sklansky, trump legal challenges, witness testimonies, american democracy, democracy and justice, defamation lawsuits, legal complexities, stanford law, election interference, legal strategy insights, judicial decision-making u.s. legal landscape, legal battles podcast, rich ford, pam karlan, political influence in courts, fraud allegations, courtroom drama, criminal indictments, trump business records, former president trials, donald trump, presidential prosecution false full 121 21ab9e1d-44ad-4378-80d8-c1e681511877 This Thursday: Stanford Legal Returns with Expert Insights on Trump Indictments from David Sklansky 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 6 Nov 2023 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, David Sklansky) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> This Thursday: Stanford Legal Returns with Expert Insights on Trump Indictments from David Sklansky Pam Karlan, Rich Ford, David Sklansky 00:01:41 Join us this Thursday for the return of Stanford Legal. Join us this Thursday for the return of Stanford Legal. pam karlin, indictments, chat gpt, siriusxm, podcast app, teaser episode, follow, conservatorship, britney spears, subscribe, social media influence, stanford legal, rich ford, ukraine, new technologies, legal stories, legal questions, new episodes, ai hiring, supreme court, stanford criminal justice center, convicted criminals, copyright, legal podcast, russian business, criminal law, prison sentences, abortion decision, donald trump, elections, relaunch, david sklansky, american law firms false bonus d04f04b6-2084-4a6e-a5a0-fd705ad7859d Stanford Legal is Back: Law Matters, we're here to help make sense of it 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Thu, 2 Nov 2023 13:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Pam Karlan, Rich Ford) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ 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 Website

Connect:


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Stanford Legal is Back: Law Matters, we're here to help make sense of it Pam Karlan, Rich Ford 00:03:49 Returning to your podcast feed November 9th. Make sure you're following the podcast. Returning to your podcast feed November 9th. Make sure you're following the podcast. voting maps, pam karlin, stanford's supreme court litigation clinic, indictments, employment discrimination, chat gpt, jim crow laws, california fair political practices commission, new episodes thursdays, siriusxm, subscribe stanford legal, podcast app, election law, teaser episode, follow, chat gpt legal status, critical race theory, conservatorship, law and democracy, britney spears, subscribe, american law, naacp legal defense fund, social media influence, college admissions, stanford legal podcast, law and popular culture, stanford legal, law and equality, local government law, gender equality in law, abortion law, rich ford, russian business laws, legal commentary, pam karlan, ukraine, new technologies, dress codes book, legal stories, copyright law, lgbt legal issues, legal questions, u.s. legal system, on-demand legal podcast, new episodes, ai hiring, supreme court, stanford criminal justice center, convicted criminals, copyright, legal podcast, russian business, criminal law, u.s. department of justice, prison sentences, abortion decision, affirmative action, donald trump, machine learning and law, legal cases, social media and elections, elections, relaunch, david sklansky, ai regulation, american law firms, legal rights false bonus be9f9262-d4f6-4ea8-b8fe-713df4f2aba4 Mishandling of Top-Secret Government Documents and the Mounting Legal Challenges Facing Donald J. Trump with David Sklansky Mon, 29 Aug 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Mishandling of Top-Secret Government Documents and the Mounting Legal Challenges Facing Donald J. Trump with David Sklansky Stanford Law School 00:36:40 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. 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. false full 120 a6552437-8440-4a2f-8965-08bedafb8ec4 The New Supreme Court and Its Blockbuster Term with Pamela Karlan Mon, 15 Aug 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The New Supreme Court and Its Blockbuster Term with Pamela Karlan Stanford Law School 00:28:04 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. 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. false full 118 8931fc0b-a20f-4d7a-a392-7f49b5864b4a The Fight to Save the Town: Reimagining Discarded America with Michelle Wilde Anderson Mon, 15 Aug 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Fight to Save the Town: Reimagining Discarded America with Michelle Wilde Anderson Stanford Law School 00:27:55 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. 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. false full 119 b2ff6fd2-d9a2-4806-aa87-72448370d622 What have we learned so far from the January 6 hearings, with Robert Weisberg Mon, 1 Aug 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ What have we learned so far from the January 6 hearings, with Robert Weisberg Stanford Law School 00:27:59 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. 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. false full 116 5a65a7c1-732f-4549-85e6-7b59a907089a Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election with Michael McConnell Mon, 1 Aug 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election with Michael McConnell Stanford Law School 00:28:02 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.” 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.” false full 117 f7a485c3-55ab-4f7e-96f6-4756d58fb89c Money, Guns, and Lawyers: The Uniquely American Epidemic of Mass Shootings Mon, 20 Jun 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Money, Guns, and Lawyers: The Uniquely American Epidemic of Mass Shootings Stanford Law School 00:27:26 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. 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. false full 115 688e5a71-4883-43e7-a93f-fd4b1a2e5730 Law Firms and Russian Profits with Robert Daines Mon, 9 May 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Law Firms and Russian Profits with Robert Daines Stanford Law School 00:27:03 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. 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. false full 113 d14ae545-ba8f-4ee0-a114-0a49ee21873e Overturning Roe and the Future of Abortion in the U.S. with Bernadette Meyler Mon, 9 May 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Overturning Roe and the Future of Abortion in the U.S. with Bernadette Meyler Stanford Law School 00:27:42 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. 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. false full 114 2b3af7a0-5d44-4f3e-9c5a-6b6cb42fcae0 Environmental, Social, and Governance Funds with Paul Brest and Colleen Honigsberg Mon, 25 Apr 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Environmental, Social, and Governance Funds with Paul Brest and Colleen Honigsberg Stanford Law School 00:27:43 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. 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. false full 112 5303de0f-bdd3-441d-af57-acb31b8eacfb Stanford Environmental Law Clinic’s Critical Environmental Cases with Debbie Sivas, Chris Meyer, and Sidni Frederick Mon, 25 Apr 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Environmental Law Clinic’s Critical Environmental Cases with Debbie Sivas, Chris Meyer, and Sidni Frederick Stanford Law School 00:27:35 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. 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. false full 111 5071392a-1981-48ef-bef0-d39947a5559c The Legacy of Justice Stephen Breyer Mon, 14 Mar 2022 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Legacy of Justice Stephen Breyer Stanford Law School 00:27:37 The Legacy of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is discussed by Stanford Law School Dean Jenny Martinez, who clerked for Breyer. The Legacy of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is discussed by Stanford Law School Dean Jenny Martinez, who clerked for Breyer. false full 110 d9ca9cca-e0a7-4f58-a4db-59c88c815769 Covid-19, mask and vaccine mandates, and Continued Challenges Facing America’s Teachers Mon, 28 Feb 2022 19:59:05 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Covid-19, mask and vaccine mandates, and Continued Challenges Facing America’s Teachers Stanford Law School 00:27:32 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. 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. false full 109 0c7cc966-effc-49ac-95ec-87c8fc86eeae The Closing of the American Mind? A Discussion about Critical Race Theory, Book Banning, and More Mon, 28 Feb 2022 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Closing of the American Mind? A Discussion about Critical Race Theory, Book Banning, and More Stanford Law School 00:27:26 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 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 false full 108 14c65429-5800-4aba-84d0-692035af3089 SF Board Supervisor Matt Haney on the Challenges of Crime and Homelessness in Big Cities Mon, 14 Feb 2022 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ SF Board Supervisor Matt Haney on the Challenges of Crime and Homelessness in Big Cities Stanford Law School 00:27:42 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. 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. false full 107 e015c223-aad7-405c-9177-94f4ac182473 Pandemic Vaccine Mandates at the Supreme Court Mon, 17 Jan 2022 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Pandemic Vaccine Mandates at the Supreme Court Stanford Law School 00:27:01 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. 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. false full 106 385e74f9-b622-402a-8193-c000be073f4b Evictions and How Covid Changed the Discussion about Government Support for Society's Most Vulnerable Mon, 22 Nov 2021 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Evictions and How Covid Changed the Discussion about Government Support for Society's Most Vulnerable Stanford Law School 00:28:05 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. 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. false full 105 13a543af-207f-481e-8679-814919d6af8c Fake it Until You Make It? The Fall of Theranos and the Trial of Elizabeth Holmes Mon, 8 Nov 2021 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Fake it Until You Make It? The Fall of Theranos and the Trial of Elizabeth Holmes Stanford Law School 00:27:49 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. 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. false full 104 8b557f58-3cac-47d1-9c6e-f687909fab63 The Future of Afghanistan and the Rule of Law Mon, 27 Sep 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Future of Afghanistan and the Rule of Law Stanford Law School 00:27:58 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. 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. false full 103 9e8da6ed-52bf-4f2f-8e07-e4b20ba6174f California Burning: Fire, Drought, and Climate Change Mon, 30 Aug 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ California Burning: Fire, Drought, and Climate Change Stanford Law School 00:28:04 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. 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. false full 102 dd486d48-fe7f-43ef-99e2-3073b317bf5c Conservatorships, Britney Spears, and the Law Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Conservatorships, Britney Spears, and the Law Stanford Law School 00:27:58 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. 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. false full 101 f617c734-0745-4fe5-9ed1-a36c334ad95e Taxes, Wealth, and Poverty with Joe Bankman Mon, 5 Jul 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Taxes, Wealth, and Poverty with Joe Bankman Stanford Law School 00:27:57 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? 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? false full 100 10f2d886-0e0b-4168-ba7a-dccecd45abc0 Democracy in Crisis?: The Aftermath of Election 2020, Trump, Facebook’s Oversight Board, and the Rollback of Election Laws Mon, 21 Jun 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Democracy in Crisis?: The Aftermath of Election 2020, Trump, Facebook’s Oversight Board, and the Rollback of Election Laws Stanford Law School 00:28:04 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. 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. false full 99 f697c0a8-4662-46da-9b92-cc10ceb986de Exploring Alternatives to Policing Mon, 10 May 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Exploring Alternatives to Policing Stanford Law School 00:27:04 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. 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. false full 98 30bc05f9-a554-4f1b-894f-13d729cae3bd Three Strikes and You’re Out: Revisiting Laws that Lock Up Nonviolent Offenders w/ Michael Romano Thu, 1 Apr 2021 20:10:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Three Strikes and You’re Out: Revisiting Laws that Lock Up Nonviolent Offenders w/ Michael Romano Stanford Law School 00:27:19 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. 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. false full 97 9e142ddf-1d83-4498-86fc-8958b1f5fc57 Classifying Crimes as Violent and What it Means for Justice Thu, 1 Apr 2021 20:06:24 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Classifying Crimes as Violent and What it Means for Justice Stanford Law School 00:28:26 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. 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. false full 96 65622fea-53e2-484a-b92d-da64b3ed7ddd What How We Dress Matters and Why Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ What How We Dress Matters and Why Stanford Law School 00:28:31 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. 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. false full 95 9415a1aa-9e85-482f-bcdc-4012d96edd03 Vaccines, Testing, and President Biden's Plan to Tackle COVID-19 Mon, 1 Feb 2021 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Vaccines, Testing, and President Biden's Plan to Tackle COVID-19 Stanford Law School 00:27:58 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. 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. false full 94 dd521c2e-7d3a-4530-845d-d0542204951a National Security Law and Homegrown Terrorism in the Wake of the Siege of the U.S. Capitol Building with Shirin Sinnar Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ National Security Law and Homegrown Terrorism in the Wake of the Siege of the U.S. Capitol Building with Shirin Sinnar Stanford Law School 00:27:58 After the siege of the Capitol building on January 6, Americans have been left stunned by the breach of security and concerned about new threats from hate groups and the angry mob. National security law expert Shirin Sinnar joins Pam and Joe to discuss critical legal questions about homegrown terrorism—and those accountable for the insurrection. After the siege of the Capitol building on January 6, Americans have been left stunned by the breach of security and concerned about new threats from hate groups and the angry mob. National security law expert Shirin Sinnar joins Pam and Joe to discuss critical legal questions about homegrown terrorism—and those accountable for the insurrection. false full 93 a36adc3b-3800-40b9-9317-a26ffdb69aa9 Election 2020: False Allegations of Fraud and Incitement to Insurrection with Nate Persily Mon, 18 Jan 2021 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Election 2020: False Allegations of Fraud and Incitement to Insurrection with Nate Persily Stanford Law School 00:27:56 President Trump lost the November, 2020 election but has refused to concede, instead stoking the flames of anger in his supporters by spreading false claims of a stolen election. In this episode, voting law expert Nate Persily joins Pam and Joe to discuss the 2020 election—and why it is considered by experts and government officials alike to have been fair and free of fraud. President Trump lost the November, 2020 election but has refused to concede, instead stoking the flames of anger in his supporters by spreading false claims of a stolen election. In this episode, voting law expert Nate Persily joins Pam and Joe to discuss the 2020 election—and why it is considered by experts and government officials alike to have been fair and free of fraud. false full 92 c8c6195d-808a-4f1b-89b6-b099e84c7c38 Election 2020: Issues During and After Votes are Cast and Counted with Pam Karlan Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Election 2020: Issues During and After Votes are Cast and Counted with Pam Karlan Stanford Law School 00:27:54 President Trump has repeatedly refused to state clearly that he will accept the results of the November election. In so doing, he raises critical questions for American democracy—particularly if the election is close. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan, one of the nation’s leading experts on the law of democracy discusses critical issues in this important election for the next American president. President Trump has repeatedly refused to state clearly that he will accept the results of the November election. In so doing, he raises critical questions for American democracy—particularly if the election is close. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan, one of the nation’s leading experts on the law of democracy discusses critical issues in this important election for the next American president. false full 91 e60fda2b-fdc5-4e40-9114-e8eec307ba0f President Trump's Taxes with Joe Bankman Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ President Trump's Taxes with Joe Bankman Stanford Law School 00:27:52 Revelations about President Trump’s tax returns, and news about how much or how little he has paid to the federal government, have made headlines in recent weeks. In this episode, Stanford Legal co-host Joe Bankman, himself a tax law expert, breaks down the important takeaways from what we know about the President and his taxes. Revelations about President Trump’s tax returns, and news about how much or how little he has paid to the federal government, have made headlines in recent weeks. In this episode, Stanford Legal co-host Joe Bankman, himself a tax law expert, breaks down the important takeaways from what we know about the President and his taxes. false full 90 b8c7f232-da18-4bfd-bc18-2bb397d0c00c What is the Electoral College and is it Fair? with guest Jack Rakove Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ What is the Electoral College and is it Fair? with guest Jack Rakove Stanford Law School 00:27:50 The Electoral College is a uniquely American system, with electors in each state choosing our president rather than the popular vote. After two recent presidents lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College (Bush and Trump), is it outdated and unfair? In this episode, Stanford historian Jack Rakove joins Pam and Joe to discuss the history and present-day relevance of the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a uniquely American system, with electors in each state choosing our president rather than the popular vote. After two recent presidents lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College (Bush and Trump), is it outdated and unfair? In this episode, Stanford historian Jack Rakove joins Pam and Joe to discuss the history and present-day relevance of the Electoral College. false full 89 47fa699e-e1fc-4f45-b905-1ba8dbf21c0d The Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:00:13 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Legacy of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stanford Law School 00:27:04 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the legal icon known as the architect of the legal fight for women’s rights in the 1970s, is remembered in this episode of Stanford Legal by her former SCOTUS clerk Lisa Beattie Frelinghuysen. Join Pam, Joe, and Lisa for this discussion about RBG’s legacy, key cases, and recollections of the notorious justice. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the legal icon known as the architect of the legal fight for women’s rights in the 1970s, is remembered in this episode of Stanford Legal by her former SCOTUS clerk Lisa Beattie Frelinghuysen. Join Pam, Joe, and Lisa for this discussion about RBG’s legacy, key cases, and recollections of the notorious justice. false full 88 c6da14e9-3802-47f8-a5f1-9ccadbc50f29 Voting During the Pandemic: Is Mail-in Voting the Answer? with guests Nate Persily and Chelsey Davidson Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:00:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Voting During the Pandemic: Is Mail-in Voting the Answer? with guests Nate Persily and Chelsey Davidson Stanford Law School 00:27:35 With Covid-19 still spreading in the U.S., and November fast approaching, more Americans are looking to mail-in voting. How can the presidential election be held safely? Voting law expert Nate Persily and law student Chelsey Davidson join Pam and Joe to discuss challenges for voting this year and possible solutions. With Covid-19 still spreading in the U.S., and November fast approaching, more Americans are looking to mail-in voting. How can the presidential election be held safely? Voting law expert Nate Persily and law student Chelsey Davidson join Pam and Joe to discuss challenges for voting this year and possible solutions. false full 86 cc0a2173-6b4f-471f-ad3b-43b013c960d3 Laws of War: The Nuclear Threat 75 Years After Hiroshima with Allen Weiner Mon, 17 Aug 2020 14:00:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Laws of War: The Nuclear Threat 75 Years After Hiroshima with Allen Weiner Stanford Law School 00:28:32 In the heat of war, the legality of the U.S. bombing of Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagsaki in August, 1945 wasn’t questioned. But the devastation of those nuclear bombs, with hundreds of thousands of mostly civilians dead, spurred the international community to look for ways to prevent it from ever happening again. But today, 75 years later, the nuclear threat is more real than ever. In this episode, international law expert Allen Weiner joins Pam and Joe to discuss the law of war and the threat of nuclear weapons after Hiroshima. In the heat of war, the legality of the U.S. bombing of Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagsaki in August, 1945 wasn’t questioned. But the devastation of those nuclear bombs, with hundreds of thousands of mostly civilians dead, spurred the international community to look for ways to prevent it from ever happening again. But today, 75 years later, the nuclear threat is more real than ever. In this episode, international law expert Allen Weiner joins Pam and Joe to discuss the law of war and the threat of nuclear weapons after Hiroshima. false full 87 0a514f2a-4de7-44ad-91e9-961fef1c4cc1 Religious Liberty at the Supreme Court: Education Aid, Medical Coverage, and Employment Discrimination Protections Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:00:09 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Religious Liberty at the Supreme Court: Education Aid, Medical Coverage, and Employment Discrimination Protections Stanford Law School 00:28:06 The Supreme Court recently decided several important First Amendment cases—ones that asked big questions about the rights of religious intuitions to receive federal aid for education, to be held to federal employment discrimination protections, and to cover all employee medical expenses. Join constitutional law expert Michael McConnell for a discussion about religious liberty in the U.S. and these SCOTUS decisions. The Supreme Court recently decided several important First Amendment cases—ones that asked big questions about the rights of religious intuitions to receive federal aid for education, to be held to federal employment discrimination protections, and to cover all employee medical expenses. Join constitutional law expert Michael McConnell for a discussion about religious liberty in the U.S. and these SCOTUS decisions. false full 85 deb6b835-42f7-4566-84e8-18942d6f2848 SCOTUS Native American Jurisdiction Decision and the Blurred Lines of Authority Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:00:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ SCOTUS Native American Jurisdiction Decision and the Blurred Lines of Authority Stanford Law School 00:28:01 Some residents of Tulsa, Oklahoma may be surprised to discover that they live on Native American land. What does that mean legally—for tribal people and others? Join Professor Greg Ablavsky, an expert on American legal history including issues of sovereignty, territory, and property in the early American West, for a discussion of the Supreme Court’s recent decision McGirt v. Oklahoma and important legal issues of Native American lands and governance. Some residents of Tulsa, Oklahoma may be surprised to discover that they live on Native American land. What does that mean legally—for tribal people and others? Join Professor Greg Ablavsky, an expert on American legal history including issues of sovereignty, territory, and property in the early American West, for a discussion of the Supreme Court’s recent decision McGirt v. Oklahoma and important legal issues of Native American lands and governance. false full 84 01072c5d-080c-4a58-8c11-7a80bd596309 At the Breaking Point: Criminal Justice During Covid-19 with Robert Weisberg Mon, 20 Jul 2020 21:27:21 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ At the Breaking Point: Criminal Justice During Covid-19 with Robert Weisberg Stanford Law School 00:28:05 As Covid-19 resurges across the country, it is hitting prisons hard and courts are more backed up than ever. Is the American criminal justice system, already stressed, now at a breaking point? Join Stanford criminal justice expert Robert Weisberg for a discussion of prisons, the courts, and criminal justice during a pandemic. As Covid-19 resurges across the country, it is hitting prisons hard and courts are more backed up than ever. Is the American criminal justice system, already stressed, now at a breaking point? Join Stanford criminal justice expert Robert Weisberg for a discussion of prisons, the courts, and criminal justice during a pandemic. false full 83 fbf73ade-08df-452b-bcb5-edf049f9789a Guns, Suicide, and Covid-19 with David Studdert Mon, 20 Jul 2020 21:17:04 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Guns, Suicide, and Covid-19 with David Studdert Stanford Law School 00:28:01 Join health law expert Professor David Studdert for a discussion of his extensive study of handgun ownership and suicides in California. David will also weigh in on the politicization of the Center for Disease Control particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. Join health law expert Professor David Studdert for a discussion of his extensive study of handgun ownership and suicides in California. David will also weigh in on the politicization of the Center for Disease Control particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic. false full 82 572f53c3-33c9-40ca-9adb-0013d3cf0cd9 Arguing at the Supreme Court: Pam Karlan Discusses the LGBTQ+ Employment Win Mon, 22 Jun 2020 14:00:04 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Arguing at the Supreme Court: Pam Karlan Discusses the LGBTQ+ Employment Win Stanford Law School 00:28:05 Landmark Supreme Court ruling protects gay and transgender workers by federal law from employment discrimination. Landmark Supreme Court ruling protects gay and transgender workers by federal law from employment discrimination. false full 81 5555b7d7-1412-44a5-80b7-43fe53288c91 Race and Policing with guest Professor David Sklansky Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:00:27 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Race and Policing with guest Professor David Sklansky Stanford Law School 00:27:57 Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky, the Faculty Co-Director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, is a former federal prosecutor who served as special counsel to the independent review panel appointed to investigate the Los Angeles Police Department’s Rampart Division scandal that formed in the wake of the Rodney King case. In this episode, Sklansky discusses race and policing in America and how we can reform policing to prevent another George Floyd death in police custody. Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky, the Faculty Co-Director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, is a former federal prosecutor who served as special counsel to the independent review panel appointed to investigate the Los Angeles Police Department’s Rampart Division scandal that formed in the wake of the Rodney King case. In this episode, Sklansky discusses race and policing in America and how we can reform policing to prevent another George Floyd death in police custody. false full 79 9d5375cb-4596-471b-b188-ed4554b149e9 The Challenges of Cases Against the Police with Attorney David Owens Mon, 15 Jun 2020 14:00:27 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Challenges of Cases Against the Police with Attorney David Owens Stanford Law School 00:28:01 The recent killings of unarmed black men in police custody, including George Floyd in Minnesota, have once again sparked outrage and protests across the country and world. In this episode, David Owens, an attorney who has represented clients in several high profile police brutality cases, joins us to talk about the challenges that victims, their families, and their attorneys face when bringing cases against the police. David is a partner at Loevy & Loevy. His practice is national, representing clients from Washington and California, Wisconsin and Illinois, and throughout the South. He is dedicated to zealous, client-centered advocacy on behalf of those seeking vindication for the violation of their civil rights and focuses on cases involving wrongful convictions, police shootings and other excessive force, false arrests, free speech rights, race discrimination, and other violations of the U.S. Constitution. David is also a Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago, where he co-teaches in the school’s world-famous pro bono wrongful conviction clinic, The Exoneration Project. The recent killings of unarmed black men in police custody, including George Floyd in Minnesota, have once again sparked outrage and protests across the country and world. In this episode, David Owens, an attorney who has represented clients in several high profile police brutality cases, joins us to talk about the challenges that victims, their families, and their attorneys face when bringing cases against the police. David is a partner at Loevy & Loevy. His practice is national, representing clients from Washington and California, Wisconsin and Illinois, and throughout the South. He is dedicated to zealous, client-centered advocacy on behalf of those seeking vindication for the violation of their civil rights and focuses on cases involving wrongful convictions, police shootings and other excessive force, false arrests, free speech rights, race discrimination, and other violations of the U.S. Constitution. David is also a Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago, where he co-teaches in the school’s world-famous pro bono wrongful conviction clinic, The Exoneration Project. false full 80 8c728cb6-96fc-4369-be24-cda78326089e Local Government during the COVID-19 Crisis: A Conversation with San Francisco Supervisor Matt Haney Mon, 1 Jun 2020 14:00:25 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Local Government during the COVID-19 Crisis: A Conversation with San Francisco Supervisor Matt Haney Stanford Law School 00:28:01 As one of the first municipalities in the nation to declare a shelter in place order, San Francisco has been on the frontline as a public policy leader during the COVID-19 crisis. Join us for a discussion with Board Supervisor Matt Haney about the challenges facing the City by the Bay, from the decision to shut down, to controlling the disease for all citizens including the growing homeless population, to how to open up schools and businesses safely. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 30, 2020. As one of the first municipalities in the nation to declare a shelter in place order, San Francisco has been on the frontline as a public policy leader during the COVID-19 crisis. Join us for a discussion with Board Supervisor Matt Haney about the challenges facing the City by the Bay, from the decision to shut down, to controlling the disease for all citizens including the growing homeless population, to how to open up schools and businesses safely. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 30, 2020. false full 78 bf40b414-38c0-4f92-a12b-0e397cc009d9 Can Bankruptcy Help Companies Weather the COVID Crisis? Mon, 18 May 2020 14:00:03 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Can Bankruptcy Help Companies Weather the COVID Crisis? Stanford Law School 00:27:58 On May 4, J.Crew became the first major American retailer to file for bankruptcy, with Neiman Marcus and Gold’s Gym quickly following. With unemployment at record levels and a wave of bankruptcies expected, the COVID-19 health crisis is quickly turning into an economic crisis—despite the CARES Act passed by Congress in April. In this episode of Stanford Legal, bankruptcy law expert and Stanford Law Professor George Triantis explains how current U.S. bankruptcy laws can help us through this crisis and offers his recommendations on what more the government can do. On May 4, J.Crew became the first major American retailer to file for bankruptcy, with Neiman Marcus and Gold’s Gym quickly following. With unemployment at record levels and a wave of bankruptcies expected, the COVID-19 health crisis is quickly turning into an economic crisis—despite the CARES Act passed by Congress in April. In this episode of Stanford Legal, bankruptcy law expert and Stanford Law Professor George Triantis explains how current U.S. bankruptcy laws can help us through this crisis and offers his recommendations on what more the government can do. false full 76 a3632a72-fcf5-46f3-9e05-a3f9bb555534 A Path Back to Normal? Previewing the New Google-Apple COVID-19 Contact TracingTools Mon, 18 May 2020 14:00:02 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ A Path Back to Normal? Previewing the New Google-Apple COVID-19 Contact TracingTools Stanford Law School 00:27:42 Early in May, tech competitors Google and Apple shared sample code for their new contact tracing technology. Hopes are high that apps developed with partnership's technology will help to slow the spread of COVID-19 by using Bluetooth technology in cell phones to contact trace infection. Consulting Director of Privacy at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society joins Pam and Joe to discuss the new tools and privacy concerns surrounding tech in contact tracing Early in May, tech competitors Google and Apple shared sample code for their new contact tracing technology. Hopes are high that apps developed with partnership's technology will help to slow the spread of COVID-19 by using Bluetooth technology in cell phones to contact trace infection. Consulting Director of Privacy at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society joins Pam and Joe to discuss the new tools and privacy concerns surrounding tech in contact tracing false full 77 8dda6e4c-8407-4da2-a761-bf552ced215d Regulating in a Pandemic: COVID-19 Legal Issues with guest Michelle Mello Mon, 27 Apr 2020 22:00:09 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Regulating in a Pandemic: COVID-19 Legal Issues with guest Michelle Mello Stanford Law School 00:28:01 As the number of COVID-19 cases across the U.S. continues to rise, with shelter in place orders in place throughout most of the country, America’s preparedness for a pandemic has been thrown into question. What went wrong with testing and protective gear, and why are we still behind? Can tech help the country safely open up again? And who is in charge—the president or the governors? Health law expert Michelle Mello joins the show today to discuss these developing issues. As the number of COVID-19 cases across the U.S. continues to rise, with shelter in place orders in place throughout most of the country, America’s preparedness for a pandemic has been thrown into question. What went wrong with testing and protective gear, and why are we still behind? Can tech help the country safely open up again? And who is in charge—the president or the governors? Health law expert Michelle Mello joins the show today to discuss these developing issues. false full 75 e8454dad-ce2d-49d8-8f1c-a74befef1f2e Covid-19 Mental Health and Supreme Court Issues Mon, 27 Apr 2020 18:49:48 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Covid-19 Mental Health and Supreme Court Issues Stanford Law School 00:28:07 Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman discuss the ramifications of the the COVID-19 pandemic, both on mental health issues and procedural issues faced by the Supreme Court during this time. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020. Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman discuss the ramifications of the the COVID-19 pandemic, both on mental health issues and procedural issues faced by the Supreme Court during this time. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020. false full 74 aa81dfbe-efc1-4783-b1b5-4c4b392f2bd3 Democracy During a Pandemic: Securing the 2020 Presidential Election with guest Nate Persily Mon, 27 Apr 2020 14:00:08 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Democracy During a Pandemic: Securing the 2020 Presidential Election with guest Nate Persily Stanford Law School 00:28:01 With a vaccine and effective treatment still months away, it is increasingly likely that the COVID-19 pandemic will fundamentally change the 2020 presidential election. After the Wisconsin primary in April reportedly to low turnout and, as recently was reported, the spread of the virus, can in-person voting happen safely? Is mail-in balloting the answer? Here to help us understand how a secure November election can be planned is election law expert Nate Persily. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020. With a vaccine and effective treatment still months away, it is increasingly likely that the COVID-19 pandemic will fundamentally change the 2020 presidential election. After the Wisconsin primary in April reportedly to low turnout and, as recently was reported, the spread of the virus, can in-person voting happen safely? Is mail-in balloting the answer? Here to help us understand how a secure November election can be planned is election law expert Nate Persily. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020. false full 73 efaa494f-19e8-448d-a9c5-cdaed2bf0b4c Racial Justice: Key NAACP Legal Defense Fund Cases with guest Sherrilyn Ifill Mon, 30 Mar 2020 14:00:02 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Racial Justice: Key NAACP Legal Defense Fund Cases with guest Sherrilyn Ifill Stanford Law School 00:28:04 From the groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education case to voting rights and education, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) has been the nation’s premier civil rights law organization fighting for racial justice and equality since its founding in 1940 by legendary civil rights lawyer (and later Supreme Court justice) Thurgood Marshall. Sherrilyn Ifill, LDF’s President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), will discuss important NAACP cases and issues. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 28, 2020. From the groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education case to voting rights and education, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) has been the nation’s premier civil rights law organization fighting for racial justice and equality since its founding in 1940 by legendary civil rights lawyer (and later Supreme Court justice) Thurgood Marshall. Sherrilyn Ifill, LDF’s President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), will discuss important NAACP cases and issues. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 28, 2020. false full 72 e6cae0bf-8119-46f0-8594-64b8940fc3e5 Key Civil Liberties Issues with guest David Cole Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:36:35 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Key Civil Liberties Issues with guest David Cole Stanford Law School 00:29:05 The ACLU has been the nation’s premier defender of civil liberties since its founding 100 years ago. David Cole, the ACLU’s national legal director who oversees its entire legal docket, will discuss key civil liberties issues facing the country today including two LGBTQ rights cases that he recently argued before the Supreme Court in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob The ACLU has been the nation’s premier defender of civil liberties since its founding 100 years ago. David Cole, the ACLU’s national legal director who oversees its entire legal docket, will discuss key civil liberties issues facing the country today including two LGBTQ rights cases that he recently argued before the Supreme Court in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob false full 71 3c94e3dd-3838-4db5-9180-05039adb9f1b Virtual Briefing at the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher Mon, 2 Mar 2020 15:00:31 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Virtual Briefing at the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher Stanford Law School 00:27:47 The open secret of Supreme Court advocacy in a digital era is that there is a new way to argue to the Justices. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman sit down with co-director of the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Jeff Fisher, to discuss his recent article, Virtual Briefing. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The open secret of Supreme Court advocacy in a digital era is that there is a new way to argue to the Justices. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman sit down with co-director of the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Jeff Fisher, to discuss his recent article, Virtual Briefing. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ false full 70 d7e78c62-72d9-426f-a532-d802f7fafc0e How We Elect the President with guest Michael McConnell Tue, 18 Feb 2020 23:17:37 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ How We Elect the President with guest Michael McConnell Stanford Law School 00:28:04 In the wake of the first wave of primary voting, former judge and Constitutional Law Professor Michael McConnell will discuss how we elect the President in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. What are the caucus, primary, and convention systems? Why do we have an electoral college? Is there a good system for resolving disputed elections? For more episodes visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ In the wake of the first wave of primary voting, former judge and Constitutional Law Professor Michael McConnell will discuss how we elect the President in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. What are the caucus, primary, and convention systems? Why do we have an electoral college? Is there a good system for resolving disputed elections? For more episodes visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ false full 69 37674c75-87e1-4756-b9d5-8499d8453f80 Mandating Diversity on Company Boards Mon, 3 Feb 2020 15:00:06 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Mandating Diversity on Company Boards Stanford Law School 00:27:30 Equality for women in the U.S. is still an uphill battle, the wage and leadership gap a challenge 100 years after passage of the19th Amendment. But can gender equality be regulated with law and quotas? California is trying in one narrow area—the boards of public companies—with a new law mandating gender diversity on those boards. Joe Grundfest, a former SEC commissioner and expert on corporate governance, and Gail Harris, who serves as lead director of investment banking advisory firm Evercore Inc., discuss the law, possible challenges to it, and why it matters in this episode of "Stanford Legal." For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Equality for women in the U.S. is still an uphill battle, the wage and leadership gap a challenge 100 years after passage of the19th Amendment. But can gender equality be regulated with law and quotas? California is trying in one narrow area—the boards of public companies—with a new law mandating gender diversity on those boards. Joe Grundfest, a former SEC commissioner and expert on corporate governance, and Gail Harris, who serves as lead director of investment banking advisory firm Evercore Inc., discuss the law, possible challenges to it, and why it matters in this episode of "Stanford Legal." For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ false full 68 106f9e47-4a5a-4310-a189-4cbd188d5c17 The Trump Impeachment with guest David Sklansky Mon, 20 Jan 2020 15:00:01 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Trump Impeachment with guest David Sklansky Stanford Law School 00:28:04 In December, the U.S. House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against the president focusing on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Only three U.S. presidents have been formally impeached by the House, including Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and now Donald Trump. So far, not one has been removed from office. In this episode, we are joined by former prosecutor and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky to look at impeachment through the lens of the prosecutor. Did the House make a good case? What are the legal procedural questions? In December, the U.S. House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against the president focusing on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Only three U.S. presidents have been formally impeached by the House, including Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and now Donald Trump. So far, not one has been removed from office. In this episode, we are joined by former prosecutor and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky to look at impeachment through the lens of the prosecutor. Did the House make a good case? What are the legal procedural questions? false full 67 9ae80025-dddb-46b6-bff9-80a29c483b9a New Study On Gun Carry Laws and Violent Crime with guest John Donohue Mon, 25 Nov 2019 15:00:09 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ New Study On Gun Carry Laws and Violent Crime with guest John Donohue Stanford Law School 00:27:29 Pam and Joe welcome John Donohue, Stanford Law Professor, who talks about his new research looking at concealed carry gun laws and the Assault Weapons Ban. Originally aired on November 22, 2019 Pam and Joe welcome John Donohue, Stanford Law Professor, who talks about his new research looking at concealed carry gun laws and the Assault Weapons Ban. Originally aired on November 22, 2019 false full 66 7e7d73f3-c914-4409-a6a3-3116737e0c6e The Women Upstarts of Silicon Valley with Julian Guthrie and M.J. Elmore Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:00:05 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Women Upstarts of Silicon Valley with Julian Guthrie and M.J. Elmore Stanford Law School 00:28:01 While women make up 50+ percent of the population, they are still a minority at most tech companies—and even more so at venture capital firms, where most have no women partners. Julian Guthrie, author of Alpha Girls: The Women Upstarts Who Took on Silicon Valley's Male Culture and Made the Deals of a Lifetime, and Stanford GSB alumna M. J. Elmore, a partner at IVP venture capital and a subject of the book, join Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman to discuss VC culture and the challenges M. J. and other women had to overcome to achieve success. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob While women make up 50+ percent of the population, they are still a minority at most tech companies—and even more so at venture capital firms, where most have no women partners. Julian Guthrie, author of Alpha Girls: The Women Upstarts Who Took on Silicon Valley's Male Culture and Made the Deals of a Lifetime, and Stanford GSB alumna M. J. Elmore, a partner at IVP venture capital and a subject of the book, join Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman to discuss VC culture and the challenges M. J. and other women had to overcome to achieve success. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob false full 65 3653377c-de46-4647-ae4f-c97dad9fde2b Cabinet Vacancies, Actings, and Law with guest Anne Joseph O'Connell Turnover and use of acting officials in the Trump administration is more prevalent than previous administrations, but churn in the White House is not unique to this president. Stanford Law Professor Anne Joseph O’Connell shares her recent research into vacancies in the executive branch and the law.

Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 26, 2019.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mon, 28 Oct 2019 14:00:02 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Turnover and use of acting officials in the Trump administration is more prevalent than previous administrations, but churn in the White House is not unique to this president. Stanford Law Professor Anne Joseph O’Connell shares her recent research into vacancies in the executive branch and the law.

Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 26, 2019.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Cabinet Vacancies, Actings, and Law with guest Anne Joseph O'Connell Stanford Law School 00:28:00 false full 64 7a504665-76aa-402b-8b6c-a620f9b3b061 The Power of the Presidential Pardon with guest Bernadette Meyler Mon, 14 Oct 2019 14:00:02 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Power of the Presidential Pardon with guest Bernadette Meyler Stanford Law School 00:28:00 The U.S. president’s power of pardon dates back to the British monarchy and the “godly” rights of kings, but has the pardon stood the test of time? Listen in as Constitutional Law expert Bernadette Meyler and author of the recent book, “Theaters of Pardoning,” discusses modern-day pardons and the evolution of the law. Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 12, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. The U.S. president’s power of pardon dates back to the British monarchy and the “godly” rights of kings, but has the pardon stood the test of time? Listen in as Constitutional Law expert Bernadette Meyler and author of the recent book, “Theaters of Pardoning,” discusses modern-day pardons and the evolution of the law. Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 12, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 63 4a3d3bf4-4d09-4af9-9c06-2b4558c8275e San Francisco in the Long Shadow of the Valley with guest Cary McClelland Tue, 1 Oct 2019 14:00:14 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ San Francisco in the Long Shadow of the Valley with guest Cary McClelland Stanford Law School 00:28:00 Stanford Law School alum Cary McClelland’s book “Silicon City” was mailed to 1,700 incoming Stanford freshmen over the summer as part of the Three Books program, which this year invited students to think about the ways cities shape experiences and social relationships. Listen as McClelland shares what he’s learned interviewing San Francisco residents whose lives have been transformed by Silicon Valley. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 28, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Law School alum Cary McClelland’s book “Silicon City” was mailed to 1,700 incoming Stanford freshmen over the summer as part of the Three Books program, which this year invited students to think about the ways cities shape experiences and social relationships. Listen as McClelland shares what he’s learned interviewing San Francisco residents whose lives have been transformed by Silicon Valley. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 28, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 62 e976fb59-c8c3-44c8-aaea-00af1fecbabe Wealth, Inequality, and Taxes with Jacob Goldin Mon, 16 Sep 2019 14:00:06 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Wealth, Inequality, and Taxes with Jacob Goldin Stanford Law School 00:28:01 Taxes help to pave our roads and even change our behavior. Can they also help to decrease extreme wealth inequality in the U.S.? Listen in as tax law experts Jacob Goldin and Joe Bankman discuss some of the latest taxation plans. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 14, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Taxes help to pave our roads and even change our behavior. Can they also help to decrease extreme wealth inequality in the U.S.? Listen in as tax law experts Jacob Goldin and Joe Bankman discuss some of the latest taxation plans. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 14, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 61 aed6c250-7ee2-4dd2-8394-2a89d5b0d196 Law and Access to Education with Bill Koski Mon, 2 Sep 2019 14:00:04 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Law and Access to Education with Bill Koski Stanford Law School 00:27:59 Access to quality education is important to everyone. But what does that mean if you live in the wrong zip code or have a disability? How do we define a quality education? How is the law developing in this area? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Bill Koski discusses this vital right in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 31, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Access to quality education is important to everyone. But what does that mean if you live in the wrong zip code or have a disability? How do we define a quality education? How is the law developing in this area? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Bill Koski discusses this vital right in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 31, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 60 225cfc78-998f-4ab6-a09b-96a415c73915 An Immigration Update with Lucas Guttentag & Julia Neusner Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:00:05 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ An Immigration Update with Lucas Guttentag & Julia Neusner Stanford Law School 00:27:59 What is driving the challenges at America’s southern border, with a surge in the number of asylum-seekers waiting to file claims? And how is the law developing for illegal immigrants already here? Immigration law expert Lucas Guttentag joins Stanford Law student Julia Neusner to discuss the situation at the border and legal issues surrounding immigration. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 17, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. What is driving the challenges at America’s southern border, with a surge in the number of asylum-seekers waiting to file claims? And how is the law developing for illegal immigrants already here? Immigration law expert Lucas Guttentag joins Stanford Law student Julia Neusner to discuss the situation at the border and legal issues surrounding immigration. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 17, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 59 60aaba8e-cac8-40ec-ac3b-14dbcdf19192 The Changing Landscape of Auditor Litigation and It's Implications for Audit Quality with Colleen Honigsberg Mon, 5 Aug 2019 08:00:09 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Changing Landscape of Auditor Litigation and It's Implications for Audit Quality with Colleen Honigsberg Stanford Law School 00:28:01 Companies like Apple, Google and Walmart report earnings each year. They also report on social justice issues, like carbon emissions and child labor. These are important reports, with important implications for shareholders and the public. But how do we know they're accurate? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Colleen Honigsberg discusses auditing. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Companies like Apple, Google and Walmart report earnings each year. They also report on social justice issues, like carbon emissions and child labor. These are important reports, with important implications for shareholders and the public. But how do we know they're accurate? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Colleen Honigsberg discusses auditing. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 58 0362bb02-2eda-4b0c-87e1-4b1cfbb205e6 The Fight For Women's Reproductive Rights with Jane Schacter Mon, 5 Aug 2019 07:00:40 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Fight For Women's Reproductive Rights with Jane Schacter Stanford Law School 00:28:01 Women’s reproductive rights are in the news again, but what exactly are these rights—and what guarantees are they granted under the U.S. Constitution? Constitutional law expert Professor Jane Schacter joins Stanford physicians Jenn Conti and Erica Cahill. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Women’s reproductive rights are in the news again, but what exactly are these rights—and what guarantees are they granted under the U.S. Constitution? Constitutional law expert Professor Jane Schacter joins Stanford physicians Jenn Conti and Erica Cahill. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 57 befe0353-c573-43ff-b497-e9869321c1fd Supreme Court: A Crucial Year for Democracy with Pam Karlan and Brian Fletcher Mon, 22 Jul 2019 08:00:07 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Supreme Court: A Crucial Year for Democracy with Pam Karlan and Brian Fletcher Stanford Law School 00:28:02 Professor Pamela Karlan and Brian Fletcher discuss gerrymandering, the 2020 census, and two of the most important decisions from the Supreme Court’s recent term. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob Professor Pamela Karlan and Brian Fletcher discuss gerrymandering, the 2020 census, and two of the most important decisions from the Supreme Court’s recent term. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob false full 56 3ec9947f-7915-4b5e-ab5b-77ae5cf5cab4 Regulating Rights for the Intellectual & Developmentally Disabled with Alison Morantz and Peter Vogel Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:00:42 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Law School) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Regulating Rights for the Intellectual & Developmentally Disabled with Alison Morantz and Peter Vogel Stanford Law School 00:28:02 About 6.5 million people in the U.S. have an intellectual or developmental disability that affects their day-to-day functioning. While there are laws and policies designed to help them access the same core rights and protections that other individuals enjoy, there are still big gaps in important services. How is the law developing in this critical and often-overlooked area? Stanford Law Professor Alison Morantz, co-founder of the newly-launched Stanford Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Law and Policy Project, and Peter Vogel, JD ’19, who worked with Morantz on newly-published research, discuss their findings and more in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob About 6.5 million people in the U.S. have an intellectual or developmental disability that affects their day-to-day functioning. While there are laws and policies designed to help them access the same core rights and protections that other individuals enjoy, there are still big gaps in important services. How is the law developing in this critical and often-overlooked area? Stanford Law Professor Alison Morantz, co-founder of the newly-launched Stanford Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Law and Policy Project, and Peter Vogel, JD ’19, who worked with Morantz on newly-published research, discuss their findings and more in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob false full 55 c506219e-c115-4660-bdbb-8e8c12fd10e3 Creating a Social Media Oversight Board for Content Decisions with guests Nate Persily and Madeline Magnuson Sat, 13 Jul 2019 06:00:06 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Creating a Social Media Oversight Board for Content Decisions with guests Nate Persily and Madeline Magnuson Stanford Radio 00:27:59 Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses his Stanford research practicum that looks at critical issues in creating a social media oversight board for content decisions. Stanford Law student Madeline Magnuson joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 6, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses his Stanford research practicum that looks at critical issues in creating a social media oversight board for content decisions. Stanford Law student Madeline Magnuson joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 6, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 54 716f4d4a-d94d-410e-8a26-ad6483ab0899 Regulating Online Hate Speech with Daphne Keller Mon, 24 Jun 2019 14:00:17 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Regulating Online Hate Speech with Daphne Keller Stanford Radio 00:28:00 How do we regulate online hate/terrorist speech? Daphne Keller, an expert in platform regulation and Internet users' rights, discusses how the law is developing particularly in the European Union, during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob How do we regulate online hate/terrorist speech? Daphne Keller, an expert in platform regulation and Internet users' rights, discusses how the law is developing particularly in the European Union, during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob false full 53 512e9cd6-64e8-4420-9fa0-16371bc93228 Securing American Elections with Nate Persily Thu, 6 Jun 2019 16:30:13 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Securing American Elections with Nate Persily Stanford Radio 00:27:59 In 2016, Russia attacked the United States. As the Special Counsel report stated, “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in a sweeping and systematic fashion.” In this episode of Stanford Legal, Stanford Professor Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses a new Stanford report that looks at the vulnerabilities of our election systems and ways to secure it. In 2016, Russia attacked the United States. As the Special Counsel report stated, “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in a sweeping and systematic fashion.” In this episode of Stanford Legal, Stanford Professor Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses a new Stanford report that looks at the vulnerabilities of our election systems and ways to secure it. stanford legal, nate persily, podcast, free speech false full 52 0b241170-973a-4f8e-a0db-19d0521a3b02 Can Technology Help Address the Mental Health Crisis? with Joe Ruzek & Zach Harned Thu, 30 May 2019 13:00:02 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Can Technology Help Address the Mental Health Crisis? with Joe Ruzek & Zach Harned Stanford Radio 00:28:00 Mental health care is going digital, with new apps designed to offer personalized intervention and instruction right when a client might need them. Can a robot be a good therapist? Who is liable when things go wrong? Joe Ruzek, a psychologist who specializes in web- and phone-based psychological interventions, Zach Harned, a third-year student at Stanford Law, and Alison Darcy, CEO and founder of Woebot, discuss in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 25, 2019. Mental health care is going digital, with new apps designed to offer personalized intervention and instruction right when a client might need them. Can a robot be a good therapist? Who is liable when things go wrong? Joe Ruzek, a psychologist who specializes in web- and phone-based psychological interventions, Zach Harned, a third-year student at Stanford Law, and Alison Darcy, CEO and founder of Woebot, discuss in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 25, 2019. stanford legal, mental health, stanford law school, podcast false full 51 bac45250-120f-41b2-b9e3-5d4987eac3a5 Fuel Economy Standards and the Law with Professor Deborah Sivas and SLS student Ben DeGolia Wed, 15 May 2019 21:37:55 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Fuel Economy Standards and the Law with Professor Deborah Sivas and SLS student Ben DeGolia Stanford Radio 00:28:02 Cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. But fuel economy standards intended to limit their impact have been challenged by the current administration, setting the stage for a legal battle. Tune in to a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast as environmental law expert Professor Deborah Sivas and student Ben DeGolia discuss. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob Cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. But fuel economy standards intended to limit their impact have been challenged by the current administration, setting the stage for a legal battle. Tune in to a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast as environmental law expert Professor Deborah Sivas and student Ben DeGolia discuss. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob deborah sivas, stanford law, stanford legal, fuel economy, podcast false full 50 563d05b6-3b86-4ec1-b13f-a723c1980fb1 Artificial Intelligence and the Administrative State with David Engstrom and Cristina Ceballos Sun, 28 Apr 2019 12:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Artificial Intelligence and the Administrative State with David Engstrom and Cristina Ceballos Stanford Radio 00:28:33 Professor David Engstrom and law student Cristina Ceballos discuss artificial intelligence and whether it can help or hinder important decision making by the federal government? Professor David Engstrom and law student Cristina Ceballos discuss artificial intelligence and whether it can help or hinder important decision making by the federal government? stanford legal, david engstrom, artificial intelligence, ai, administrative state false full 49 21584100-36ab-4a82-8e5a-322874a73d7c The Mueller Report and Indictments. What Have we Learned? with David Sklansky Sun, 28 Apr 2019 10:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Mueller Report and Indictments. What Have we Learned? with David Sklansky Stanford Radio 00:27:28 Professor David Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, discusses what we know about the investigation, what we have learned from the report, and what may come next. Professor David Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, discusses what we know about the investigation, what we have learned from the report, and what may come next. mueller, stanford legal, david sklansky false full 48 5b4af20e-a24a-48ec-9281-3069d1c6aa7e How Safe is Your Online Information? with Jennifer King Sun, 14 Apr 2019 10:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ How Safe is Your Online Information? with Jennifer King Stanford Radio 00:27:29 Why and when do people choose to hand over their personal information in exchange for online services? Jennifer King, of Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society, discusses power dynamics and privacy. Why and when do people choose to hand over their personal information in exchange for online services? Jennifer King, of Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society, discusses power dynamics and privacy. false full 47 fe1aea87-1bae-49c5-bfb2-55e839a23fce Race, Class, and College Admissions with Rick Banks Sun, 14 Apr 2019 08:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Race, Class, and College Admissions with Rick Banks Stanford Radio 00:28:33 Law Professor Rick Banks, author of the forthcoming book Meritocracy in an Age of Inequality, discusses college admissions, race, and class in the wake of the college admissions scandal and Harvard bias case. Law Professor Rick Banks, author of the forthcoming book Meritocracy in an Age of Inequality, discusses college admissions, race, and class in the wake of the college admissions scandal and Harvard bias case. false full 46 17979535-a87d-4767-bfbb-2cc623611cfa Chinese State-Owned Enterprises with Curtis Milhaupt Tue, 19 Feb 2019 14:12:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Chinese State-Owned Enterprises with Curtis Milhaupt Stanford Radio 00:27:39 How has China managed to grow in the world economy? Comparative corporate governance expert Curtis Milhaupt discusses Chinese state-owned enterprises and their implications for the authoritarian nation's domestic economy and policy makers abroad during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob How has China managed to grow in the world economy? Comparative corporate governance expert Curtis Milhaupt discusses Chinese state-owned enterprises and their implications for the authoritarian nation's domestic economy and policy makers abroad during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob stanford law, enterprises false full 45 7751517c-37b0-4f6e-afdb-6947e15e158f Gene-edited Babies and DNA Testing with Hank Greely Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:09:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Gene-edited Babies and DNA Testing with Hank Greely Stanford Radio 00:28:33 Hank Greely, an expert in ethical, legal, and social implications of new biomedical technologies, discusses gene-edited babies and DNA testing. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob Hank Greely, an expert in ethical, legal, and social implications of new biomedical technologies, discusses gene-edited babies and DNA testing. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob dna testing, gene-edited, gene-edited babies false full 44 930efdd3-6e5f-4540-8e14-3fe4650cb4cd A Conversation with ACLU Staff Attorney Katrina Eiland, JD '10 Sun, 3 Feb 2019 12:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ A Conversation with ACLU Staff Attorney Katrina Eiland, JD '10 Stanford Radio 00:28:25 Katrina Eiland, JD ’10, serves as a staff attorney with the ACLU's with the Immigrants’ Rights Project. She discusses the Trump administration's termination of DACA, family separation and more during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanfordradio.stanford.edu Katrina Eiland, JD ’10, serves as a staff attorney with the ACLU's with the Immigrants’ Rights Project. She discusses the Trump administration's termination of DACA, family separation and more during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanfordradio.stanford.edu false full 43 429de7ee-3ce3-436e-9a57-806202f2d91d Gerrymandering and the 2020 Census with Nate Persily Sat, 2 Feb 2019 12:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Gerrymandering and the 2020 Census with Nate Persily Stanford Radio 00:27:35 Voting law expert Nate Persily discusses gerrymandering, the 2018 midterms and the 2020 census during a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob Voting law expert Nate Persily discusses gerrymandering, the 2018 midterms and the 2020 census during a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob gerrymandering, census false full 42 437c4fff-2e0f-4b1c-8343-c501aa23ac3f Climate Change Dilemma with Professor Thomas Heller Tue, 22 Jan 2019 10:10:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Climate Change Dilemma with Professor Thomas Heller Stanford Radio 00:27:42 In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam and Joe are joined by Tom Heller, faculty director of the new Sustainable Finance Initiative at Stanford and professor emeritus at Stanford Law School. An expert in climate policies, law, and economic development, Heller has spent much of his career focusing on the legal and financial challenges of solving climate change—particularly in developing economies. He was part of the network of experts who made up the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that shared the 2008 Nobel Prize prize with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam and Joe are joined by Tom Heller, faculty director of the new Sustainable Finance Initiative at Stanford and professor emeritus at Stanford Law School. An expert in climate policies, law, and economic development, Heller has spent much of his career focusing on the legal and financial challenges of solving climate change—particularly in developing economies. He was part of the network of experts who made up the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that shared the 2008 Nobel Prize prize with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 41 0a115d12-5231-4819-9d9d-d86ce41bfc28 Natural Disasters and Climate Change with Buzz Thompson Tue, 22 Jan 2019 09:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Natural Disasters and Climate Change with Buzz Thompson Stanford Radio 00:28:19 To what extent is climate change to blame for recent natural disasters like California’s Camp Fire, and how will law and policy respond? Buzz Thompson, an expert in water and natural resources law, discusses in a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. To what extent is climate change to blame for recent natural disasters like California’s Camp Fire, and how will law and policy respond? Buzz Thompson, an expert in water and natural resources law, discusses in a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 40 fc76035a-a0a8-4e05-b606-017f4c898b8d Religious Liberty in the Workplace with Jim Sonne and Liz Klein Sat, 8 Dec 2018 14:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Religious Liberty in the Workplace with Jim Sonne and Liz Klein Stanford Radio 00:28:15 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Religious Liberty in the Workplace with guests Jim Sonne and Liz Klein" Jim Sonne, professor of law and founding director of the Religious Liberty Clinic at Stanford, and law student Liz Klein discuss the constitutional right of religious liberty and how that sometimes clashes with workplace rules. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Religious Liberty in the Workplace with guests Jim Sonne and Liz Klein" Jim Sonne, professor of law and founding director of the Religious Liberty Clinic at Stanford, and law student Liz Klein discuss the constitutional right of religious liberty and how that sometimes clashes with workplace rules. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 39 872c098d-152c-4a76-9761-4cf482e6ad69 Barriers to Voting with Rabia Belt Sat, 8 Dec 2018 13:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Barriers to Voting with Rabia Belt Stanford Radio 00:27:44 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Voting Rights for Felons and the Disabled with guest Rabia Belt" During each election, people with disabilities across the country face hurdles to casting their votes while thousands of formerly-incarcerated citizens are barred completely from this essential democratic act. Assistant Professor of Law Rabia Belt discusses voting rights for people with disabilities and the formerly incarcerated. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Voting Rights for Felons and the Disabled with guest Rabia Belt" During each election, people with disabilities across the country face hurdles to casting their votes while thousands of formerly-incarcerated citizens are barred completely from this essential democratic act. Assistant Professor of Law Rabia Belt discusses voting rights for people with disabilities and the formerly incarcerated. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 38 5e168f25-380c-4e96-8bc9-30169d138d6a The Supreme Court After Kennedy with Dahlia Lithwick, Part 2 Sat, 10 Nov 2018 12:43:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Supreme Court After Kennedy with Dahlia Lithwick, Part 2 Stanford Radio 00:29:49 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 2) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 2) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. false full 37 a332f1a6-169e-402c-a047-49d1ef19d282 The Supreme Court After Kennedy with Dahlia Lithwick, Part 1 Sat, 10 Nov 2018 12:25:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ The Supreme Court After Kennedy with Dahlia Lithwick, Part 1 Stanford Radio 00:26:12 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 1) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 1) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. false full 36 493c1d5e-4efb-45dc-a09d-a3b4941b76d5 Conformity and Self-Censorship on College Campuses with Greg Lukianoff Free speech advocate and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff, discusses issues of conformity and self-censorship on college campuses, and his recently-published book, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” co-written with Jonathan Haidt.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 27 Oct 2018 15:05:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Free speech advocate and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff, discusses issues of conformity and self-censorship on college campuses, and his recently-published book, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” co-written with Jonathan Haidt.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Conformity and Self-Censorship on College Campuses with Greg Lukianoff Stanford Radio 00:27:40 Free speech advocate and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff, discusses issues of conformity and self-censorship on college campuses, and his recently-published book, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” co-written with Jonathan Haidt. Free speech advocate and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff, discusses issues of conformity and self-censorship on college campuses, and his recently-published book, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” co-written with Jonathan Haidt. false full 35 ee225cd0-e0d4-4503-975d-60c1e6357f04 Bad Blood and Silicon Valley Startup Culture with guest John Carreyrou John Carreyrou, author of best-selling book “Bad Blood,” joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about Silicon Valley excesses, the downfall of VC darling Theranos, and its charismatic founder Elizabeth Holmes.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 13 Oct 2018 10:15:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ John Carreyrou, author of best-selling book “Bad Blood,” joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about Silicon Valley excesses, the downfall of VC darling Theranos, and its charismatic founder Elizabeth Holmes.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Bad Blood and Silicon Valley Startup Culture with guest John Carreyrou Stanford Radio 00:28:39 John Carreyrou, author of best-selling book “Bad Blood,” joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about Silicon Valley excesses, the downfall of VC darling Theranos, and its charismatic founder Elizabeth Holmes. John Carreyrou, author of best-selling book “Bad Blood,” joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about Silicon Valley excesses, the downfall of VC darling Theranos, and its charismatic founder Elizabeth Holmes. false full 34 0c07ca0f-dedf-4cd4-8dae-6d8d693f4dd4 Mental Health Challenges for Lawyers & Law Students w/ guest Kathryne Young Kathryne Young, assistant professor of sociology at Amherst and author of "How to Be (Sort Of) Happy in Law School,” joins Pam and Joe to discuss the mental health challenges of high-pressure careers like law and shares tips that law students and others can use to improve their mental well being in school, on the job, and in life.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:06:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Kathryne Young, assistant professor of sociology at Amherst and author of "How to Be (Sort Of) Happy in Law School,” joins Pam and Joe to discuss the mental health challenges of high-pressure careers like law and shares tips that law students and others can use to improve their mental well being in school, on the job, and in life.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Mental Health Challenges for Lawyers & Law Students w/ guest Kathryne Young Stanford Radio 00:27:22 Kathryne Young, assistant professor of sociology at Amherst and author of "How to Be (Sort Of) Happy in Law School,” joins Pam and Joe to discuss the mental health challenges of high-pressure careers like law and shares tips that law students and others can use to improve their mental well being in school, on the job, and in life. Kathryne Young, assistant professor of sociology at Amherst and author of "How to Be (Sort Of) Happy in Law School,” joins Pam and Joe to discuss the mental health challenges of high-pressure careers like law and shares tips that law students and others can use to improve their mental well being in school, on the job, and in life. false full 33 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/498099450 Fighting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "FIghting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello" An estimated 510,000 people will die over the next decade from opioid-related causes. Should the companies that make and distribute the drugs be held liable? Professors Michelle Mello and Nora Freeman Engstrom share their thoughts on an issue that is increasingly ending up in our courts. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 15 Sep 2018 15:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "FIghting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello" An estimated 510,000 people will die over the next decade from opioid-related causes. Should the companies that make and distribute the drugs be held liable? Professors Michelle Mello and Nora Freeman Engstrom share their thoughts on an issue that is increasingly ending up in our courts. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fighting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello Stanford Radio 00:27:46 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "FIghting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello" An estimated 510,000 people will die over the next decade from opioid-related causes. Should the companies that make and distribute the drugs be held liable? Professors Michelle Mello and Nora Freeman Engstrom share their thoughts on an issue that is increasingly ending up in our courts. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "FIghting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello" An estimated 510,000 people will die over the next decade from opioid-related causes. Should the companies that make and distribute the drugs be held liable? Professors Michelle Mello and Nora Freeman Engstrom share their thoughts on an issue that is increasingly ending up in our courts. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 32 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/498101043 Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest" What are cryptocurrencies? Should they be regulated? How much? Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Professor Joe Grundfest answer these questions and more in this episode of Stanford Legal. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 15 Sep 2018 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest" What are cryptocurrencies? Should they be regulated? How much? Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Professor Joe Grundfest answer these questions and more in this episode of Stanford Legal. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest Stanford Radio 00:28:14 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest" What are cryptocurrencies? Should they be regulated? How much? Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Professor Joe Grundfest answer these questions and more in this episode of Stanford Legal. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest" What are cryptocurrencies? Should they be regulated? How much? Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Professor Joe Grundfest answer these questions and more in this episode of Stanford Legal. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video. false full 31 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/493361712 Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan" Stanford Law Professor Joe Grundfest and Michael Callahan, former GC of Yahoo! and LinkedIn, discuss the legal issues arising from America’s changing corporate culture where it is easier for CEO’s to speak off the cuff and take to social media without the knowledge of their lawyers-- sometimes to the detriment of their companies. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan" Stanford Law Professor Joe Grundfest and Michael Callahan, former GC of Yahoo! and LinkedIn, discuss the legal issues arising from America’s changing corporate culture where it is easier for CEO’s to speak off the cuff and take to social media without the knowledge of their lawyers-- sometimes to the detriment of their companies. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan Stanford Radio 00:28:19 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan" Stanford Law Professor Joe Grundfest and Michael Callahan, former GC of Yahoo! and LinkedIn, discuss the legal issues arising from America’s changing corporate culture where it is easier for CEO’s to speak off the cuff and take to social media without the knowledge of their lawyers-- sometimes to the detriment of their companies. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan" Stanford Law Professor Joe Grundfest and Michael Callahan, former GC of Yahoo! and LinkedIn, discuss the legal issues arising from America’s changing corporate culture where it is easier for CEO’s to speak off the cuff and take to social media without the knowledge of their lawyers-- sometimes to the detriment of their companies. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 30 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/493362897 Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford" Can an employer force women to wear makeup and tell them what to wear? Do we have the right to style our hair as we pleased for work? Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford explains the relationship between dress codes, style, law, and bias-- and whether the courts are ready to address the issue. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford" Can an employer force women to wear makeup and tell them what to wear? Do we have the right to style our hair as we pleased for work? Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford explains the relationship between dress codes, style, law, and bias-- and whether the courts are ready to address the issue. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford Stanford Radio 00:27:41 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford" Can an employer force women to wear makeup and tell them what to wear? Do we have the right to style our hair as we pleased for work? Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford explains the relationship between dress codes, style, law, and bias-- and whether the courts are ready to address the issue. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford" Can an employer force women to wear makeup and tell them what to wear? Do we have the right to style our hair as we pleased for work? Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford explains the relationship between dress codes, style, law, and bias-- and whether the courts are ready to address the issue. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 29 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/480698574 Eroding Union Rights with guest William B. Gould IV Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Eroding union rights with guest William B. Gould IV" Stanford Law Professor Emeritus William B. Gould IV talks about the recent Supreme Court decision that hinders the ability of unions to collect dues from their members. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 4, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Eroding union rights with guest William B. Gould IV" Stanford Law Professor Emeritus William B. Gould IV talks about the recent Supreme Court decision that hinders the ability of unions to collect dues from their members. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 4, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Eroding Union Rights with guest William B. Gould IV Stanford Radio 00:27:47 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Eroding union rights with guest William B. Gould IV" Stanford Law Professor Emeritus William B. Gould IV talks about the recent Supreme Court decision that hinders the ability of unions to collect dues from their members. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 4, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Eroding union rights with guest William B. Gould IV" Stanford Law Professor Emeritus William B. Gould IV talks about the recent Supreme Court decision that hinders the ability of unions to collect dues from their members. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 4, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 28 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/474033558 The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher" Stanford law professor and co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeff Fisher discusses the career of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, his legacy, and the potential for many of his centrist decisions to be undone by the next court. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 21 Jul 2018 15:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher" Stanford law professor and co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeff Fisher discusses the career of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, his legacy, and the potential for many of his centrist decisions to be undone by the next court. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher Stanford Radio 00:28:13 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher" Stanford law professor and co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeff Fisher discusses the career of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, his legacy, and the potential for many of his centrist decisions to be undone by the next court. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher" Stanford law professor and co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeff Fisher discusses the career of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, his legacy, and the potential for many of his centrist decisions to be undone by the next court. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 27 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/474034062 Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson" Stanford Law School Professor Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her research into concentrated rural and urban poverty, which has taken her across the country to the many “dying” communities that no longer have a base of middle-class jobs. Here, she shares her view of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the impact on urban areas, and families and how we as a nation might help to solve this growing challenge. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 21 Jul 2018 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson" Stanford Law School Professor Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her research into concentrated rural and urban poverty, which has taken her across the country to the many “dying” communities that no longer have a base of middle-class jobs. Here, she shares her view of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the impact on urban areas, and families and how we as a nation might help to solve this growing challenge. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson Stanford Radio 00:27:48 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson" Stanford Law School Professor Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her research into concentrated rural and urban poverty, which has taken her across the country to the many “dying” communities that no longer have a base of middle-class jobs. Here, she shares her view of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the impact on urban areas, and families and how we as a nation might help to solve this growing challenge. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson" Stanford Law School Professor Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her research into concentrated rural and urban poverty, which has taken her across the country to the many “dying” communities that no longer have a base of middle-class jobs. Here, she shares her view of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the impact on urban areas, and families and how we as a nation might help to solve this growing challenge. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 26 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/466465281 Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily discusses important recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights including one that allows Ohio to take the names of certain voters off its roles. Will this and other decisions impact one party’s voters disproportionately? Originally aired on SiriusXm on July 7, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 7 Jul 2018 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily discusses important recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights including one that allows Ohio to take the names of certain voters off its roles. Will this and other decisions impact one party’s voters disproportionately? Originally aired on SiriusXm on July 7, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily Stanford Radio 00:27:20 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily discusses important recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights including one that allows Ohio to take the names of certain voters off its roles. Will this and other decisions impact one party’s voters disproportionately? Originally aired on SiriusXm on July 7, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily discusses important recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights including one that allows Ohio to take the names of certain voters off its roles. Will this and other decisions impact one party’s voters disproportionately? Originally aired on SiriusXm on July 7, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 25 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/463268640 Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan" Allen Weiner, Director of the Stanford Program on International and Comparative Law, and Scott Sagan, Political Science Professor at Stanford and Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, talk about the nuclear summit between President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and whether the agreement they hashed out will lead to a decline in tensions on the Korean peninsula. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 23 Jun 2018 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan" Allen Weiner, Director of the Stanford Program on International and Comparative Law, and Scott Sagan, Political Science Professor at Stanford and Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, talk about the nuclear summit between President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and whether the agreement they hashed out will lead to a decline in tensions on the Korean peninsula. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan Stanford Radio 00:27:49 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan" Allen Weiner, Director of the Stanford Program on International and Comparative Law, and Scott Sagan, Political Science Professor at Stanford and Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, talk about the nuclear summit between President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and whether the agreement they hashed out will lead to a decline in tensions on the Korean peninsula. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan" Allen Weiner, Director of the Stanford Program on International and Comparative Law, and Scott Sagan, Political Science Professor at Stanford and Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, talk about the nuclear summit between President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and whether the agreement they hashed out will lead to a decline in tensions on the Korean peninsula. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 24 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/463269315 Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan" Stanford Law Professor and Stanford Legal co-host Pam Karlan discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to side with a Colorado cake shop owner who denied service to a gay couple who wanted him to bake a cake for their wedding. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 23 Jun 2018 13:16:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan" Stanford Law Professor and Stanford Legal co-host Pam Karlan discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to side with a Colorado cake shop owner who denied service to a gay couple who wanted him to bake a cake for their wedding. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan Stanford Radio 00:28:11 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan" Stanford Law Professor and Stanford Legal co-host Pam Karlan discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to side with a Colorado cake shop owner who denied service to a gay couple who wanted him to bake a cake for their wedding. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan" Stanford Law Professor and Stanford Legal co-host Pam Karlan discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to side with a Colorado cake shop owner who denied service to a gay couple who wanted him to bake a cake for their wedding. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 23 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/457901616 Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum" Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, an instructor with Stanford’s Native American Amicus Brief Project and law student Jared Crum, president of Stanford’s Native American Law Student Association; discuss their work with tribal court systems, legal issues related to tribal sovereignty, and why that sovereignty exists. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 9, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 9 Jun 2018 14:00:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum" Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, an instructor with Stanford’s Native American Amicus Brief Project and law student Jared Crum, president of Stanford’s Native American Law Student Association; discuss their work with tribal court systems, legal issues related to tribal sovereignty, and why that sovereignty exists. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 9, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum Stanford Radio 00:28:02 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum" Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, an instructor with Stanford’s Native American Amicus Brief Project and law student Jared Crum, president of Stanford’s Native American Law Student Association; discuss their work with tribal court systems, legal issues related to tribal sovereignty, and why that sovereignty exists. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 9, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum" Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, an instructor with Stanford’s Native American Amicus Brief Project and law student Jared Crum, president of Stanford’s Native American Law Student Association; discuss their work with tribal court systems, legal issues related to tribal sovereignty, and why that sovereignty exists. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 9, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 22 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/449159136 The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg" Stanford Law professors Hank Greely and Bob Weisberg discuss advances in truth detecting technology and how those technologies intersect with the legal system and societal ethics now and in the not too distant future. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 26 May 2018 14:31:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg" Stanford Law professors Hank Greely and Bob Weisberg discuss advances in truth detecting technology and how those technologies intersect with the legal system and societal ethics now and in the not too distant future. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg Stanford Radio 00:28:30 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg" Stanford Law professors Hank Greely and Bob Weisberg discuss advances in truth detecting technology and how those technologies intersect with the legal system and societal ethics now and in the not too distant future. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg" Stanford Law professors Hank Greely and Bob Weisberg discuss advances in truth detecting technology and how those technologies intersect with the legal system and societal ethics now and in the not too distant future. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 21 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/449159631 The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell" Law professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, Michael McConnell talks about the First Amendment and where it begins and ends on different types of college campuses. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 26 May 2018 14:29:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell" Law professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, Michael McConnell talks about the First Amendment and where it begins and ends on different types of college campuses. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell Stanford Radio 00:27:29 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell" Law professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, Michael McConnell talks about the First Amendment and where it begins and ends on different types of college campuses. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell" Law professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, Michael McConnell talks about the First Amendment and where it begins and ends on different types of college campuses. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 20 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/436120191 Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin" Stanford Law School student and Afghanistan War Veteran Matt Ball developed a friendship with Afghan native and translator Qismat Amin. The two describe meeting and working together in Afghanistan and how Qismat overcame legal obstacles and ISIS threats before finally arriving safely in the United States. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 28 Apr 2018 14:44:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin" Stanford Law School student and Afghanistan War Veteran Matt Ball developed a friendship with Afghan native and translator Qismat Amin. The two describe meeting and working together in Afghanistan and how Qismat overcame legal obstacles and ISIS threats before finally arriving safely in the United States. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin Stanford Radio 00:24:39 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin" Stanford Law School student and Afghanistan War Veteran Matt Ball developed a friendship with Afghan native and translator Qismat Amin. The two describe meeting and working together in Afghanistan and how Qismat overcame legal obstacles and ISIS threats before finally arriving safely in the United States. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin" Stanford Law School student and Afghanistan War Veteran Matt Ball developed a friendship with Afghan native and translator Qismat Amin. The two describe meeting and working together in Afghanistan and how Qismat overcame legal obstacles and ISIS threats before finally arriving safely in the United States. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 19 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/436119690 Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee" Stanford law professor and Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, Mark Lemley and visiting law professor Michelle Lee join Pam and Joe for a discussion on some of the legal issues that are likely to arise as Artificial intelligence becomes an integral part of our daily lives. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 28 Apr 2018 14:34:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee" Stanford law professor and Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, Mark Lemley and visiting law professor Michelle Lee join Pam and Joe for a discussion on some of the legal issues that are likely to arise as Artificial intelligence becomes an integral part of our daily lives. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee Stanford Radio 00:31:22 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee" Stanford law professor and Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, Mark Lemley and visiting law professor Michelle Lee join Pam and Joe for a discussion on some of the legal issues that are likely to arise as Artificial intelligence becomes an integral part of our daily lives. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee" Stanford law professor and Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, Mark Lemley and visiting law professor Michelle Lee join Pam and Joe for a discussion on some of the legal issues that are likely to arise as Artificial intelligence becomes an integral part of our daily lives. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 18 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/431070318 States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom" California Solicitor General Ed Dumont talks about the rise in blue state federalism and California’s role in defending the values of its citizens in the face of an increasingly difficult to work with federal government. Law professor and director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic, Debbie Sivas shares her expertise on what could be a federal-state standoff over California’s auto emissions standards. Stanford law professor and associate dean for strategic planning, David Freeman Engstrom talks about the extent at which states can create their own foreign policy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 14 Apr 2018 14:34:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom" California Solicitor General Ed Dumont talks about the rise in blue state federalism and California’s role in defending the values of its citizens in the face of an increasingly difficult to work with federal government. Law professor and director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic, Debbie Sivas shares her expertise on what could be a federal-state standoff over California’s auto emissions standards. Stanford law professor and associate dean for strategic planning, David Freeman Engstrom talks about the extent at which states can create their own foreign policy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom Stanford Radio 00:27:59 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom" California Solicitor General Ed Dumont talks about the rise in blue state federalism and California’s role in defending the values of its citizens in the face of an increasingly difficult to work with federal government. Law professor and director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic, Debbie Sivas shares her expertise on what could be a federal-state standoff over California’s auto emissions standards. Stanford law professor and associate dean for strategic planning, David Freeman Engstrom talks about the extent at which states can create their own foreign policy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom" California Solicitor General Ed Dumont talks about the rise in blue state federalism and California’s role in defending the values of its citizens in the face of an increasingly difficult to work with federal government. Law professor and director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic, Debbie Sivas shares her expertise on what could be a federal-state standoff over California’s auto emissions standards. Stanford law professor and associate dean for strategic planning, David Freeman Engstrom talks about the extent at which states can create their own foreign policy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 17 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/431069826 Trade Wars with guest Alan Sykes Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trade wars with guest Alan Sykes" Stanford Law professor and Director of the Masters Program in International Economic Law, Business and Policy Alan Sykes discusses the benefits and drawbacks of a trade war and what it would look like if President Trump decides to engage in one. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 14 Apr 2018 13:27:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trade wars with guest Alan Sykes" Stanford Law professor and Director of the Masters Program in International Economic Law, Business and Policy Alan Sykes discusses the benefits and drawbacks of a trade war and what it would look like if President Trump decides to engage in one. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trade Wars with guest Alan Sykes Stanford Radio 00:28:01 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trade wars with guest Alan Sykes" Stanford Law professor and Director of the Masters Program in International Economic Law, Business and Policy Alan Sykes discusses the benefits and drawbacks of a trade war and what it would look like if President Trump decides to engage in one. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trade wars with guest Alan Sykes" Stanford Law professor and Director of the Masters Program in International Economic Law, Business and Policy Alan Sykes discusses the benefits and drawbacks of a trade war and what it would look like if President Trump decides to engage in one. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 16 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/416177640 Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg" Erik Jensen, director of Stanford’s Rule of Law program, is joined by Sean Rosenberg, JD/MBA student and West Point grad who served in Afghanistan, who works with Jensen in the Afghanistan Legal Ed Project designed to help nations deal with the challenges of building a new democratic system of government after experiencing periods of upheaval. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 17 Mar 2018 14:54:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg" Erik Jensen, director of Stanford’s Rule of Law program, is joined by Sean Rosenberg, JD/MBA student and West Point grad who served in Afghanistan, who works with Jensen in the Afghanistan Legal Ed Project designed to help nations deal with the challenges of building a new democratic system of government after experiencing periods of upheaval. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg Stanford Radio 00:27:48 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg" Erik Jensen, director of Stanford’s Rule of Law program, is joined by Sean Rosenberg, JD/MBA student and West Point grad who served in Afghanistan, who works with Jensen in the Afghanistan Legal Ed Project designed to help nations deal with the challenges of building a new democratic system of government after experiencing periods of upheaval. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg" Erik Jensen, director of Stanford’s Rule of Law program, is joined by Sean Rosenberg, JD/MBA student and West Point grad who served in Afghanistan, who works with Jensen in the Afghanistan Legal Ed Project designed to help nations deal with the challenges of building a new democratic system of government after experiencing periods of upheaval. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 15 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/416176896 Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick" Jon Krosnick is a Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Communication, and Political Science at Stanford. Jon shares his work on what voters say they want in a politician and how they expect their elected officials to vote and behave while in office. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 17 Mar 2018 14:52:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick" Jon Krosnick is a Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Communication, and Political Science at Stanford. Jon shares his work on what voters say they want in a politician and how they expect their elected officials to vote and behave while in office. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick Stanford Radio 00:28:12 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick" Jon Krosnick is a Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Communication, and Political Science at Stanford. Jon shares his work on what voters say they want in a politician and how they expect their elected officials to vote and behave while in office. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick" Jon Krosnick is a Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Communication, and Political Science at Stanford. Jon shares his work on what voters say they want in a politician and how they expect their elected officials to vote and behave while in office. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 14 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/409585164 Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode" Emily Murphy, Stanford Law graduate and Associate Law Professor at UC Hastings, shares her story of harassment at the hands of former U.S. 9th Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She also discusses what little protections law clerks have if they are harassed. Stanford Law professor and director of the Center on the Legal Profession, Deborah Rhode joins the conversation to discuss the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations and what people can do if they are harassed at work. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 3 Mar 2018 15:36:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode" Emily Murphy, Stanford Law graduate and Associate Law Professor at UC Hastings, shares her story of harassment at the hands of former U.S. 9th Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She also discusses what little protections law clerks have if they are harassed. Stanford Law professor and director of the Center on the Legal Profession, Deborah Rhode joins the conversation to discuss the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations and what people can do if they are harassed at work. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode Stanford Radio 00:27:56 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode" Emily Murphy, Stanford Law graduate and Associate Law Professor at UC Hastings, shares her story of harassment at the hands of former U.S. 9th Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She also discusses what little protections law clerks have if they are harassed. Stanford Law professor and director of the Center on the Legal Profession, Deborah Rhode joins the conversation to discuss the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations and what people can do if they are harassed at work. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode" Emily Murphy, Stanford Law graduate and Associate Law Professor at UC Hastings, shares her story of harassment at the hands of former U.S. 9th Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She also discusses what little protections law clerks have if they are harassed. Stanford Law professor and director of the Center on the Legal Profession, Deborah Rhode joins the conversation to discuss the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations and what people can do if they are harassed at work. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 13 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/366794009 Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III" Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III joins us for a conversation about gun violence in America, and how the law is developing in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Nevada and five years after the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings in Newtown, Connecticut Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 3 Mar 2018 14:53:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III" Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III joins us for a conversation about gun violence in America, and how the law is developing in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Nevada and five years after the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings in Newtown, Connecticut Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III Stanford Radio 00:27:55 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III" Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III joins us for a conversation about gun violence in America, and how the law is developing in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Nevada and five years after the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings in Newtown, Connecticut Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III" Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III joins us for a conversation about gun violence in America, and how the law is developing in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Nevada and five years after the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings in Newtown, Connecticut Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. false full 12 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/404269554 Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg" Stanford Law Professor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center Robert Weisberg discusses how technology is changing the laws designed to protect you from police searches and the use of police body cameras. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:13:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg" Stanford Law Professor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center Robert Weisberg discusses how technology is changing the laws designed to protect you from police searches and the use of police body cameras. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg Stanford Radio 00:26:37 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg" Stanford Law Professor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center Robert Weisberg discusses how technology is changing the laws designed to protect you from police searches and the use of police body cameras. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg" Stanford Law Professor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center Robert Weisberg discusses how technology is changing the laws designed to protect you from police searches and the use of police body cameras. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 11 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/404269779 Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily shares his expertise on American election law and what can be done to combat the Fake News problem. Reporter Deepa Seetharaman covers Facebook and other social media sites for The Wall Street Journal. She discusses some of her insights on how fabricated news stories are created and spread over online platforms. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 17 Feb 2018 14:13:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily shares his expertise on American election law and what can be done to combat the Fake News problem. Reporter Deepa Seetharaman covers Facebook and other social media sites for The Wall Street Journal. She discusses some of her insights on how fabricated news stories are created and spread over online platforms. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman Stanford Radio 00:28:50 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily shares his expertise on American election law and what can be done to combat the Fake News problem. Reporter Deepa Seetharaman covers Facebook and other social media sites for The Wall Street Journal. She discusses some of her insights on how fabricated news stories are created and spread over online platforms. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily shares his expertise on American election law and what can be done to combat the Fake News problem. Reporter Deepa Seetharaman covers Facebook and other social media sites for The Wall Street Journal. She discusses some of her insights on how fabricated news stories are created and spread over online platforms. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 10 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/395962665 Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan" Founding Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and Professor of Law Jayashri Srikantiah joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about federal immigration enforcement and issues surrounding undocumented immigrants targeted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Kavita Narayan also shares her experiences working with the federal government as lead deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County, one of the nation's many sanctuary counties. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 3 Feb 2018 14:58:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan" Founding Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and Professor of Law Jayashri Srikantiah joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about federal immigration enforcement and issues surrounding undocumented immigrants targeted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Kavita Narayan also shares her experiences working with the federal government as lead deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County, one of the nation's many sanctuary counties. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan Stanford Radio 00:28:19 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan" Founding Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and Professor of Law Jayashri Srikantiah joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about federal immigration enforcement and issues surrounding undocumented immigrants targeted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Kavita Narayan also shares her experiences working with the federal government as lead deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County, one of the nation's many sanctuary counties. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan" Founding Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and Professor of Law Jayashri Srikantiah joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about federal immigration enforcement and issues surrounding undocumented immigrants targeted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Kavita Narayan also shares her experiences working with the federal government as lead deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County, one of the nation's many sanctuary counties. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 9 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/395924268 Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed" Should veterans who come home from combat and find themselves caught in the criminal justice system be offered special help? In this episode, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley, who has launched special treatment courts for veterans and the mentally ill, discuss the need for special courts that offer treatment options to veterans and the mentally ill, including help for substance abuse, trauma, and PTSD, with the aim of keeping them out of prison. Stanford Law student Joe Reed, himself a Marine who served two tours in Afghanistan and has studied Veterans Courts, joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 3 Feb 2018 14:54:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed" Should veterans who come home from combat and find themselves caught in the criminal justice system be offered special help? In this episode, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley, who has launched special treatment courts for veterans and the mentally ill, discuss the need for special courts that offer treatment options to veterans and the mentally ill, including help for substance abuse, trauma, and PTSD, with the aim of keeping them out of prison. Stanford Law student Joe Reed, himself a Marine who served two tours in Afghanistan and has studied Veterans Courts, joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed Stanford Radio 00:27:39 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed" Should veterans who come home from combat and find themselves caught in the criminal justice system be offered special help? In this episode, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley, who has launched special treatment courts for veterans and the mentally ill, discuss the need for special courts that offer treatment options to veterans and the mentally ill, including help for substance abuse, trauma, and PTSD, with the aim of keeping them out of prison. Stanford Law student Joe Reed, himself a Marine who served two tours in Afghanistan and has studied Veterans Courts, joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed" Should veterans who come home from combat and find themselves caught in the criminal justice system be offered special help? In this episode, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley, who has launched special treatment courts for veterans and the mentally ill, discuss the need for special courts that offer treatment options to veterans and the mentally ill, including help for substance abuse, trauma, and PTSD, with the aim of keeping them out of prison. Stanford Law student Joe Reed, himself a Marine who served two tours in Afghanistan and has studied Veterans Courts, joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 8 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/388112384 Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman" Pam and Joe talk about the recently passed GOP tax law. Joe reveals who he thinks are the big winners and losers are and how individuals, corporations, and states are looking to reap maximum benefits. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 20, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 20 Jan 2018 14:30:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman" Pam and Joe talk about the recently passed GOP tax law. Joe reveals who he thinks are the big winners and losers are and how individuals, corporations, and states are looking to reap maximum benefits. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 20, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman Stanford Radio 00:28:08 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman" Pam and Joe talk about the recently passed GOP tax law. Joe reveals who he thinks are the big winners and losers are and how individuals, corporations, and states are looking to reap maximum benefits. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 20, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman" Pam and Joe talk about the recently passed GOP tax law. Joe reveals who he thinks are the big winners and losers are and how individuals, corporations, and states are looking to reap maximum benefits. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 20, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 7 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/380780102 Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky" David Sklansky, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, discusses how prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue and what changes can be implemented for a more just criminal justice system. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:36:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky" David Sklansky, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, discusses how prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue and what changes can be implemented for a more just criminal justice system. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky Stanford Radio 00:27:26 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky" David Sklansky, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, discusses how prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue and what changes can be implemented for a more just criminal justice system. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky" David Sklansky, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, discusses how prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue and what changes can be implemented for a more just criminal justice system. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 6 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/380780417 The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger" Stanford Law Professor and Associate Dean of Curriculum, Nora Freeman Engstrom shares her expertise on tort law as it relates to the gig economy. Steve Siger, managing counsel at Thumbtack and a former attorney for Uber, talks about how companies are navigating the emerging sharing economy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:32:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger" Stanford Law Professor and Associate Dean of Curriculum, Nora Freeman Engstrom shares her expertise on tort law as it relates to the gig economy. Steve Siger, managing counsel at Thumbtack and a former attorney for Uber, talks about how companies are navigating the emerging sharing economy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger Stanford Radio 00:28:31 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger" Stanford Law Professor and Associate Dean of Curriculum, Nora Freeman Engstrom shares her expertise on tort law as it relates to the gig economy. Steve Siger, managing counsel at Thumbtack and a former attorney for Uber, talks about how companies are navigating the emerging sharing economy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger" Stanford Law Professor and Associate Dean of Curriculum, Nora Freeman Engstrom shares her expertise on tort law as it relates to the gig economy. Steve Siger, managing counsel at Thumbtack and a former attorney for Uber, talks about how companies are navigating the emerging sharing economy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 5 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/369652598 Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar" Law professor and founding director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, Jayashri Srikantiah and Associate Professor Shirin Sinnar discuss the legal issues surrounding the Trump administrations multiple attempts at restricting travel from several mostly Muslim majority nations to the U.S. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 23 Dec 2017 16:53:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar" Law professor and founding director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, Jayashri Srikantiah and Associate Professor Shirin Sinnar discuss the legal issues surrounding the Trump administrations multiple attempts at restricting travel from several mostly Muslim majority nations to the U.S. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar Stanford Radio 00:28:01 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar" Law professor and founding director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, Jayashri Srikantiah and Associate Professor Shirin Sinnar discuss the legal issues surrounding the Trump administrations multiple attempts at restricting travel from several mostly Muslim majority nations to the U.S. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar" Law professor and founding director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, Jayashri Srikantiah and Associate Professor Shirin Sinnar discuss the legal issues surrounding the Trump administrations multiple attempts at restricting travel from several mostly Muslim majority nations to the U.S. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 4 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/369648329 Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher" Law professor and co-director of Stanford's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeffrey Fisher, shares his extensive experience arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including what it is like to prepare for and present a case. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 23 Dec 2017 15:53:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher" Law professor and co-director of Stanford's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeffrey Fisher, shares his extensive experience arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including what it is like to prepare for and present a case. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher Stanford Radio 00:28:00 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher" Law professor and co-director of Stanford's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeffrey Fisher, shares his extensive experience arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including what it is like to prepare for and present a case. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher" Law professor and co-director of Stanford's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeffrey Fisher, shares his extensive experience arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including what it is like to prepare for and present a case. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 3 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/368704406 Web Extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Web extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick" Law School professor Barbara van Schewick discusses net neutrality as the FCC plans to vote on changing those rules. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:13:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Web extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick" Law School professor Barbara van Schewick discusses net neutrality as the FCC plans to vote on changing those rules. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Web Extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick Stanford Radio 00:27:58 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Web extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick" Law School professor Barbara van Schewick discusses net neutrality as the FCC plans to vote on changing those rules. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Web extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick" Law School professor Barbara van Schewick discusses net neutrality as the FCC plans to vote on changing those rules. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 2 tag:soundcloud,2010:tracks/366788747 Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford" Stanford Law Professor Robert MacCoun describes the legal future for recreational marijuana. Hadley Ford, CEO of iAnthus Capital, discusses the barriers to financing marijuana business ventures and bringing pot to market. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Sat, 9 Dec 2017 14:51:00 +0000 podcasts@podiumpodcastco.com (Stanford Radio) https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford" Stanford Law Professor Robert MacCoun describes the legal future for recreational marijuana. Hadley Ford, CEO of iAnthus Capital, discusses the barriers to financing marijuana business ventures and bringing pot to market. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.


Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

]]> Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford Stanford Radio 00:28:04 Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford" Stanford Law Professor Robert MacCoun describes the legal future for recreational marijuana. Hadley Ford, CEO of iAnthus Capital, discusses the barriers to financing marijuana business ventures and bringing pot to market. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford" Stanford Law Professor Robert MacCoun describes the legal future for recreational marijuana. Hadley Ford, CEO of iAnthus Capital, discusses the barriers to financing marijuana business ventures and bringing pot to market. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video. false full 1