Podcasts about aals

My conversation with Eric starts at about 36 mins Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Follow Eric on Blue Sky Read Eric on Dorf on Law Listen to Supreme Myths Podcast Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us  Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi Weekly Happy Hour Hangouts!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing Gift a Subscription https://www.patreon.com/PeteDominick/gift

My conversation with Eric starts around 30 mins Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 750 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Follow Eric on Blue Sky Read Eric on Dorf on Law Listen to Supreme Myths Podcast Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us Monday's and Thursday's at 8EST for our Bi-Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Today I have Eric Segall and our conversation starts at 41 minutes... Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Dionne Koller is a leading expert in sports law, specializing in youth, Olympic, Paralympic, and education-based sports. She has advised state and federal legislatures and co-chaired the bipartisan Commission on the State of U.S. Olympic and Paralympics. Recognized for her contributions, Koller has received numerous awards, including the AALS 2024 award for significant contributions to sports law.Social Media Links:X: https://x.com/dionnekoller?lang=enLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dionne-koller-165205241/Email:work@dionnekoller.comYou can explore more of Hernan's work on his website, https://www.hernanchousa.com/.The music enriching our show is the creative work of Sebastian Klauer. You can reach him at klauersebas@gmail.com.

Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more GET TICKETS TO PODJAM II In Vegas March 27-30 Confirmed Guests! Professor Eric Segall, Dr Aaron Carroll, Maura Quint, Tim Wise, JL Cauvin, Ophira Eisenberg, Christian Finnegan and The Ladies of The Huw will all join us! Confirmed Guests! Professor Eric Segall, Dr Aaron Carroll, Maura Quint, Tim Wise, JL Cauvin, Ophira Eisenberg, Christian Finnegan and More! Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing

Stand Up is a daily podcast that I book,host,edit, post and promote new episodes with brilliant guests every day. Please subscribe now for as little as 5$ and gain access to a community of over 700 awesome, curious, kind, funny, brilliant, generous souls Check out StandUpwithPete.com to learn more GET TICKETS TO PODJAM II In Vegas March 27-30 Confirmed Guests! Professor Eric Segall, Dr Aaron Carroll, Maura Quint, Tim Wise, JL Cauvin, Ophira Eisenberg, Christian Finnegan and More! Eric Segall teaches federal courts and constitutional law I and II. He is the author of the book Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is not a Court and its Justices are not Judges. He has served on the Executive Committee of the AALS section on federal courts, and has given numerous speeches both inside and outside the academy on constitutional law questions and the Supreme Court. He appears regularly on the national XM Radio show StandUp with Pete Dominick talking about the Supreme Court and constitutional law. Join us Thursday's at 8EST for our Weekly Happy Hour Hangout!  Pete on Blue Sky Pete on Threads Pete on Tik Tok Pete on YouTube  Pete on Twitter Pete On Instagram Pete Personal FB page Stand Up with Pete FB page All things Jon Carroll  Follow and Support Pete Coe Buy Ava's Art  Hire DJ Monzyk to build your website or help you with Marketing  

Kürzlich kam es zu einer im aalgemeinen als eher unnormaal zu bezeichnenden Situation im Notfall-Operations-Saal. Ein Vietnamese traf eine eher ungünstige Waal und erlitt dadurch eine eher ungewöhnliche Quaal. Aalles in Aallem kann man sagen, das euch eine totaal speziaale Geschichte erwartet.

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Happy Ringtone (1a) (Incoming message Ezira)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠ani_music⁠⁠ and ⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Happy Ringtone (1a) (Incoming message Ezira)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠ani_music⁠⁠ and ⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Happy Ringtone (1a) (Incoming message Ezira)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠ani_music⁠⁠ and ⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠From Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

In this episode, I interview Mark Fox of Peak District Survival School. Mark has worked in the outdoor industry full-time for over 25 years delivering AALs activities, a range of in-school linked curriculum activities, as well as external school trips. He alsodelivers a range of accredited courses for instructional staff and educational establishments. We talk about delivering bushcraft and outdoor learning in schools, making learning experiential and relevant, transitioning from employee to business and much more, Resources:Peak District Survival School websitePeak District Survival School FacebookPeak District Survival School InstagramThe Bracken Outdoors Podcast is designed for Woodland Leaders from bushcraft instructors to Forest School practitioners, helping you build a life in the great outdoors. With weekly short episodes on all aspects of life as a freelance Woodland Leader, from business tips and advice to philosophy of outdoor education, as well as monthly deep dives into larger topics or interviews with inspirational professionals and leaders in the outdoor education space.To find out more about my mission to help people Belong Outside, head to https://brackenoutdoors.com/Free Resources: + How to choose a tarp guide+ Forest School Activity Ideas PDF + The complete guide to setting your rates as an outdoor leader

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠⁠ (⁠⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (both under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠ (⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠); Various other sound effects from Freesound under CC-0. Cover art: ⁠⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠ and ⁠Happy Ringtone (1a) (Incoming message Ezira)⁠ by ⁠ani_music⁠ (both ⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠⁠ by ⁠⁠BeezleFM⁠⁠ (⁠⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠⁠) Cover art: ⁠⁠dustandhalos⁠⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Sound effects: ⁠⁠Pop-up Sound (Outgoing message)⁠ by ⁠BeezleFM⁠ (⁠CC-BY 4.0⁠) Cover art: ⁠dustandhalos⁠ For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499⁠!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

A Good Omens ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠fanfic by nieded⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Full title: Accept a Little Spin. Part 3 of the #RainbowRoad series. Credits Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Justice And Fame by Rafael Krux⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Epic Movie Adventure Cinematic by Alex-Productions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sunset Hardcore by Sascha Ende®⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (all under ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠filmmusic.io standard license⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Cover art: dustandhalos For tags and other details, to leave kudos and comments, please visit the corresponding post on archiveofourown: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://archiveofourown.org/works/55323499!⁠ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/literarion/message

*This episode was recorded prior to the start of the SAG-AFTRA strike.* LOOK OUT! It's only Films To Be Buried With! Join your host Brett Goldstein as he talks life, death, love and the universe with wonderful actor and all round good person SARAH SNOOK! Below will be the original writeup for this episode which originally aired January 16th 2020. Can you believe it... How much life we've lived since those days long since completed and now behind us. Well, here is a lovely chance to revisit one of those historical days with a pure feelgood shot of FTBBW gold, from episode 79! Of course a lot of folks will know Sarah from Succession, which went on to become a pure televisual phenomenon, but make sure you investigate her many roles in other shows and films because she's truly excellent. Australia's Emma Stone? You got it! ENJOY! ––––––––––––––––––––––––– Surely you must know Sarah as ‘Shiv' from the quite wonderful series ‘Succession', which is almost too good to even begin getting into here - i would venture to say that you should track it down and prepare for a weekend indoors while you race to get it all finished... If not, keep it in mind for the future okay? Anyway - you will hugely enjoy this one, as Sarah is a delight and does not feature on a to of podcasts either, so it's a rare treat indeed! They get into many objects of chat including some choice afterlife nuggets involving bread (gold lies within that one), fancy cinemas, days of childhood, that old chestnut and everyone's friend AALS (aka Altitude Adjusted Lachrymosity Syndrome or crying on planes), how to cry on film and forgetting the film Titanic. Glorious! You'll love it! You'll love Sarah! IMDB SOUL MATES  SUCCESSION  BRETT GOLDSTEIN on TWITTER BRETT GOLDSTEIN on INSTAGRAM TED LASSO SHRINKING SOUL MATES SUPERBOB (Brett's 2015 feature film) CORNERBOYS with BRETT & SCROOBIUS PIP DISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK • FACEBOOK / INSTAGRAMSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of Status Check with Spivey, two experienced and respected law school Deans—Craig Boise, Dean of Syracuse University College of Law, and Daniel Rodriguez, former Dean of Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law—discuss the history, the present, and the future of law school admissions and legal education. Their conversation covers a range of topics, including problems with the LSAT, the recent test-optional proposal to the ABA, the impacts that the U.S. News law school rankings have had on legal education (and their thoughts on the new methodology changes), and a new pathway to law school admissions, JD-Next. You can find basic information on JD-Next, as well as a list of schools that have been granted variances to accept JD-Next in lieu of another admissions test (LSAT or GRE), here. Craig Boise is the Dean of Syracuse University College of Law, where he is currently completing his final year in that role, after which he will be working with colleges, universities, and law schools as a part of Spivey Consulting Group. He is a Member of the Council of the ABA Section on Legal Education, previously served on the ABA's Standards Review Committee and the Steering Committee of the AALS's Deans' Forum, and served as Dean of Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. He holds a JD from the University of Chicago Law School and an LLM in Tax from NYU School of Law. Daniel Rodriguez is a current professor and former Dean of Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law. He served as President of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) in 2014 and served as Dean of the University of San Diego School of Law from 1998 to 2005. He holds a JD from Harvard Law School. You can listen and subscribe to Status Check with Spivey on ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠, ⁠Spotify⁠, ⁠Stitcher⁠, ⁠YouTube⁠, and ⁠Google Podcasts⁠. You can read a full transcript of this episode ⁠here⁠.

Editor's Note:  This is a re-broadcast.  It was originally published in June 2021.Welcome to The Endow Podcast! This podcast is a forum for women to foster conversations about the intellectual life and intentional community for the cultivation of the feminine genius. On this episode, Simone Rizkallah, Director of Program Growth, interviews Helen Alvare on her personal vocation, religious freedom, and family life.Helen Alvaré is a Professor of Law at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, where she teaches Family Law, Law and Religion, and Property Law. She publishes on matters concerning marriage, parenting, non-marital households, and the First Amendment religion clauses. She is faculty advisor to the law school's Civil Rights Law Journal, and the Latino/a Law Student Association, a Member of the Holy See's Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life (Vatican City), a board member of Catholic Relief Services, a member of the Executive Committee of the AALS' Section on Law and Religion, and an ABC News consultant. She cooperates with the Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations as a speaker and a delegate to various United Nations conferences concerning women and the family.In addition to her books, and her publications in law reviews and other academic journals, Professor Alvaré publishes regularly in news outlets including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, and CNN.com. She also speaks at academic and professional conferences in the United States, Europe, Latin America, and Australia.Prior to joining the faculty of Scalia Law, Professor Alvaré taught at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America; represented the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops before legislative bodies, academic audiences, and the media; and was a litigation attorney for the Philadelphia law firm of Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young.Professor Alvaré received her law degree from Cornell University School of Law and her master's degree in Systematic Theology from the Catholic University of America.  Thanks for listening!Support the Endow PodcastWhat's on your mind and heart? Let us know by connecting with The Endow Team on social media!Facebook at www.facebook.com/endowgroupsInstagram at www.instagram.com/endowgroupsWant to start your own Endow Group? Learn more by visiting our website at www.endowgroups.org or reach out to us at info@endowgroups.org. We look forward to serving you!

Kathy is Assistant Dean, Animal Legal Education at George Washington University Law School and Director of the Animal Legal Education Initiative. Kathy has been a clinical law professor for 30 years and has been teaching animal law for 22 years. She is the first law professor hired to teach animal law full-time. Kathy helped develop the Center for Animal Law Studies at Lewis & Clark Law School (L&C). For fourteen years she taught there and directed the Animal Law Clinic. She also created and directed the Aquatic Animal Law Initiative and is the co-founder of World Aquatic Animal Day along with Amy P. Wilson. Kathy co-authored “Animal Law in a Nutshell”, “Animal Law – New Perspectives on Teaching Traditional Law” and the amicus briefs submitted in the U.S. v. Stevens and Justice v. Gwendolyn Vercher cases. She has written numerous law review and other articles and teaches and lectures widely across the U.S. and internationally. Kathy was a board member with the Animal Legal Defense Fund; helped found the Animal Law Committee of the Cuyahoga County Bar; and was the chair and a founder of the Animal Law Section and the Balance in Legal Education Section of the American Association of Law Schools (AALS). She was also a co-chair of the Clinical Legal Education Section of the AALS, is on the board of the Center for Teaching Peace and is a fellow at the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics. In Sentientist Conversations we talk about the two most important questions: “what's real?” & “who matters?” Sentientism is "evidence, reason & compassion for all sentient beings." The video of our conversation is here on YouTube. We discuss: 00:00 Welcome - Randall Abate 01:30 Kathy's Intro - #animallaw professor & practitioner - #nonviolence activism - "This is one area of law where students can do something today... to change things" - "& they're implicated... what we eat, what we wear" - "It's hard to say 'all day I'm talking about protecting animals' & go home & eat them" 06:39 What's Real? - Raised #Catholic & #republican "Rules bounded, status quo, respected authority... dogmatically religious" - "You weren't supposed to question"... just listen to parents & nuns - Noticing inconsistencies (in one place girls can be altar servers, in another they can't) - Mid to late #1960's "A lot of questioning" - #Vatican II - Liking justice aspects, not liking treatment of women/indigenous people - Questioning in college - "If people who told me that god existed... were wrong about women... they could be wrong about god" ...and much more. Full show notes at Sentientism.info. Sentientism is “Evidence, reason & compassion for all sentient beings.” More at Sentientism.info. Join our "I'm a Sentientist" wall via this simple form. Everyone, Sentientist or not, is welcome in our groups. The biggest so far is here on FaceBook. Come join us there!

LOOK OUT! It's only Films To Be Buried With! THE RESURRECTION!Join your host Brett Goldstein as he talks life, death, love and the universe with Ted Lasso star (aka Sam Obisanya) TOHEEB JIMOH!...of course Toheeb is a working actor well known for many other brilliant roles but for today, let's think AFC Richmond. Toheeb last appeared on here all those years ago in August 2020 - but Brett has brought young Toheeb back to go through the whole beautiful cinematic ordeal one more time, for the wonder of us all! A lovely one, as we get to catch up on a ton of Toheeb goodness, and hear those new questions out in the open along with new revelations including drama school scuffles, self tapes, our old friend AALS (or Altitude Adjusted Lachrymosity Syndrome or crying on planes), TWO new film premises, and an exciting new marriage pact! What a treat. Find out of he makes it through - ENJOY!FTBBW EP109 (Toheeb's debut)TED LASSOIMDBTHE POWERANTHONYBRETT GOLDSTEIN on TWITTERBRETT GOLDSTEIN on INSTAGRAMBRETT GOLDSTEIN on PATREONTED LASSOSOULMATESSUPERBOB (Brett's 2015 feature film)CORNERBOYS with BRETT & SCROOBIUS PIPDISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on FACEBOOKDISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on INSTAGRAMSupport this show http://supporter.acast.com/filmstobeburiedwith. Our GDPR privacy policy was updated on August 8, 2022. Visit acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sandra Day O'Connor became the first female Supreme Court Justice in 1981, but before that there was a long history of female candidates waiting in the wings. On this week's 51%, we discuss the honors and limits of being shortlisted with the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court. We also take a look at President Biden's shortlist, following his pledge to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. Guests: Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson, authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. Follow Along You're listening to 51%, a WAMC production dedicated to women's issues and experiences. Thanks for joining us, I'm Jesse King. With Associate Justice Stephen Breyer set to retire, President Biden has said he will tap his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court by the end of February. The Democrat has also said his pick will be the first Black woman to fill the role, more than 40 years after the nomination of Sandra Day O'Connor, the first female Supreme Court justice, in 1981. When we talk about women in the Supreme Court, we tend to start with O'Connor — but as our guests today will tell us, there's actually a long, untold history of women being considered, but ultimately passed over, for the nation's highest court. Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson are the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court, out now on New York University Press. Jefferson is an internationally-recognized expert on professional responsibility and legal ethics, as well as a professor of law at the University of Houston, while Johnson is vice dean of academic affairs and a professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego. Both have done extensive research on gender equality in the legal profession. Their latest title, in addition to sharing the stories of the so-called “Shortlisted Sisters,” examines the challenges women and minorities face when seeking positions of power — be it in the courts, in the boardroom, or on the playing field. What inspired you to write this book? Johnson: It was about the time that President Obama was faced with two vacancies on the Court. And he, as we now know, nominated two women, now Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, to the U.S. Supreme Court. And Renee and I just had the usual conversations that law professors have about those nominations. We were particularly struck, at that time, by the way the media was covering their nominations, the scrutiny that was being focused on things unrelated to their qualifications. I mean, these are two extraordinarily qualified women. You can't not be and make it to the Supreme Court. But the mainstream media was focusing on their appearance and their sexuality, on the fact that they didn't have a husband. And we were perplexed and frustrated, and frankly, offended by some of the coverage. And because we're academics, we have a lot of privilege that comes along with that role. And so we set about the business of studying the way that the media portrays nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court through a gender lens. And it was in the midst of that research study, during which we and a team of research assistants read about 4,000 articles that covered Supreme Court nominations, that we found an article that really struck our attention, and we flagged it. It was an article written in the 1970s that appeared in the New York Times, and it talked about President Nixon was faced with a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and he had shortlisted two women, a woman named Sylvia Bacon, and then a judge in California named Mildred Lillie. Now, the article reminded us of what we were observing in 2009 in 2010, in terms of the coverage. The article noted that Judge Lillie looked great in a bathing suit, and that it was fortunate that she had no children. Now, we were stunned and shocked, of course, by that sexism in the coverage, but even more importantly, we realized we had never heard of this Judge Lillie. We didn't know that Nixon had in fact, placed two women on a shortlist for the Supreme Court in the 1970s. And so this article, and our discovery of this fact, really led us to ask the research question that informed the entire book and that is, what other women may have also been shortlisted? We think of gender in the Supreme Court around Sandra Day O'Connor. She, of course, was the first woman who was put on the court by President Reagan in the early ‘80s. But we wondered if there was another thread through this storyline, and in fact, learned that there were nine women who were shortlisted up until the point at which Sandra Day O'Connor became the first. And so who are these nine women? Jefferson: OK, so you gotta go back to the 1930s and start with Florence Allen. She was shortlisted by FDR. And actually, we have seen the memo in his archives from 1937. This is the year that he was considering adding more justices to the Supreme Court, because he was unhappy with the Court continuing to strike down his New Deal legislation. Ultimately, that didn't happen, and she remained on that shortlist – although he did make her the first female Federal Court of Appeals judge on the Sixth Circuit, and prior to that, she was a judge on the Ohio Supreme Court. Then LBJ was next, he shortlisted Soia Mentschikoff. She was the first female law professor at Harvard Law School and the first female professor at the University of Chicago Law School. Then you have the two women we've already talked about, or that Hannah already mentioned: Sylvia Bacon, a judge in Washington D.C., and Mildred Lillie, a judge from California, both who found themselves on Nixon's shortlist. Then President Ford shortlists his Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Carla Hills. Well, he also considers Cornelia Kennedy, a judge on the Sixth Circuit. And then we jump over to President Reagan's shortlist, and his shortlist for the Supreme Court – of course, he campaigned on the promise to put a woman on the Court, so his shortlist included several women, including Judge Kennedy from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Sandra Day O'Connor, of course, and Joan Dempsey Klein, who was a judge from California, and Amalya Kearse, who is the only African American female to have been shortlisted up to O'Connor. She was on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals at the time. And I think that history has particular relevance right now as we are on the cusp of having, finally, 40 years later, our first Black female Supreme Court justice. And then who did I forget Hannah? There was one more. Johnson: Susie Sharp? Jefferson: Oh yeah! How could I forget Susie – and Susie Sharp, who was the first female justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court, and the first female Chief Justice elected to any state Supreme Court. And I don't know how I could possibly have forgotten her, because of all the women, her archives were definitely the most fun. They were filled not just with all of her opinions and drafts and the things she did as a judge, but all kinds of juicy details from her makeup routine, and her exercise routine, recipe ideas, travel. She was a fan of the royalty, so she clipped all kinds of things that were happening with the royal family. I'm not sure how I forgot her. But those are your nine. We didn't mean for it to be enough to seat a full Supreme Court, but as it turns out, we could have had nine female justices already on the Supreme Court. Is there anything that you think would be, I guess, different today, if any of these women had been selected? Johnson: I mean, it's a really interesting thought experiment to contemplate Florence Allen being appointed to the court by President Hoover or FDR, and what that would have meant, not just to the opinions that came out of the Supreme Court, but also how that would have opened doors for subsequent appointments – and not just subsequent appointments on the Supreme Court, but just to positions of leadership and power generally. We know that there's a great power in seeing representations of people who would like us in those very, very powerful positions. We talk in the book about Madeleine Albright, who was asked at one point if she ever contemplated being Secretary of State. And she said, “Well, that that thought had never really crossed my mind, because I never saw somebody in that role wearing a skirt.” And for many of us, myself included, walking through the hallways of my law school, the portraits of the professors who were there for ages were all white men. I didn't see very many representations of people who looked like me. Of course, I made it into the doors of the law school, but I think that if somebody like Allen or one of the early women had been elevated to the Supreme Court, I think it would have expedited our path forward, and perhaps gotten us a bit closer to issues of equity and equality in a bit more expedient fashion. Jefferson: And if I could just add to that: it isn't just about seeing women in these roles, but it's also just having the workplace ready for them. One of the things that we were, I guess, horrified and maybe a little amused, but mostly horrified to discover, is that some of these women in our study – in some ways couldn't be more different – but they had some common experiences. For example, when they got to courts, there were no bathrooms for them. So they had to either borrow a male colleague's bathroom. And in fact, with Florence Allen, going to the Sixth Circuit, they had to get federal funding to have appropriate facilities for her. The women were routinely told by employers, “We'd love to hire you, but we don't have facilities for women here.” And if women had been more present on the Supreme Court earlier on, not only would we have been inspired to see ourselves in them, but frankly, the workplaces and public life would have been open to women more quickly. I think that's a good point. It makes me think, are there areas where you still see room for improvement today? Jefferson: I think that the analogy of the physical spaces not being appropriate or amenable to women, we can extrapolate that a little bit and think about the structure of the workplace – not just in terms of locations of bathrooms, but what a workday looks like, and where one has to do their work. And especially in COVID, everyone has been thinking about work-life balance and issues, for example, of childcare. And that was definitely another theme we saw. So some of the women in our study never had children, others did. But one theme that was common from all of them was the lack of childcare support, and very difficult decisions they had to make in their professional lives. I think that those are decisions that women grapple with still today and that fall, to be sure, on all caregivers. But because women are disproportionately more likely to be the caregivers, they're more impacted. Johnson: Well, and that reminds me of one of the structural changes that one of the women in our study made. So Soia Mentschikoff, who Rene mentioned a few moments ago, she was one of the first female law professors in the country. She taught at Harvard. She's at the University of Chicago. She's the first permanent female dean at the University of Miami. And she was also the first female president of the AALS, the American Association of law schools, which is a national affinity organization for law professors, an organization that is still very much alive and thriving today. And when Mentschikoff was the president of AALS, she noticed that there were few female law professors who would attend the annual meeting, which was scheduled between the Christmas and the New Year holiday. And for women who were juggling life as a mother, as a spouse, as a professional, it was really difficult for them to get away to this important meeting. So she moved the date of the meeting. She made it after the holidays, which seems like a really simple thing. But in fact, once she did that, women law professors were able to attend. And perhaps it's not readily apparent to your listeners, the importance of attendance at a meeting like this: it's a place where scholars come together and share their research, it's where connections are built, it's where relationships developed that might lead to other professional opportunities, new jobs, speaking opportunities, even awards. Renee and I ourselves were beneficiaries of Mentschikoff's work to change that meeting date. We routinely attend this meeting – our media study that I referenced earlier, was the recipient of an award at that very conference. And so sometimes the structural changes don't require massive efforts to make them, but the impact can be quite significant. You also talk in the book about the use of shortlists in general, and at times, the limits or even harms of shortlists. Can you tell me a little more about that? Jefferson: Well, to be sure, in order to be selected for a position of leadership and power, whether it's the Supreme Court or, you know, another shortlist that's been in the media lately relates to head coaches for football. You got to be on the shortlist to be selected. But what we found in our own study, and I think this is a fair critique of shortlists beyond the Supreme Court, is that sometimes that very list can be used by an organization to claim that they care about diversity – because they have a diverse slate on the shortlist – but then it actually is used to perpetuate the status quo, when the individual selected is not the diverse individual. And so we push back on that in our book. We show how the use of shortlists perhaps kept women off the Supreme Court longer than it should [have]. With Nixon, like that example we told you, that's where the books origins were – we've listened to his Oval Office tapes. So he did put two women on his Supreme Court shortlist, but behind closed doors, he said he would never put a woman on the Supreme Court. In fact, he said he didn't even think women should be allowed to vote. But he wanted their votes. And so he used the placement of women on his shortlist to be able to go and politically say, “Yes, we at least considered you this time. And maybe your time will come.” And he was so blatant that he actually delivered a speech to a women's group after he appointed Justices Rehnquist and Powell from his shortlist – both white men, of course. And we've seen that same kind of dynamic play out. So we are mindful that you've got to be on the shortlist to be selected, but our book focuses on ways that sometimes that effort for reform can actually undermine the very objective it's meant to achieve. So because how do we avoid that? You mentioned what's going on right now with the NFL even, is there a better way to enforce things like the Rooney Rule or is it more of a matter of changing an organization's culture? Johnson: Well, I think part of what we're doing, we're just we're shedding light on the shortlist, right? We are illuminating this practice and that many of the women in our study were perpetually shortlisted. "Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.” There was an old Listerine ad apparently that sort of bored that sentiment, and Sharp was shortlisted so many times that that was sort of how she referred to it, this chronic shortlisting. And I think part of how we can address it, or fix it, or keep it from happening in this negative sort of way, is to tell the story, to shed the light, to make it evident. Jefferson: But there are also a little bit more concrete things that can be done. For example, Biden has a shortlist of all Black women, so we know that a Black woman will come off the shortlist. That is not necessarily what we recommend in the book, although of course, we appreciate the fact that Biden is finally making good on something that is long deserved. But another example that comes from the book – so I mentioned Amalya Kearse, she was the only Black female in our study that was shortlisted for the court before O'Connor. She will go on to not only appear on another shortlist of Regan – Regan had multiple vacancies, and could have given us more than one woman on the Court, but he checked that box and was ready to move on – she was later considered for the court by George H.W. Bush and also by Bill Clinton, for the very seat that Justice Breyer now holds. So it's interesting that in his retirement, [his seat] will finally go to a black woman. But to your question, how did she end up on the shortlist at all? And how did she end up on the Second Circuit Federal Court of Appeals? This is a concrete example of the kind of reform that we are interested in, and its structural reform in the decision-making process. When President Carter took office, he decided to change the way federal judges were appointed to the court. And of course, he never had a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court – he would have given us our first female justice, I'm sure. But he transformed the lower federal courts. He put more women on lower federal courts than all presidents before him. And the way he did it was by taking that decision process out of behind-the-scenes [factors of] who do you know, who are you friends with? And he actually created a commission through executive order. It had 16 different panels or groups across the country, and the panels were diverse in makeup: women, men, minorities. They were tasked with interviewing and vetting candidates for the federal judiciary who were also diverse women, men, and minorities. And so a structural reform like that is another example of how a shortlist can go from being sort of lip service to diversity, and actually having meaningful, real change. Let's talk about President Biden's shortlist then. Who are some of the women that Biden has on his shortlist, and what does this mean for the Court? Jefferson: So I'll take the second part of that question first, and then Hannah may have some thoughts as well. I think what this means for the U.S. Supreme Court – we aren't going to see a major ideological shift, it's still going to remain sort of 6-3 with this conservative majority – but it is absolutely transformational in terms of the Court's history and its legacy. It will increase the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court as it moves ever closer to reflecting the public that it serves. For the first time ever, we will have two Black justices, we will have four female justices. And to the point Hannah was making earlier, about it matters who we see holding these roles: young girls, young Black girls across the country, are going to be inspired to become lawyers, become judges, and to reach for the highest pinnacle in whatever career goal they might possibly have. Now, as for the names that we're seeing, I could start with the most obvious, and Hannah might want to jump in with some names as well. But the one that I think everyone is speculating as most likely is Kentanji Brown Jackson, and that's because she was confirmed by this very same Senate just a year ago, for the seat she currently holds on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Prior to that, she was a federal judge and a district court [judge]. She's also served as the federal public defender. And I think this is kind of a nice piece for Breyer's legacy: she clerked for Justice Breyer. And so he would be retiring from a seat that he would be giving to one of his former clerks, I think she's probably the most likely pick. She also received bipartisan support when she was confirmed by the Senate, so in a world where everything seems like the parties can never agree, to be able to say that, I think, also probably has her very close to the top of the list. Johnson: Yeah, I don't disagree with Rene's analysis, and I think it's worth highlighting that today, the process is so incredibly partisan. We've talked about Amalya Kearse, who was one of the shortlisted women that we write about in the book – she was shortlisted by presidents across partisan lines. We don't see that today. It would be unthinkable, really, to think about our former president and President Biden actually nominating or shortlisting, even, some of the same women. Other judges, of course, are on the list, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention Melissa Murray, who is a law professor at NYU, and importantly, wrote the foreword to the paperback edition of Shortlisted that is coming out. So we feel really, really lucky to have her writing start the new edition of the book. But the list is long, it is filled with incredibly qualified women. It's going to be a difficult pick, for sure. It will, of course, include political calculations, as all shortlisted [candidates] and nominees have [navigated] in the past. But I guess we will know by the end of this month, is what Biden tells us. Well, as you prepare for your paperback edition to come out, what's the biggest thing you hope readers take away from your book? Jefferson: There's a couple things. On the one hand, the book is an untold history. So I want readers to know that the history is so much more than – I mean, not to take away from Sandra Day O'Connor being the first female justice on the Supreme Court, but the history is so much more rich, and history tells us a lot about what's happening now. It helps put into context just how long overdue the placement of a Black female justice is on the court. But the other thing I hope readers take away is that we can learn a lot from the lives of these women, that apply to everyone as they're trying to navigate their own career trajectory, their own balance of personal and public and family life, professional life. And so it's very much a book about the history of the Supreme Court that's been untold. But it's also very much a book about these women and their incredible lives. And I won't speak for Hannah on this, but I will say, learning from these women, they felt like real mentors to me, and helped me navigate my own professional pursuits. And so I hope they do the same for readers. Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson are the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court. You can find it now at all major booksellers. It'll be out in paperback with a new foreword from Melissa Murray next month. For more, check out shortlistedbook.com. As Jefferson noted, Biden's nomination, while historic, would not tip the current conservative majority on the Supreme Court. Following a December hearing on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Court appears poised to overturn — or at least weaken — Roe v. Wade in the coming months. That's either a good or bad thing depending on where you stand in the debate, and states across the country are preparing accordingly. This November, residents of Vermont will decide whether the state constitution should be changed to assure personal reproductive freedom. Proposition 5, or the “Reproductive Liberty Amendment,” was passed by the Vermont House on Tuesday, February 8, checking the last box in the amendment process before moving the issue to voters. WAMC's Pat Bradley brings us more. You can find Pat Bradley's story here. You've been listening to 51%. 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by me, Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is “Lolita” by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. A big thanks to Renee Knake Jefferson, Hannah Brenner Johnson, and Pat Bradley for contributing to this week's episode. To learn more about our guests, or just the show in general, check us out at wamcpodcasts.org. You can also find us on Twitter and Instagram @51percentradio — let us know how we're doing or if you have a story you'd like to share as well. Until next week, I'm Jesse King for 51%.

Sandra Day O'Connor became the first female Supreme Court Justice in 1981, but before that there was a long history of female candidates waiting in the wings. On this week's 51%, we discuss the honors and limits of being shortlisted with the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court. We also take a look at President Biden's shortlist, following his pledge to nominate the first Black woman to the Supreme Court. Guests: Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson, authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is "Lolita" by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. Follow Along You're listening to 51%, a WAMC production dedicated to women's issues and experiences. Thanks for joining us, I'm Jesse King. With Associate Justice Stephen Breyer set to retire, President Biden has said he will tap his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court by the end of February. The Democrat has also said his pick will be the first Black woman to fill the role, more than 40 years after the nomination of Sandra Day O'Connor, the first female Supreme Court justice, in 1981. When we talk about women in the Supreme Court, we tend to start with O'Connor — but as our guests today will tell us, there's actually a long, untold history of women being considered, but ultimately passed over, for the nation's highest court. Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson are the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court, out now on New York University Press. Jefferson is an internationally-recognized expert on professional responsibility and legal ethics, as well as a professor of law at the University of Houston, while Johnson is vice dean of academic affairs and a professor at California Western School of Law in San Diego. Both have done extensive research on gender equality in the legal profession. Their latest title, in addition to sharing the stories of the so-called “Shortlisted Sisters,” examines the challenges women and minorities face when seeking positions of power — be it in the courts, in the boardroom, or on the playing field. What inspired you to write this book? Johnson: It was about the time that President Obama was faced with two vacancies on the Court. And he, as we now know, nominated two women, now Justices Sotomayor and Kagan, to the U.S. Supreme Court. And Renee and I just had the usual conversations that law professors have about those nominations. We were particularly struck, at that time, by the way the media was covering their nominations, the scrutiny that was being focused on things unrelated to their qualifications. I mean, these are two extraordinarily qualified women. You can't not be and make it to the Supreme Court. But the mainstream media was focusing on their appearance and their sexuality, on the fact that they didn't have a husband. And we were perplexed and frustrated, and frankly, offended by some of the coverage. And because we're academics, we have a lot of privilege that comes along with that role. And so we set about the business of studying the way that the media portrays nominees to the U.S. Supreme Court through a gender lens. And it was in the midst of that research study, during which we and a team of research assistants read about 4,000 articles that covered Supreme Court nominations, that we found an article that really struck our attention, and we flagged it. It was an article written in the 1970s that appeared in the New York Times, and it talked about President Nixon was faced with a vacancy on the Supreme Court, and he had shortlisted two women, a woman named Sylvia Bacon, and then a judge in California named Mildred Lillie. Now, the article reminded us of what we were observing in 2009 in 2010, in terms of the coverage. The article noted that Judge Lillie looked great in a bathing suit, and that it was fortunate that she had no children. Now, we were stunned and shocked, of course, by that sexism in the coverage, but even more importantly, we realized we had never heard of this Judge Lillie. We didn't know that Nixon had in fact, placed two women on a shortlist for the Supreme Court in the 1970s. And so this article, and our discovery of this fact, really led us to ask the research question that informed the entire book and that is, what other women may have also been shortlisted? We think of gender in the Supreme Court around Sandra Day O'Connor. She, of course, was the first woman who was put on the court by President Reagan in the early ‘80s. But we wondered if there was another thread through this storyline, and in fact, learned that there were nine women who were shortlisted up until the point at which Sandra Day O'Connor became the first. And so who are these nine women? Jefferson: OK, so you gotta go back to the 1930s and start with Florence Allen. She was shortlisted by FDR. And actually, we have seen the memo in his archives from 1937. This is the year that he was considering adding more justices to the Supreme Court, because he was unhappy with the Court continuing to strike down his New Deal legislation. Ultimately, that didn't happen, and she remained on that shortlist – although he did make her the first female Federal Court of Appeals judge on the Sixth Circuit, and prior to that, she was a judge on the Ohio Supreme Court. Then LBJ was next, he shortlisted Soia Mentschikoff. She was the first female law professor at Harvard Law School and the first female professor at the University of Chicago Law School. Then you have the two women we've already talked about, or that Hannah already mentioned: Sylvia Bacon, a judge in Washington D.C., and Mildred Lillie, a judge from California, both who found themselves on Nixon's shortlist. Then President Ford shortlists his Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Carla Hills. Well, he also considers Cornelia Kennedy, a judge on the Sixth Circuit. And then we jump over to President Reagan's shortlist, and his shortlist for the Supreme Court – of course, he campaigned on the promise to put a woman on the Court, so his shortlist included several women, including Judge Kennedy from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Sandra Day O'Connor, of course, and Joan Dempsey Klein, who was a judge from California, and Amalya Kearse, who is the only African American female to have been shortlisted up to O'Connor. She was on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals at the time. And I think that history has particular relevance right now as we are on the cusp of having, finally, 40 years later, our first Black female Supreme Court justice. And then who did I forget Hannah? There was one more. Johnson: Susie Sharp? Jefferson: Oh yeah! How could I forget Susie – and Susie Sharp, who was the first female justice on the North Carolina Supreme Court, and the first female Chief Justice elected to any state Supreme Court. And I don't know how I could possibly have forgotten her, because of all the women, her archives were definitely the most fun. They were filled not just with all of her opinions and drafts and the things she did as a judge, but all kinds of juicy details from her makeup routine, and her exercise routine, recipe ideas, travel. She was a fan of the royalty, so she clipped all kinds of things that were happening with the royal family. I'm not sure how I forgot her. But those are your nine. We didn't mean for it to be enough to seat a full Supreme Court, but as it turns out, we could have had nine female justices already on the Supreme Court. Is there anything that you think would be, I guess, different today, if any of these women had been selected? Johnson: I mean, it's a really interesting thought experiment to contemplate Florence Allen being appointed to the court by President Hoover or FDR, and what that would have meant, not just to the opinions that came out of the Supreme Court, but also how that would have opened doors for subsequent appointments – and not just subsequent appointments on the Supreme Court, but just to positions of leadership and power generally. We know that there's a great power in seeing representations of people who would like us in those very, very powerful positions. We talk in the book about Madeleine Albright, who was asked at one point if she ever contemplated being Secretary of State. And she said, “Well, that that thought had never really crossed my mind, because I never saw somebody in that role wearing a skirt.” And for many of us, myself included, walking through the hallways of my law school, the portraits of the professors who were there for ages were all white men. I didn't see very many representations of people who looked like me. Of course, I made it into the doors of the law school, but I think that if somebody like Allen or one of the early women had been elevated to the Supreme Court, I think it would have expedited our path forward, and perhaps gotten us a bit closer to issues of equity and equality in a bit more expedient fashion. Jefferson: And if I could just add to that: it isn't just about seeing women in these roles, but it's also just having the workplace ready for them. One of the things that we were, I guess, horrified and maybe a little amused, but mostly horrified to discover, is that some of these women in our study – in some ways couldn't be more different – but they had some common experiences. For example, when they got to courts, there were no bathrooms for them. So they had to either borrow a male colleague's bathroom. And in fact, with Florence Allen, going to the Sixth Circuit, they had to get federal funding to have appropriate facilities for her. The women were routinely told by employers, “We'd love to hire you, but we don't have facilities for women here.” And if women had been more present on the Supreme Court earlier on, not only would we have been inspired to see ourselves in them, but frankly, the workplaces and public life would have been open to women more quickly. I think that's a good point. It makes me think, are there areas where you still see room for improvement today? Jefferson: I think that the analogy of the physical spaces not being appropriate or amenable to women, we can extrapolate that a little bit and think about the structure of the workplace – not just in terms of locations of bathrooms, but what a workday looks like, and where one has to do their work. And especially in COVID, everyone has been thinking about work-life balance and issues, for example, of childcare. And that was definitely another theme we saw. So some of the women in our study never had children, others did. But one theme that was common from all of them was the lack of childcare support, and very difficult decisions they had to make in their professional lives. I think that those are decisions that women grapple with still today and that fall, to be sure, on all caregivers. But because women are disproportionately more likely to be the caregivers, they're more impacted. Johnson: Well, and that reminds me of one of the structural changes that one of the women in our study made. So Soia Mentschikoff, who Rene mentioned a few moments ago, she was one of the first female law professors in the country. She taught at Harvard. She's at the University of Chicago. She's the first permanent female dean at the University of Miami. And she was also the first female president of the AALS, the American Association of law schools, which is a national affinity organization for law professors, an organization that is still very much alive and thriving today. And when Mentschikoff was the president of AALS, she noticed that there were few female law professors who would attend the annual meeting, which was scheduled between the Christmas and the New Year holiday. And for women who were juggling life as a mother, as a spouse, as a professional, it was really difficult for them to get away to this important meeting. So she moved the date of the meeting. She made it after the holidays, which seems like a really simple thing. But in fact, once she did that, women law professors were able to attend. And perhaps it's not readily apparent to your listeners, the importance of attendance at a meeting like this: it's a place where scholars come together and share their research, it's where connections are built, it's where relationships developed that might lead to other professional opportunities, new jobs, speaking opportunities, even awards. Renee and I ourselves were beneficiaries of Mentschikoff's work to change that meeting date. We routinely attend this meeting – our media study that I referenced earlier, was the recipient of an award at that very conference. And so sometimes the structural changes don't require massive efforts to make them, but the impact can be quite significant. You also talk in the book about the use of shortlists in general, and at times, the limits or even harms of shortlists. Can you tell me a little more about that? Jefferson: Well, to be sure, in order to be selected for a position of leadership and power, whether it's the Supreme Court or, you know, another shortlist that's been in the media lately relates to head coaches for football. You got to be on the shortlist to be selected. But what we found in our own study, and I think this is a fair critique of shortlists beyond the Supreme Court, is that sometimes that very list can be used by an organization to claim that they care about diversity – because they have a diverse slate on the shortlist – but then it actually is used to perpetuate the status quo, when the individual selected is not the diverse individual. And so we push back on that in our book. We show how the use of shortlists perhaps kept women off the Supreme Court longer than it should [have]. With Nixon, like that example we told you, that's where the books origins were – we've listened to his Oval Office tapes. So he did put two women on his Supreme Court shortlist, but behind closed doors, he said he would never put a woman on the Supreme Court. In fact, he said he didn't even think women should be allowed to vote. But he wanted their votes. And so he used the placement of women on his shortlist to be able to go and politically say, “Yes, we at least considered you this time. And maybe your time will come.” And he was so blatant that he actually delivered a speech to a women's group after he appointed Justices Rehnquist and Powell from his shortlist – both white men, of course. And we've seen that same kind of dynamic play out. So we are mindful that you've got to be on the shortlist to be selected, but our book focuses on ways that sometimes that effort for reform can actually undermine the very objective it's meant to achieve. So because how do we avoid that? You mentioned what's going on right now with the NFL even, is there a better way to enforce things like the Rooney Rule or is it more of a matter of changing an organization's culture? Johnson: Well, I think part of what we're doing, we're just we're shedding light on the shortlist, right? We are illuminating this practice and that many of the women in our study were perpetually shortlisted. "Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.” There was an old Listerine ad apparently that sort of bored that sentiment, and Sharp was shortlisted so many times that that was sort of how she referred to it, this chronic shortlisting. And I think part of how we can address it, or fix it, or keep it from happening in this negative sort of way, is to tell the story, to shed the light, to make it evident. Jefferson: But there are also a little bit more concrete things that can be done. For example, Biden has a shortlist of all Black women, so we know that a Black woman will come off the shortlist. That is not necessarily what we recommend in the book, although of course, we appreciate the fact that Biden is finally making good on something that is long deserved. But another example that comes from the book – so I mentioned Amalya Kearse, she was the only Black female in our study that was shortlisted for the court before O'Connor. She will go on to not only appear on another shortlist of Regan – Regan had multiple vacancies, and could have given us more than one woman on the Court, but he checked that box and was ready to move on – she was later considered for the court by George H.W. Bush and also by Bill Clinton, for the very seat that Justice Breyer now holds. So it's interesting that in his retirement, [his seat] will finally go to a black woman. But to your question, how did she end up on the shortlist at all? And how did she end up on the Second Circuit Federal Court of Appeals? This is a concrete example of the kind of reform that we are interested in, and its structural reform in the decision-making process. When President Carter took office, he decided to change the way federal judges were appointed to the court. And of course, he never had a vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court – he would have given us our first female justice, I'm sure. But he transformed the lower federal courts. He put more women on lower federal courts than all presidents before him. And the way he did it was by taking that decision process out of behind-the-scenes [factors of] who do you know, who are you friends with? And he actually created a commission through executive order. It had 16 different panels or groups across the country, and the panels were diverse in makeup: women, men, minorities. They were tasked with interviewing and vetting candidates for the federal judiciary who were also diverse women, men, and minorities. And so a structural reform like that is another example of how a shortlist can go from being sort of lip service to diversity, and actually having meaningful, real change. Let's talk about President Biden's shortlist then. Who are some of the women that Biden has on his shortlist, and what does this mean for the Court? Jefferson: So I'll take the second part of that question first, and then Hannah may have some thoughts as well. I think what this means for the U.S. Supreme Court – we aren't going to see a major ideological shift, it's still going to remain sort of 6-3 with this conservative majority – but it is absolutely transformational in terms of the Court's history and its legacy. It will increase the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court as it moves ever closer to reflecting the public that it serves. For the first time ever, we will have two Black justices, we will have four female justices. And to the point Hannah was making earlier, about it matters who we see holding these roles: young girls, young Black girls across the country, are going to be inspired to become lawyers, become judges, and to reach for the highest pinnacle in whatever career goal they might possibly have. Now, as for the names that we're seeing, I could start with the most obvious, and Hannah might want to jump in with some names as well. But the one that I think everyone is speculating as most likely is Kentanji Brown Jackson, and that's because she was confirmed by this very same Senate just a year ago, for the seat she currently holds on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Prior to that, she was a federal judge and a district court [judge]. She's also served as the federal public defender. And I think this is kind of a nice piece for Breyer's legacy: she clerked for Justice Breyer. And so he would be retiring from a seat that he would be giving to one of his former clerks, I think she's probably the most likely pick. She also received bipartisan support when she was confirmed by the Senate, so in a world where everything seems like the parties can never agree, to be able to say that, I think, also probably has her very close to the top of the list. Johnson: Yeah, I don't disagree with Rene's analysis, and I think it's worth highlighting that today, the process is so incredibly partisan. We've talked about Amalya Kearse, who was one of the shortlisted women that we write about in the book – she was shortlisted by presidents across partisan lines. We don't see that today. It would be unthinkable, really, to think about our former president and President Biden actually nominating or shortlisting, even, some of the same women. Other judges, of course, are on the list, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention Melissa Murray, who is a law professor at NYU, and importantly, wrote the foreword to the paperback edition of Shortlisted that is coming out. So we feel really, really lucky to have her writing start the new edition of the book. But the list is long, it is filled with incredibly qualified women. It's going to be a difficult pick, for sure. It will, of course, include political calculations, as all shortlisted [candidates] and nominees have [navigated] in the past. But I guess we will know by the end of this month, is what Biden tells us. Well, as you prepare for your paperback edition to come out, what's the biggest thing you hope readers take away from your book? Jefferson: There's a couple things. On the one hand, the book is an untold history. So I want readers to know that the history is so much more than – I mean, not to take away from Sandra Day O'Connor being the first female justice on the Supreme Court, but the history is so much more rich, and history tells us a lot about what's happening now. It helps put into context just how long overdue the placement of a Black female justice is on the court. But the other thing I hope readers take away is that we can learn a lot from the lives of these women, that apply to everyone as they're trying to navigate their own career trajectory, their own balance of personal and public and family life, professional life. And so it's very much a book about the history of the Supreme Court that's been untold. But it's also very much a book about these women and their incredible lives. And I won't speak for Hannah on this, but I will say, learning from these women, they felt like real mentors to me, and helped me navigate my own professional pursuits. And so I hope they do the same for readers. Renee Knake Jefferson and Hannah Brenner Johnson are the authors of Shortlisted: Women in the Shadows of the Supreme Court. You can find it now at all major booksellers. It'll be out in paperback with a new foreword from Melissa Murray next month. For more, check out shortlistedbook.com. As Jefferson noted, Biden's nomination, while historic, would not tip the current conservative majority on the Supreme Court. Following a December hearing on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the Court appears poised to overturn — or at least weaken — Roe v. Wade in the coming months. That's either a good or bad thing depending on where you stand in the debate, and states across the country are preparing accordingly. This November, residents of Vermont will decide whether the state constitution should be changed to assure personal reproductive freedom. Proposition 5, or the “Reproductive Liberty Amendment,” was passed by the Vermont House on Tuesday, February 8, checking the last box in the amendment process before moving the issue to voters. WAMC's Pat Bradley brings us more. You can find Pat Bradley's story here. You've been listening to 51%. 51% is a national production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio. It's produced by me, Jesse King. Our executive producer is Dr. Alan Chartock, and our theme is “Lolita” by the Albany-based artist Girl Blue. A big thanks to Renee Knake Jefferson, Hannah Brenner Johnson, and Pat Bradley for contributing to this week's episode. To learn more about our guests, or just the show in general, check us out at wamcpodcasts.org. You can also find us on Twitter and Instagram @51percentradio — let us know how we're doing or if you have a story you'd like to share as well. Until next week, I'm Jesse King for 51%.

Welcome back to America's leading higher education law podcast, EdUp Legal - part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network! Our guest for this episode is Howard Katz, who is Cleveland-Marshall College of Law's first Legal Educator-in-Residence, a position in which he advises the Dean, faculty, and staff on best practices in admissions, academic support, bar passage, curriculum, and pedagogy; he was also a former visiting professor at Cleveland-Marshall for several years. Professor Katz has served in a variety of academic and administrative leadership positions at a number of law schools, including the law schools at Duquesne University and Elon University. Professor Katz co-authored (with Kevin Francis O'Neill) Strategies and Techniques of Law School Teaching, which formed the foundation for a series of subject-matter teaching advice for law professors. He regularly participates in the annual Leading Edge conference convened by Wolters Kluwer and serves as a member of the executive committee of the New Teachers section of the AALS. Professor Katz discusses the resources available for new law teachers and includes advice for them in developing a strategy that demonstrates care for students while also effectively teaching the material. He is passionate about helping new professors, and improving the curriculum and the law school experience through enrichment of early skills and technology teaching, and improved student advising. Professor Katz opines about the future of legal education and the profession, and the need to narrow the gap of available legal services between those who can afford them, and those who cannot. Thank you so much for tuning in. Join us on the next episode for your EdUp time! Connect with your host - Patty Roberts ● If you want to get involved, leave us a comment or rate us! ● Join the EdUp community at The EdUp Experience! ● Follow EdUp on Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube Thanks for listening!

Welcome back to America's leading higher education law podcast, EdUp Legal - part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network! Our guest for this episode is Howard Katz, who is Cleveland-Marshall College of Law's first Legal Educator-in-Residence, a position in which he advises the Dean, faculty, and staff on best practices in admissions, academic support, bar passage, curriculum, and pedagogy; he was also a former visiting professor at Cleveland-Marshall for several years. Professor Katz has served in a variety of academic and administrative leadership positions at a number of law schools, including the law schools at Duquesne University and Elon University. Professor Katz co-authored (with Kevin Francis O'Neill) Strategies and Techniques of Law School Teaching, which formed the foundation for a series of subject-matter teaching advice for law professors. He regularly participates in the annual Leading Edge conference convened by Wolters Kluwer and serves as a member of the executive committee of the New Teachers section of the AALS. Professor Katz discusses the resources available for new law teachers and includes advice for them in developing a strategy that demonstrates care for students while also effectively teaching the material. He is passionate about helping new professors, and improving the curriculum and the law school experience through enrichment of early skills and technology teaching, and improved student advising. Professor Katz opines about the future of legal education and the profession, and the need to narrow the gap of available legal services between those who can afford them, and those who cannot. Thank you so much for tuning in. Join us on the next episode for your EdUp time! Connect with your host - Patty Roberts ● If you want to get involved, leave us a comment or rate us! ● Join the EdUp community at The EdUp Experience! ● Follow EdUp on Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube Thanks for listening!

This week's episode the ladies chat with Julie Cromer Young. She went to undergrad at the University of Alabama and got her degree in diplomacy. After undergrad, Julie went to law school at Harvard law (YES just like Elle Woods!) She talks about how law school is law school. But in retrospect, she realizes how many great opportunities there were and how intellectually stimulating it truly was. Julie shares some of her biggest struggles and accomplishments while at Harvard. For instance, she is the first lawyer in her family, she went straight through from undergrad to law school, and while in law school she realized she didn't care for the subject that got her there. Her biggest tip, get context to how the law works. If you have the ability to take a year or two off before law school, then do it! #thelawdoesnotexistinavoidJulie's TOP tip for current law students, PAY ATTENTION TO LEGAL WRITING! She talks about how important legal writing is in the field and how understanding the structure is the key to success as a lawyer. Julie's first job out of law school was at K&L Gates where she started as a 2L. While there she tried to dabble in as many areas as she could to try and figure out what type of law interested her.  Julie was offered a post-bar position and described the tasks she worked on in the litigation department. She ended up falling in love with trademark and IP work, and at the very same time, the internet came into what we know it as today! Ultimately Julie worked at 4 different law firms after she decided IP law was for her, but after leaving the 3rd firm, she began to realize that she wanted something with more of an immediate impact. Que the idea of becoming a law professor!Julie attended an AALS course that covered becoming a law professor, step-by-step. She says being a law school professor can be nerve-racking, but her feet tingle when she is in the classroom.  Julie was a civil procedure teacher when she first started. Julie now works for Bryce Legal as a Legal Career Coach and Résumé Writer, so please reach out to her HERE if you want to chat with her more about anything we discussed today!Julie was also kind enough to explain to us what “Big Law” means to most people, while the term big law can mean something different to people based on where they live in the US. When trying to decide if a firm you are looking at falls into the big law category, look HERE at the AmLaw 100 list to see if it's on there. If not, look at how many lawyers work at the firm, how much money does the firm makes a year, and how many locations does the firm have. FACEBOOK GROUP

Welcome back to America's leading higher education law podcast, EdUp Legal - part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network! In this episode, we hear from Kellye Y. Testy, President and CEO of The Law School Admission Council (LSAC). You will learn from Kellye Testy about her experience as dean of two law schools and President of the AALS, and how those roles inform her current work at LSAC, where her team focuses on increasing access to the profession and serving as a Law Hub that supports law school applicants to J.D., LL.M. and other law programs. Ms. Testy's skill and innovation in leading nonprofit LSAC leverages technology to provide support to higher education institutions and leading organizations in law, education, and business, to promote universal access to justice. Thank you so much for tuning in. Join us on the next episode for your EdUp time! Connect with your host - Patty Roberts ● If you want to get involved, leave us a comment or rate us! ● Join the EdUp community at The EdUp Experience! ● Follow EdUp on Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube Thanks for listening!

Welcome back to America's leading higher education law podcast, EdUp Legal - part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network! In this episode, we hear from Kellye Y. Testy, President and CEO of The Law School Admission Council (LSAC). You will learn from Kellye Testy about her experience as dean of two law schools and President of the AALS, and how those roles inform her current work at LSAC, where her team focuses on increasing access to the profession and serving as a Law Hub that supports law school applicants to J.D., LL.M. and other law programs. Ms. Testy's skill and innovation in leading nonprofit LSAC leverages technology to provide support to higher education institutions and leading organizations in law, education, and business, to promote universal access to justice. Thank you so much for tuning in. Join us on the next episode for your EdUp time! Connect with your host - Patty Roberts ● If you want to get involved, leave us a comment or rate us! ● Join the EdUp community at The EdUp Experience! ● Follow EdUp on Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube Thanks for listening!

Welcome to The Endow Podcast! This podcast is a forum for women to foster conversations about the intellectual life and intentional community for the cultivation of the feminine genius. On this episode, Simone Rizkallah, Director of Program Growth, interviews Helen Alvare on her personal vocation, religious freedom, and family life.Helen Alvaré is a Professor of Law at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, where she teaches Family Law, Law and Religion, and Property Law. She publishes on matters concerning marriage, parenting, non-marital households, and the First Amendment religion clauses. She is faculty advisor to the law school's Civil Rights Law Journal, and the Latino/a Law Student Association, a Member of the Holy See's Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life (Vatican City), a board member of Catholic Relief Services, a member of the Executive Committee of the AALS' Section on Law and Religion, and an ABC News consultant. She cooperates with the Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations as a speaker and a delegate to various United Nations conferences concerning women and the family.In addition to her books, and her publications in law reviews and other academic journals, Professor Alvaré publishes regularly in news outlets including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, and CNN.com. She also speaks at academic and professional conferences in the United States, Europe, Latin America, and Australia.Prior to joining the faculty of Scalia Law, Professor Alvaré taught at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America; represented the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops before legislative bodies, academic audiences, and the media; and was a litigation attorney for the Philadelphia law firm of Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young.Professor Alvaré received her law degree from Cornell University School of Law and her master's degree in Systematic Theology from the Catholic University of America.  Thanks for listening!Support the Endow PodcastWhat's on your mind and heart? Let us know by connecting with The Endow Team on social media!Facebook at www.facebook.com/endowgroups Instagram at www.instagram.com/endowgroupsWant to start your own Endow Group? Learn more by visiting our website at www.endowgroups.org or reach out to us at info@endowgroups.org. We look forward to serving you!

Aaron Freiwald, Managing Partner of Freiwald Law and host of the weekly podcast, Good Law | Bad Law, is joined by law professor, Patricia A. Cain, of Santa Clara University School of Law, to discuss sex discrimination, glass-ceilings, and the incredible women law professors who broke down barriers throughout history; Professor Cain is the editor of the newly released book, Paving the Way: The First American Women Law Professors, a book that follows the first wave of trailblazing female law professors and the stage they set for American democracy. The late Herma Hill Kay, of Berkeley, is the author of the book while the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the foreword.   In today’s episode, Aaron and Pat delve into this special project, one that Justice Ginsburg advocated for tirelessly and admired publicly in the years before her death. Herma Hill Kay, former Dean of UC Berkeley School of Law and Ginsburg’s close professional colleague, wrote Paving the Way to tell the stories of the first fourteen female law professors at ABA- and AALS-accredited law schools in the United States. Kay, who became the fifteenth such professor, labored over the stories of these women in order to provide an essential history of their path for the more than 2,000 women working as law professors today and all of their feminist colleagues.   Dean Kay passed away in 2017 and our guest, Pat Cain, ensured the completion of this important work. Pat explains that each woman’s story is wrapped in rich historical context and that their perseverance through extraordinarily difficult times must never be forgotten. Paving the Way is not just a collection of individual stories of remarkable, strong, motivated women but also a well-crafted interweaving of law and society during a historical period when women’s voices were often not heard and sometimes actively muted.   The final chapter of this book connects these first fourteen women to the “second wave” of women law professors who achieved tenure-track appointments in the 1960s and 1970s, carrying on the torch and analogous challenges. Pat and Aaron recount some of these stories in today’s conversation and explain what these women can teach us and what their profound impact has been on society, culture, democracy and the law.   Professor Cain is a national expert in federal tax law and sexuality and the law. She has published numerous law review articles, essays, and book reviews on various topics, including federal taxation of installment sales, tort law, the role of judges, feminist legal theory, and the history of the LGBT rights movement. Her area of specialization is taxation and estate planning for same-sex couples and she frequently lectures on this topic at state and national continuing legal education programs.   A graduate of Vassar (A.B.) and the University of Georgia (J.D.), Professor Cain began her law teaching career at the University of Texas in 1974, where she was a member of the faculty for 17 years. She then joined the law faculty at the University of Iowa, where she held the Aliber Family Chair in Law and the Vice Provost position. She became a member of the Santa Clara faculty in 2007.   Listen now!   To learn more about Professor Cain, please visit her bio here.     To check out the new book, Paving the Way: The First American Women Law Professors, please click here.   To learn more about the book’s author, Herma Hill Kay, please click here.   Host: Aaron Freiwald Guest: Patricia A. Cain   Follow Good Law | Bad Law: YouTube: Good Law | Bad Law Facebook: @GOODLAWBADLAW Instagram: @GoodLawBadLaw Website: https://www.law-podcast.com

¡Hola, hola! ¿Qué tal estás? Aún no había podido presentarte la nueva bienvenida bajo Anímate a lo Silvirina. Pero, ya terminó la espera.    Si eres nueva o nuevo por aquí, en esta comunidad tenemos como misión animarnos a amarnos más, valorarnos más y por consiguiente: a elevar esa motivación cada día más y más. Y claro está, tú y yo de la mano para lograrlo ¡JUNTOS!   Cada martes escucha un episodio nuevo. Te invito a suscribirte en esta plataforma, sé que te será de provecho.

Co-Dean Kim Mutcherson sits down with the creators of the AALS Law Deans Antiracist Clearinghouse Project discuss the project's inception, what it takes to create an antiracist learning institution, and the legacy each Dean hopes to achieve through their extraordinarily necessary work. The Co-Creators of the AALS Law Deans Antiracist Clearinghouse Project are: Angela Onwuachi-Willig, Boston University School of Law Kim Mutcherson, Rutgers Law School Carla D. Pratt, Washburn University School of Law Danielle Holley-Walker, Howard University School of Law Danielle M. Conway, Penn State Dickinson Law Learn more about the AALS Law Deans Antiracist Clearinghouse Project. The Power of Attorney is produced by Rutgers Law School. With two locations minutes from Philadelphia and New York City, Rutgers Law offers the prestige and reputation of a large, nationally-known university combined with a personal, small campus experience. Learn more by visiting law.rutgers.edu. Series Producer and Editor: Kate Bianco --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/rutgerslaw/message

Ein letztes Mal für dieses Jahr heißt es Ahoi und Herzlich Willkommen, Freunde des geräuchterten Aals. Zum Ende eines kräftezehrenden Jahres finden sich unsere drei Bigosz-Bagaluten noch einmal in der alten Kombüse zusammen, um gemeinsam das Jahr ausklingen zu lassen. Was lag Weihnachten außer leeren Weinflaschen unterm Tannenbaum, wie gehts kulinarisch zu Silvester weiter und welche Überraschungen warten auf Euch in 2021? Wir wünschen gute Fahrt in ein leckeres, glückliches und erfolgreiches neues Jahr!

In this episode, Guha Krishnamurthi, Assistant Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law Houston, discusses his article "The Case for the Abolition of Criminal Confessions," which was honored in the 2021 AALS scholarly papers competition. Krishnamurthi begins by explaining why confessions are terrible evidence of guilt. He observes that criminal defendants often have incentives to falsely confess, and that juries give confessions far more weight than they deserve. He defines confessions as admissions of guilt, not other kinds of evidence. And he argues that we should exclude confessions from criminal trials. Krishnamurthi is on Twitter at @GGKrishnamoomoo.This episode was hosted by Brian L. Frye, Spears-Gilbert Professor of Law at the University of Kentucky College of Law. Frye is on Twitter at @brianlfrye. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Welcome, welcome, welcome to the Distraction Pieces Podcast with Scroobius Pip!The cinematic spirit is maintained wonderfully this week as Pip chats over zoom with director BEN WHEATLEY!With Ben’s new film ‘Rebecca’ blessing screens on Netflix (and selected bigger screens), it’s a perfect time to catch the director and Pip crams a lot into his time with him… Everything ranging from the zoom press junket (and how it is infinitely preferable to the alternative), influences on a granular level, early films (his own as well as greats in the world of cinema), trailers and film posters, timesucking computer games, the old AALS chestnut (getting emotional on planes while watching filmes), period dramas, the casting process, genre in general and so much more that is all there for you to explore… Listen and watch ‘Rebecca’ at your nearest available convenience!EPISODE LINKS:REBECCABEN WHEATLEY IMDBLINKS FOR SCROOBIUS PIP & SPEECH DEVELOPMENT:SCROOBIUS PIP on TWITTERSCROOBIUS PIP on INSTAGRAMSCROOBIUS PIP on PATREONNORTH STAR RISINGPOD BIBLESPEECH DEVELOPMENT RECORDSDISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on FACEBOOKDISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on INSTAGRAMDISTRACTION PIECES PODCAST ARCHIVE See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Danielle Holley-Walker is a Harvard educated lawyer and Dean of Howard University School of Law. She also teaches first year law students. In this episode, Dean Holley-Walker discusses inclusion and diversity in law school and the law profession. Dean Holley-Walker has written numerous essays and a book, “Critical Race Theory & Civil Procedure;” expected out Fall 2021. Currently, she also has a manuscript in the works. Additionally, Dean Holley-Walker sits with her other "sister Deans" on the panel of Law Deans on the Antiracist Clearinghouse Project for the Association of American Law Schools. (AALS). Howard University (HU) School Of Law is part of a consortium of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and is world renowned. HU Law is well known for their contribution to laws in the United States that advance equity, and inclusion in the law and beyond. You can find Dean Holley-Walker contributing to that mission both at the law school and on social media. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/StateofEducation/support

Wie der Titel schon sagt, sind wir im allgemein bekanntem Monat des Aals angekommen und was gibt es passenderes, als erneut über Hades und dessen Platz inmitten der anderen großen Rogue-likes zu diskutieren. Michi erzählt außerdem von seinen langsam zurückkehrenden Skills im Tony Hawk 1 & 2 Remaster. In den News sprechen wir über die neuen Games with Gold, Game Pass und PS-Plus spiele, den Release von EA Play als Teil von Game Pass, dem Make-Over von Peter Parker im Spider-Man Remaster für die Playstation 5 und natürlich dem Erscheinen von Minecraft Steve in Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. Zum Schluss versuchen wir noch mehr oder weniger erfolgreich den Urpsrung der nächsten 8 Redewendungen aus der Email der letzten Woche zu erklären. Emails bitte an podcast@bytesized.de

In this episode of the new podcast, Path to Well-Being in Law, co-hosts Chris Newbold and Bree Buchanan enjoy lively conversations with lawyer well-being pioneer David Jaffe.  David gives essential insight into how the well-being movement took hold in the legal profession and discuss ways in which its culture may finally be shifting. He also discusses the research study he co-authored regarding law students and how that data has informed significant shifts in how law schools are addressing the well-being of their students.Transcript:CHRIS NEWBOLD:Welcome to Episode Four of The Path to Lawyer Well-Being in Law, a podcast series, a production of the National Task Force on Lawyer Well-Being with technical support coming from our friends at ALPS. Our goal is simple, to introduce you to cool people doing awesome work in the space of lawyer well-being, and to shine the light on the many great things happening around the country. I'm joined today by my fantastic co-host, Bree Buchanan.BREE BUCHANAN:Hi everybody, thanks Chris. Good to be here with you today.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Yeah, and today we're going to dive into an area of lawyer well-being that I think is both fascinating, because it's kind of where a lot of the cultural elements of lawyer well-being originate. We're going to talk about law schools and the work that's being done in law schools. We are very excited to have with us a real visionary in terms of thinking about law school culture as it relates to lawyer well-being. Bree, I'm going to have you introduce our guest, David Jaffe.BREE BUCHANAN:Sure, and thank you, and I appreciate the opportunity to do that because David Jaffe is one of the favorite people that I know, and so I'm delighted to have him here. David's day job, he's the Associate Dean of Student Affairs at the American University Washington College of Law in D.C., and I know David from the many years that he spent on the ABA's Commission on Lawyers Assistance Programs and has been a leader with that group around issues related to law students and looking at reform for law schools across the country around how they address students who are struggling with mental health issues or substance use problems, and just general well-being. He was awarded CoLAP's Meritorious Service Award a few years ago. Near and dear to our hearts is that David was the author, the lead author, the author, on the law school section of the National Task Force Report. So he's been in this space with us from the very, very beginning.So David, welcome. I'm so glad you're here with us today.DAVID JAFFE:Thank you, thank you Bree and Chris, thank you so much for having me today.BREE BUCHANAN:Yeah. And you know one of the questions that we ask everybody that's on the podcast, because I think it's helpful to just have the human side of this is, David, what brought you to the lawyer well-being movement? It's so clear that you have a driving passion for this work. What drives it?DAVID JAFFE:It's a great question actually, something I've been thinking about a lot. I think I bring it back to two elements from my own, my personal childhood and background, one of them which I've not shared a lot. When I was 15 years old I actually came across one of my siblings who was attempting to commit suicide, or at least thought he was at a very young age. He was 16 months younger than me, and had taken a mixture of pills in an effort to join, not through suicide but a cry for help to join one of my other siblings in a private rehab school in another state. I happened to be the one at home who found him, found him in enough time. He was taken care of and ultimately did end up at this school, and he's now okay, thank you. But I think it's really something that at that age had to have stuck with me.There's also a history of depression in my family. It goes very deep to my grandmother, with whom I was very close, and my father and a couple of other relatives. So it's something that I've been sensitive in my personal life, and then through extrapolation. I look at these 100s of law students who we take in at our law school and across the country every year, and just wonder with all the myriad issues that they have facing them even prior to school, and then exacerbated by everything that they have in transitioning to law school, what they must be going through. And I think that's just been a lot of what's driven my desire to be available to reach out when possible and try to be some resource of assistance.BREE BUCHANAN:And they're so lucky to have you, David, to have somebody in that role who really gets it and is really compassionate and feels for what they're going through, and it's evident in hearing you talk and the work that you do.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Yeah. David, remind me how many years you've been involved in higher education and in particular the law school setting.DAVID JAFFE:Sure. So I graduated from the Washington College of Law, where I'm presently employed, in 1993. I spent a total of three years in different positions with the school, four actually, and in 1997 I interviewed successfully for the Dean of Students job. I was the second Dean of Students that the law school had, was relatively young to have the title of Dean although it's never been something that I've made a lot of in my title, but more importantly it was giving me the opportunity to work with students more on the, just on a one-on-one level. So I think I had a LinkedIn reminder today that 27 years of service with the law school.CHRIS NEWBOLD:That's definitely got to have provided you the context and the perspective to see obviously a lot of different changes in the law school setting over that duration of period of time.DAVID JAFFE:Absolutely. Absolutely. I think we, I'm sure we'll talk more about this, but I think that we've seen an evolution of sorts, and unfortunately and fortunately in the same breath, around mental health and well-being. I think it's one that's really only taken hold probably the last five, maybe no more than seven years. But again, to the good, I think law schools generally are trending in the right direction in that regard.CHRIS NEWBOLD:That's exciting to hear. Let's go back a little bit and let's talk about the Suffering in Silence study. Obviously that was a precursor to the Path to Lawyer Well-Being report, and lay the evidence based challenges that I think we're both seeing in the profession in one respect but in the law schools specifically in that particular study. I'd just be curious on why did you do the study, and how did it come about?DAVID JAFFE:Sure. I got lucky to a large degree. I had been thinking a lot about the fact that we did not have a lot of data around the issues that those of us who've worked on the front lines with students perceived to be the case, around well-being, mental health, substance use, help seeking behaviors, things of that nature. I don't remember who it was but somebody put me in touch with a fellow traveler, Jerry Organ, who's a law professor at St. Thomas and somebody who does a lot of work around data for the American Bar Association. Jerry and I were introduced via email from a third party, and funny enough I think we spent about two years, maybe longer, working together towards building the survey and the idea without ever having met each other in person. I think it was some conference subsequent that we finally had a chance to meet and exchange hugs and catch up.Jerry was interested in the same thing I was. We believe anecdotally that there's significant issues around law student well-being. We don't have the data. The only survey that had been out at that time was in AALS, Association of American Law School survey dating back to 1993, so it's actually the time that I had graduated law school. That survey was limited to some degree. It hadn't really addressed prescription drugs. It hadn't looked at help seeking behaviors as well. So we wanted to have information. For me the discussion was always the important part, but data's important, particularly for individuals who may not believe that the issues are actually ripe or actually out there, and so we wanted to have the backing and then be able to use that as a foundation to say, "Okay, now what do we do?"So the survey came about in 2014. We surveyed 15 law schools, 3500 students, had just over 3,000 responses, and the numbers by and large confirmed a lot of what those who were working already with students noticed to be the case, that there was more drinking than anybody would, if not have anticipated, anybody wanted to see in law students. Use of prescription drugs without a prescription in more significant numbers than anybody would have hoped for. Positive screening for depression, around anxiety, particularly around anxiety fairly significant numbers. I think we screened 37% positive for anxiety.Then again in the same breath that although a significant number of the students who responded to the survey, over 80%, indicated that they would seek a health professional if they felt they had an issue around alcohol or drug use or mental health, only 4% had indicated actually having seen somebody and those [inaudible], the numbers just don't match up. It wouldn't make sense if you were acknowledging in one breath the significant numbers that students were drinking and binge drinking and using drugs and everything else yet not getting help for it.And that had just turned us quickly to some of the other numbers, which were around the help seeking behavior, that between, depending on whether you were looking at substance use or mental health, between 40 to 50% of the respondents said that they felt that they were more likely to get admitted to the bar if they kept their problem hidden. So [inaudible] when you take all these numbers together that they're acknowledging in one breath that they probably needed help based upon their use in different areas, but that they weren't getting the help and the presumption is that they weren't getting the help because they were afraid they were either going to have a job implication or that their character and fitness were going to impede them and they were not going to be admitted to the jurisdiction that they sought to get admitted to after three or four years of hard study and tuition payments and everything else.BREE BUCHANAN:Absolutely, and you know I shared in that first episode about, I started having emerging mental health issues in my first year of law school, and I can remember, I mean no way would I have ever gone to anybody and asked for help.DAVID JAFFE:Yeah. Right.BREE BUCHANAN:I really felt like I had to completely put out this image of being on top of everything and couldn't show any chink in the armor, so to speak. I got the opportunity to go back to that same law school and teach a clinical program 20 years later and I'll tell you, it's the same attitudes. Not much had changed at that time, but hopefully some things are changing now. [crosstalk]DAVID JAFFE:It's hard, Bree. It's really, you think about these individuals and regardless of the law school where you're working or assisting students, these students were skimmed from the top of undergrads or even if they were out for a few years, the top colleges from across the country. They all want to be competitive, oftentimes with themselves, sometimes with the sacrifice of classmates, which is another challenge. But they also, as a general rule, those students tend to be type A. They feel they've got everything under control and they can handle everything, and this whole notion of, a stigma of needing to have things under control really, really gets in the way of these students seeking help.CHRIS NEWBOLD:David, the study came out in 2016, right? So we're four years removed from the study. Do you have a sense of how things have shifted with law students since the study was done? Do you have a general feeling for if we're doing better, are we worse, are we about the same? What do your instincts tell you?DAVID JAFFE:It's a great question. I'll start with a tease. Jerry and I are fortunate to have received a grant opportunity, and we're going to be updating that survey. We're surveying again next spring, in 2021, and so we're going to have yet another opportunity to really see the hard numbers and see if we've made some significant changes or potentially slid back since that survey and that time. What I would suggest, and although I'm very proud of the survey and a lot of the results from it, I don't want to give all of the credit to that. I think that Jerry and I should also mention Kate Bender from the Dave Nee Foundation who co-wrote the article with us after the survey came out, or the results of the survey came out.I think that the law schools have been trending, maybe in part from results of the survey but just in part from being more aware of the importance of the issues, have been trending towards being more proactive than we have been. I had used the number five, seven years prior to this conversation, and what I mean by that is that we were at a time where, orientation for example, we would be told by senior administrators informally or formally that the last thing we should be talking about are issues around mental health and stress and anxiety. We're welcoming an entering class, and then boom they're going to get hit right between the eyes with this notion that it's going to be a really, really different experience, and next thing you know we're scaring them away to another school, as if we were the only law school that had an issue around these challenges.That conversation has given way towards issues or conversations around well-being, around meditation and mindfulness and yoga and other outlets and seeking help when needed, as really being front and center orientations at I would say a good many law schools around the country. So we're not only not afraid of it anymore, but rather than being in this kind of reactive posture where we wait for a student to come and either be referred by a faculty member or just realize that they're desperately sinking and really come to somebody for help at the last minute, we're doing more proactive outreach. We're saying from the beginning in the orientation, in the materials, through reminders of mindfulness meditation sessions or yoga sessions or whatever else it is, that we understand that students are going through these issues and we want to try to head them off, and then of course also be there should despite our best efforts some of the issues continue to make the work and the challenges difficult for our students.CHRIS NEWBOLD:I'm curious how you, to the extent possible, how do you measure success of what you've been doing relative to how you want to create an evolving culture in the law school that obviously prepares them for maybe greater vulnerability and greater willingness to let faculty know when they're in those challenging spots, or perhaps fostering a more collaborative and maybe less of a competitive environment?DAVID JAFFE:It's a great question. I think it's one thing that we, I would say for myself in our student affairs office, we probably struggle with a little bit. Metrics seem to be coming more and more important for schools, the ability to report outcomes of what they're doing in various ways. One way one can do it is to, how many students are dropping in your office, how many students are you meeting with one on one? In theory around well-being you could mark it by the number of students who are coming to a meditation session. But it's tricky, because you can argue two sides. If fewer students are coming to your office for help, then you could suggest that or imply that the work that you've done in orientation are causing students to, in a good way, to maybe seek help maybe with family or private counseling or things like that or maybe doing meditation on their own, and they're actually taking better care of themselves.On the other hand, if numbers are increasing of students coming in to you, you could also argue that you've gotten word out about it, that you are a positive resource without judgment, without question, and so the students have found the credibility in your office and the comfort level and they're coming to you maybe at a time that they would be afraid, you know the Dean of Students has a job to report me to a character and fitness and to the bar, and so if I go and get help I might just be putting my death sentence out there for admission to the bar later on. So the short answer, I don't have an ideal one, Chris. I think, I simply feel that if one keeps beating the drum of the context and the conversation around this just being important and doing what you need to for yourself when you can, and seeking help when you feel like this is getting out of control, you've just got to trust that the students are responding to you and are getting help when they need, either with you or again through other individuals.BREE BUCHANAN:David, I know during your tenure as a leader of the law school committee of CoLAP, there was a study published by Jordana Confino that really looked at what was going on with law schools across the country and adopting well-being initiatives, and this was written within the last couple of years. Can you share some of the most promising practices or things that impressed you that are going on right now across the country that we might entice some of the law schools to adopt?DAVID JAFFE:Sure. Jordana's article was terrific, and as you said it did kind of follow a survey that several individuals had worked on in just trying to get a sense of ... Some of it was following our survey, but again some of it was just a general sense of we know you as law schools are doing better work or looking to increase your efforts in regard to what is working, what is not working. I would say if I wanted to tease out one, and forgive me, I don't recall if the numbers were as solid on this as I'd like to see them, but I actually think our faculty, faculty across the board, law faculty across the board that is, have the perhaps best opportunity to have a positive input and a positive effect on our students around these issues.What I mean by that is that despite those of us as Dean of Students who like to kind of wear this badge of honor of being on the front line with law students, we're technically not. We do get to see the law students at orientation, at least for those Deans of Students who run orientation. In my case I'm one of them. But once school gets started the students are really, they're beholden to their classes and their faculty and vice versa. One of the parts of the article that had come out was, again, I think it was, there were definitely examples of faculty leading the way but I think it was more of a suggestion that we do a deeper dive in that regard.Our faculty are held in such esteem by their students, particularly the entering students who are kind of seeing them for the first time and learning from them in these various subject areas. The opportunity for the faculty to, what's the phrase, to step away from the sage on the stage and just kind of be an assistant on the side. Not to stop doing what they're doing in teaching, but to take a minute in class, every now and then, even starting classes, with a very brief breathing exercise, but also taking a break every couple of weeks and acknowledging, "I know that you're hitting a peak point of the semester right now, that you're doing your legal writing class and that you're taking a midterm and this and that." Checking with the students. "Are you doing okay?" Reminding them that they've accomplished so much just by getting to law school, and reminding them that they have very much the right to be where they are and that they're going to graduate and not going to be- [inaudible]BREE BUCHANAN:Oh dear.DAVID JAFFE:Having a dog bark in support of that, I will take 100% of the time. [inaudible] So I think that's one of the big areas. I know that Jordana's survey had also pointed out that a lot of the wellness programming again are areas, depending on your school and what's working best for you, was definitely another area where we were seeing wellness committees that invited students in to discuss what was going to work best and then giving way to these meditation sessions or yoga sessions or running clubs or just giving an opportunity for students to gather together to talk, and ideally to kind of give way to more open conversation about how they could be supporting each other.BREE BUCHANAN:One of the things that's really golden is if you have a faculty member who will actually share his or her experience, maybe with depression or anxiety over the course of their career.DAVID JAFFE:100%.BREE BUCHANAN:That does so much to bring down the stigma that's around this and just makes it okay for people to start talking about it. When you can talk about it, then you can ask for help for it, and that's so critical.DAVID JAFFE:That's right. And we all have it, and that's the thing. And I try to share with students and say, occasionally I'll share the stories that I shared here in the podcast and go into a little more depth, but I'll also say, these things don't change. Some of our students are older and married, but you graduate from law school, you get married, you're dealing with raising a family, with a spouse or a significant other, buying a house, jobs and things like that. The stressors continue, so it's may be peaking to a degree in law school for students but they don't go away, and so the real question is, what do we do about getting help while we can, while we're in a support network where others can be helping us so that we can come out the other side and be as healthy as we can.BREE BUCHANAN:So David, you've been really central to some policy initiatives that have the potential to make real change in this area, and I want you to have the chance to talk about this. One of them is around the character and fitness questions that states ask law students and has such a chilling effect on law students' willingness to ask for help. Tell us about what your work is in that area.DAVID JAFFE:Sure. I [inaudible] an incredible component to the issue, and chilling effect is exactly the right phrase, Bree. There's again a much deeper dive. For those who are interested I would just encourage them to either reach out to any of us or to look up, Louisiana, I think they probably list it as Consent Decree in 2014, but basically there was a determination back in 2014 that a number, well that the State of Louisiana in that case was using their questions on their character and fitness portion of the bar application that were invasive and violative of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the ADA, that they were asking questions that could not or should not be asked. And so a decision was made to force through the decree to soften those questions, but if the determination was that they were being made only in that state because the suit was there and not federal and not across the board.Some other states indeed who were already well addressing mental health questions or not having them at all. A couple of other states saw the handwriting on the wall and decided to make some changes. But there are still a decent number of states, four or five or six that would be described as extremely invasive, and then maybe scaling down to another 10 or 12, maybe even 15 or so. And these are states that are just asking questions that most typically is kind of the, did you ever? I mean they're asking questions about a student's health and background that really don't have a place in the current reflection of the character or the fitness of that applicant to study law. There may be issues that occurred that were well dealt with a number of years ago, and yet the question is opening it up again and causing a student to potentially disgorge information of a very personal nature, and also potentially re traumatize when these students have been through significant issues.I've worked with some others. I've worked with Janet Stearns, who's my counterpart and friend at Miami's Law School. We have written an article recently about it, and even on the heels of that, we think, and some other things that were going on. We've seen a couple of states even in this calendar year who have rethought their questions, New York somewhat famously, and although they had cited to our article but to their credit they had been at work at it for a while. But they actually chose to modify their questions significantly after about a year, maybe a year and a half of a working group. And we still hope, because that's still fairly current and New York is such a significant bar, that we may see, and we've indeed heard from a couple of states since that decision came down, from a couple of states and their working groups that have been asking, "What information do you have, what can you provide us, because there's some of us who would like to see some of those changes implemented in our states as well."And the argument just simply, maybe I should have started with this, is if the students were more and more savvy about looking ahead about what their future may be and what they have to do, they're looking on line. They see what the questions are. And if we're able to respond, or if their jurisdiction is able to respond, to say, "We're not going to ask questions around mental health," or the question we're [inaudible] asking is have you, if it's an issue that is maybe within the last two or three years, have you been receiving treatment for it, and if you have then we're going to be okay with that. Well that's going to allow those students, to go back to the bulk of our conversation this far, to actually get the help they need while in law school so that they can sail through with flying colors on that application and go on to lead healthy, not only professional lives as lawyers but personal lives as well.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Great. I think that's a great time for us to take our break, and we'll talk about some more of these policy initiatives that are currently being pushed by CoLAP.DAVID JAFFE:Sounds great.Your law firm is worth protecting, and so is your time. ALPS has the quickest online application for legal malpractice insurance out there. Apply, see rates, and bind coverage, all in about 20 minutes. Being a lawyer is hard. Our new online app is easy. Apply now at applyonline.ALPSnet.com.BREE BUCHANAN:All right, welcome back everybody. We have David Jaffe with us today and we're talking about some really exciting policy initiatives that David has been at the forefront of, and these are things that can be game changers, really, around well-being for law students. What I wanted to, I can't miss out on asking you about, David, is your efforts to convince the ABA's law school accreditation committee to make some changes for what law schools are required to do around this. Can you talk a little bit about what your, I guess, I don't want to say lobbying but that's what it basically comes down to, efforts in this area?DAVID JAFFE:Sure, advocacy, definitely. Thanks, that's a great question. So one of the areas that we, and again a number of individuals who are interested in this would like to see more of an emphasis on, is some kind of formalized or required training around substance use and mental health awareness while in law school. Every law school is part of this. So the ABA accredits law schools, it's either every seven years or might be every 10 years now. You have to go through a process of self-evaluation and then sharing that information, and there are a lot of steps and questions around standards that have to be complied with.One of the ongoing requirements towards the completion of the degree is that students take a course in legal ethics or professional responsibility, it's more often called, and while recognizing that a number of those courses will fold in because of the nature of the topic, professional responsibility, a session may be an hour or something like that around substance use, mental health education and awareness. Oftentimes a lawyer assistance program director is brought in, maybe a volunteer to tell his or her story, and they're very engaging conversations when they're held.So it's there informally, but informally is a relevant term. No professor is required to write that into their professional responsibility textbook or case book and no faculty member is required to teach it as part of their overall assessment in that class. Since that's the most obvious class we've focused on that in a proposal to the ABA where we suggest it or at least suggest it generally, that substance use, mental health, at a minimum, two hours during a student's three or four years of education, is devoted towards that topic with the suggestion that a professional responsibility course would be the most logical place, that the ABA could be free to simply say that the requirement is there.In theory you could do it as part of orientation, you could do it prior to that although I think it would be a little bit too early, I think we'd want students to transition and get settled in and then appreciate some of the nuances and some of the things that might be affecting them before they hear this information. But we really feel that trying to build atop this informal approach and those faculty and those who do write these course books to fold it in, that we have a formal adoption so that schools are really compelled to work in an area that quite frankly they ought to be doing regardless.BREE BUCHANAN:Terrific. That's just a brilliant approach.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Yeah. David, you've also been very involved in the law school mental health day for law schools. I think last year it was in October, which I think is not coincidence, that you plan that in the first six to eight weeks of the semester, and I'd be curious on your thoughts around that particular mental health day and what the plans look like for 2020.DAVID JAFFE:Sure, thanks for that. So prior to, it might have been two years ago, mental health day was being held in the third week in March, and it was a somewhat artificial date and time that had been selected. A group of us had gotten together and said, "You know, it's way too late in the day to be having these conversations, right? You're at the end of the academic year. Why not push something up?" And so there was a determination and some advocacy to move it. It was actually a fairly easy lift, in credit to the ABA law student division, which is oftentimes very helpful in publicizing events that are going on around it. So we moved it to October 10th, which coincides with Global Mental Health Day as well. We've occasionally had to ... Well, we've only done it a couple years but we try to avoid a Saturday or sometimes even a Friday where law students are starting to check out for the weekend.What we tried to do is bring some [inaudible] leaders. The last couple of years we've done some national broadcasting and invited schools to, through a webinar, to attend live, to ask questions live, and have them anchored at a school. We're looking to finalize the plans for this coming October, but I would say the part that I'm most excited about and I do hope it comes together, because it's probably a long time in coming, is that I believe the law student division is going to play an even increasingly prominent role in the event or quite frankly series of events. We may do a couple of presentations over a few days this year, and we hope that one of them will be led by the law student division and students themselves, because they really, there's never a better moment or an opportunity than a student working peer to peer with other students around these issues.We like to stay the law students are getting younger each year. Obviously it's a joke as we age each year and still dedicate ourselves to doing this work, but when they stop and they see that they're, listen to their law students and the issues that their law students are facing and going through, it's then when they can really say, that's me, and it's really nice to hear, for some of them for the first time, I'm not the only one going through this.That's another area we probably should touch on at least lightly as well. We have students who believe, particularly when they're transitioning into school and feeling the crush of the Socratic method and the new language and the reading and everything else, that they're the only one who's going through whatever it is that they're going through. I've seen so many times when I've finally had an opportunity to counsel one of these students, when I will look them in the eye and say, "You know, you're not the only one this week, or sometimes the only one today, who's come to my office from these issues," and you almost can see the burden kind of lighten from their shoulders, that they're like, "Oh my god, I'm so happy to hear that because I really thought I was the only one who was afraid to be called on or the only one who wasn't getting what was going on in class and everything else."So coming back to mental health day, our hope is that there'll be at least one session that could be led by some of the student leaders and [inaudible] leaders, and really speak directly to students about some of these issues and inspire them to get help if that's an issue or to become leaders in their own right at their other schools across the country, and just kind of tentacle this out so that we're building on these wellness programs wherever and whenever we can.CHRIS NEWBOLD:David, one of the things that I think is interesting as we look into the future a little bit is, I'm concerned that there's just, a lot of folks who go into law school, go through law school and then ultimately, there's a failure in expectations of what practicing law is like relative to what their expectations were before they came into law school. It's an expectations gap that I think ultimately, you get through law school, you've got all this student debt. You maybe take a job that you didn't anticipate taking, and then you kind of move yourself through a profession in which maybe you don't love what you're doing, and if you can't find professional satisfaction some of these other coping mechanisms then kind of creep in. I'd be curious on your thoughts on what law schools can do to maybe better establish what practicing law is actually like, and when to do that in the law school setting, and whether you believe that there is some notion of an expectations gap.DAVID JAFFE:That's a very thoughtful question, Chris. Let me take a stab at that. I'm going to back up a little bit. I don't disagree with anything that you said but I'm going to take maybe a step back prior to law school. I've had some really helpful conversations with the counselor who's assigned to our law students through the university's counseling center, and although we have an absolute agreement that she cannot share any specific information about law students with me, we do have an ongoing agreement that if there are any kind of threads or issues in the aggregate that are worth sharing, maybe there's a faculty member who seems to be affecting a group of students or something going on at the school, that she absolutely can share it, and time and again when we've sat down what she has said to me, Chris, is that by and large the issues that the students are bringing forward in law school are not law school related.They're issues that, these kind of deep seated issues that law students have not addressed prior to coming to law school. Family issues, maybe unresolved. Personal issues. There may be issues around self-confidence and imposter syndrome and things like that, but also any issues around relationships, and maybe some diagnoses of depression and things like that as well. But things that students have not come to grips with, and then they get to law school and it's this jarring transition to start with, and then at the back end, and it's really, you know three years is a, even four years for evening students, it's a blink of an eye at the end of the day, and the student who has not sought the opportunity to work through some of these issues, which are now of course being exacerbated by the tuition and the potential prospects for employment and looking for those jobs and looking for summer opportunities and dealing with the debt and making new friends and transitioning, all these things are coming to a head.And so the student who's not dealing with it at all is simply, they're not sailing through typically. They're struggling. But then all these issues are presenting themselves again in the work force, inclusive potentially of this kind of gap which is, I haven't been able to focus on myself, let alone on what I ought to be learning while I'm in law school to make myself a better lawyer, and to have an appreciation for what it is that I want to do.I think the other part to your question in terms of the gap, and it all relates to well-being at the end. But I think the better job a law school is doing, not only around counseling students individually, collectively, but also providing some kind of experiential, solid experiential education or opportunities, variety of opportunities for education prior to the student getting out, is only going to serve the student well. And by that I simply mean whether it's a clinical program where a student's able to work as attorney student, attorneys for a year under the supervision of one of our faculty or even attorneys who are in practice, or even externships or internships where the students are going out into the field and working under the tutelage of a lawyer or a judge or a set of lawyers, and really gaining a sense, one, that it may be a subject area that they thought they were interested in and it ultimately turns them off, but they still have an opportunity to pivot and move in another direction; two, to gain some of those professional skills.Because where a lot of these students, they're coming right out of undergrad and really they may not have ever worked at all and if they did, they're more of the kind of run of the mill retail positions and whatnot, but not something that really immerses you in the day to day, the exchange, the thoughtful thinking, the analysis, the professionalism that needs to be brought. And if you're not having those experiences in school then Chris, I absolutely agree, you find yourself in the profession potentially in a position that was not something that you thought you wanted to do or knew anything about, and you're unhappy. And there's [inaudible] to do that. We only get a limited period of time to enjoy what we're doing in living, and if we're not making positive selections about it we're bringing ourselves down, we're bringing down our colleagues, those around us, and again, this is the time around family formation, relationships and all, and those aren't going to work well either if you're not grounded in what it is you expect of yourself and what's making you happy on a daily basis.BREE BUCHANAN:Absolutely. And David I can really tell that you, like we said at the very beginning, I think, visionary. You think about all of these issues so deeply. So let me just ask in our last question, where do you stand today looking forward and for our students? Are you optimistic or pessimistic? Do you think things are going to get better for students, and what do you base that on if that's the case or otherwise?DAVID JAFFE:Short answer, long answer. As this podcast is being recorded, we're living in the middle of this pandemic, or if somebody's optimistic maybe a third of the way out, who knows. There are a number of us who are extremely concerned as we head into an academic year of where our students are going to be mental health wise. Social isolation is just the number one attack or deterrent towards well-being, and so while we're trying to make all this progress at law schools all of a sudden we're in this remote environment where we're staring at screens and looking desperately for other opportunities to engage, and this is going to be with us for a while. For most of us, at least the fall semester, we don't know about the year ahead.So short term we're going to have to be looking at those issues. I'll also mention here that we're dealing with some professional licensure issues about the ability or the inability to counsel across state lines, and so if we have students at a school who are not at a school physically but are now living in another state and taking classes remotely, we in many instances cannot provide them the counseling and the counseling services that we would normally be able to do when they were in person, so that is a significant challenge. There is some legislation out there that I'm tracking and others are following that we hope will continue to relax some of the provisions that were initially relaxed in some states in the immediate aftermath of COVID in March.Long term though, and again I hope it's a long term, a short long term or a short, short term where this kind of challenges go we start to have, I think we're trending towards the good. I think what we're finding, and we should give some credits to the law students as well. We're finding law students who are coming to law school, I want to say a little more self-aware. Maybe not, not self-aware and immediately well as a result of self-aware, but self-aware and comfortable enough that there are issues that they need to acknowledge to get better. I feel like there have been more open ended conversations. We've been running orientation for about five weeks now for this year's entering class and we've seen some really healthy conversations. We've received a lot of props in emails after some of our address your stress and mental health sessions during orientation, that students are really opened up and really appreciated them.So I think the generation of students may be more willing on the one hand to be more open about these issues, and in turn probably more insistent that law schools are looking to address these issues. I know in my school our students formed a mental health alliance and they were pushing us around a number of issues. Are we providing enough counseling sessions? Are the referrals appropriate if we run out of our sessions? Can we make the intake a little bit easier? On and on.And so I think the respectful, kind of gentle pounding on the table for, almost coming back to us and saying, "Hey, if Dean of Students, you're telling us that we need to be taking better care of ourselves, then we're going to turn around and say here are the things that you as law schools need to be doing to support it." And I think this is all going to coalesce in, I don't know how many years. I want to say three years, maybe five years as we're having this conversation, that I don't think we're going to turn ourselves entirely out of jobs around mental health but I think that our students are going to be taking even more and more of a look at themselves and making these requests of law schools, and I think we're going to be heading in the right direction. So I'm pretty optimistic, looking ahead.CHRIS NEWBOLD:David, do you find that that's generational in nature or societal in nature, or what do you think are some of the drivers that are kind of positioning us for that optimism?DAVID JAFFE:You know, I used to say, when I was growing up and probably a couple of generations around then, if a principal or the teacher called you in as parents and said, "We think there's a behavioral issue or something that's going on with your child," you would look at that adult and say, "How dare you accuse my child of that," and look to sue the school or take them out or go somewhere else. The pendulum then I think swung for a period of time where, and I don't mean to blame parents here but I think the notion was, if my child through medication can be achieving and overachieving, as the pendulum kind of swung to the other way. Whatever you can to do help my child, that's great. I'll do it, let's go for it.And I don't know exactly where that pendulum is right now, but I think it's some settling in the middle of a combination where students are students, when they're younger, prior to being law students, are being perhaps better diagnosed, again perhaps a little bit more self-aware. Maybe the parents now are a little bit more aware of knowing what to look for and what to avoid. So I think we're growing up a little bit healthier as families in that regard, and so I would say it's a little bit generational and maybe also a little bit societal. I mean there's just, wherever you turn there's just a push around well-being and wellness. And sometimes it's a push back against some of the challenges that we're facing around [inaudible] news and society and things like that, and so folks are looking for better answers. It can be really sobering and depressing if you're just constantly looking at negative breaking news and natural disasters and the epidemic we're living in and things of that nature.So sometimes the best response is simply to say, "I'm not going to be that person. I'm waking up every morning and eating my Wheaties and getting my exercise in and taking care of myself, and then through my own well-being I'm looking for others to do the same." And in some, you know it is that kind of village analogy. It's going to take all of us. But I think we're, even going back to the faculty, I think as we see, not to criticize older faculty but as we see faculty who are coming through law schools where they saw some of this well-being support, they're looking to mimic that because they realize that they were served well and they want to make sure that they're paying that forward with their students as they're receiving them in their classes and their experiential learning and everything else. So I think it's a combination, Chris, of a lot of those things, and again I think if we continue to sound the importance of this and continue to work in various areas, it should only continue to improve.CHRIS NEWBOLD:All right. I think that's going to be fascinating to watch over the next decade, how your graduates also come into the practice of law with better expectations as to the work life balance, and how that will play into talent acquisition by law firms and what law students ultimately are looking for out of their professional, the professional part of their journey and how that balances with their personal side. Because I think the days of Saturday Sunday working and all that, you know again, some firms are going to require it, but I think it's going to be very interesting that I think folks are coming into law school with better sense of what they want, and it'll be interesting to see kind of a clash of generations of partners and hires and how that ultimately evolves into the law firm culture within the profession generally. [crosstalk]BREE BUCHANAN:It's like a podcast episode.DAVID JAFFE:I think it's an excellent observation, and I would just respond to that briefly to say that I know that I have met with students, when they've asked, you know maybe students in recovery, students who are feeling a little more confident about themselves and they say, "What can I do to contribute?" And I say, "Well, this is going to be a really big ask, but your next interview, your set of interviews, you ought to ask about what that law firm is doing around well-being," because the more often they hear that the more they realize that that is going to have to be the next leverage point. And if you start to fall behind as a law firm you're going to have quality associates who are not interested in working there because they're not seeing it.Now it's putting a lot on the law students of course to ask, but if you're [inaudible] the right law students who are getting six, eight, 10, 15, 20 call backs for interviews, they're going to have the pick of the litter. So why not ask that question and force the hand of the firms. And you're absolutely right, Chris, the law firms are going to have to ... Some of them are doing it, to be fair, but their going to have to make some critical decisions around these issues in the coming years.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Well, David, our time's coming to a close. I want to obviously thank you for being a visionary in the law school space. Bree and I do a lot of work working with our state task forces around the country, and invariably one of the subgroups that they create within their task force is law schools, right, because I think everyone appreciates that the law school is the headwater of, the training ground for the next generation of lawyers to come into our profession, and there's critically important work issues suggested.There's a lot of issues before they even come into law school, but in terms of their introduction into the law space and the legal culture, it starts in law school, right? And there's just so many important things happening there that sets the tone for their journey into the profession, that we can't thank you enough for the work and the leadership that you've done within the law student culture. I know that there's a lot of uphill battles still to face, but I think that we all share in your optimism that there's real positive things happening in that space that I think bodes well for the culture shift that we're trying to engineer within the profession generally.DAVID JAFFE:I really, I appreciate this opportunity, and the two of you have been incredible thought leaders in the legal profession and the work with the task force and everything to come, so I thank you both in turn and again for granting me an opportunity just to have this conversation. Thanks so much.BREE BUCHANAN:Thank you, David.CHRIS NEWBOLD:Awesome. Yeah, thank you, and we'll be back in two weeks. Our next guest will be Judge David Shaheed out of Indiana. Judge Shaheed is a real thought leader in terms of bringing the nexus between well-being and the judicial sector of the legal profession, serving in a number of different capacity and leadership roles. I'm really looking forward to that podcast, because the judge element of well-being in law I think is a critical part that's oftentimes overlooked. So we'll be excited to get into the weeds with Judge Shaheed in a couple of weeks. So thank you for joining us for Episode Four. Thank you, David, and we'll be back in a couple weeks.David Jaffe is Associate Dean of Student Affairs at American University, Washington College of Law. He is co-author of the 2016 national law student study, Suffering in Silence, and a number of other publications on law student well-being. He serves on the ABA Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs (CoLAP) as co-chair of the Law School Assistance Committee, and in 2015, he received the CoLAP Meritorious Service Award in recognition of his commitment to improving the lives of law students. 

Leslie Y. Garfield Tenzer is the host/producer of Law to Fact podcast and the James D. Hopkins Professor of Law at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University in White Plains, NY where she teaches Criminal, Tort, Contract and Social Media Law. She is the author of several articles, most notably “The Death of Slander,” 35 Columbia L. Rev. 17 (2012).Professor Tenzer has received several awards during her tenure at Pace including Professor of the Year, the Ottinger Prize for Faculty Achievement, and the Goettel Prize for Faculty Scholarship. In addition to her regular teaching at Pace Law School, Professor Tenzer serves as a contributing editor to Matthew Bender Criminal Defense Techniques. Professor Tenzer was one of the first academic support professionals in the legal academy and was the founding chair of the AALS section on Academic Support. She is a student of improv and had a featured role in the 2018 movie “Larchmont.” --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

LOOK OUT! It’s only Films To Be Buried With! Join your host Brett Goldstein as he talks life, death, love and the universe with the brilliant actor and all round awesome SARAH SNOOK!Surely you must know Sarah as ‘Shiv’ from the quite wonderful series ‘Succession’, which is almost too good to even begin getting into here - i would venture to say that you should track it down and prepare for a weekend indoors while you race to get it all finished... If not, keep it in mind for the future okay? Anyway - you will hugely enjoy this one, as Sarah is a delight and does not feature on a to of podcasts either, so it’s a rare treat indeed! They get into many objects of chat including some choice afterlife nuggets involving bread (gold lies within that one), fancy cinemas, days of childhood, that old chestnut and everyone’s friend AALS (aka Altitude Adjusted Lachrymosity Syndrome or crying on planes), how to cry on film and forgetting the film Titanic. Glorious! You’ll love it! You’ll love Sarah!LINKS FOR THIS EPISODE:• SARAH on IMDB!• SUCCESSION Season 1!• SUCCESSION Season 2!• BRETT GOLDSTEIN on TWITTER!• BRETT GOLDSTEIN on INSTAGRAM!• BRETT GOLDSTEIN on PATREON!• 'SUPERBOB' - Brett's 2015 feature film!• 'CORNERBOYS' with BRETT & SCROOBIUS PIP!• DISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on FACEBOOK• DISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on INSTAGRAM See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode...Professor Victor Flatt, The Dwight Olds Chair in Law at The University of Houston Law Center and the 2019 Haub School of Law at Pace University Visiting Scholar, explains the requirements of Model Rule of Professional Responsibility 1.6(b), which permits attorneys to disclose information to prevent death or serious bodily harm and how bar associations can use the rule to prevent further climate change. He presents his theory in his most recent article, Disclosing the Danger: State Attorney Ethics Rules MEet Climate Change, to be published in the Utah Law Review.About our guest...Professor Victor B. Flatt returned to the University of Houston in 2017 as the Dwight Olds Chair in Law and the Faculty Director of the Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources (EENR) Center. He also holds an appointment as a Distinguished Scholar of Carbon Markets at the University of Houston’s Global Energy Management Institute. He was previously the inaugural O’Quinn Chair in Environmental Law at UHLC from 2002-2009.Professor Flatt’s teaching career began at the University of Washington’s Evins School of Public Affairs, and he has previously taught at Georgia State University College of Law, and most recently at the University of North Carolina School of Law, where he was the inaugural Taft Distinguished Professor in Environmental Law and the Co-Director of the Center for Climate, Energy, Environment, and Economics (CE3).Professor Flatt is a recognized expert on environmental law, climate law, and energy law. His research focuses on environmental legislation and enforcement, with particular expertise in the Clean Air Act and NEPA. He is co-author of a popular environmental law casebook, and has authored more than 40 law review articles, which have appeared in journals such as the Notre Dame Law Review, Ecology Law Quarterly, Washington Law Review, Houston Law Review and the Carolina Law Review. Six of his articles have been recognized as finalists or winner of the best environmental law review article of the year, and one was recognized by Vanderbilt University Law School and the Environmental Law Institute as one of the three best environmental articles of 2010, leading to a seminar and panel on the article in a Congressional staff briefing.Professor Flatt has served on the AALS sub-committees on Natural Resources and Environmental Law and was chair of the AALS Teaching Methods Section. He has served on many other boards and committees in his career including the national board of Lambda Legal, and the Law School Admission Council’s Gay and Lesbian Interests section. He is currently on the Advisory Board of CE3, a member of the ABA’s Section on Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Law Congressional Liaison Committee, and a member scholar of the Center for Progressive Reform.Law to Fact is a podcast about law school for law school students. As always if you if you have any suggestions for an episode topic concerning any matter related to law school, please let us know! You can email us at leslie@lawtofact.com or tweet to @lawtofact. Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter and Instagram (@lawtofact) and to like us on FaceBook! And finally, your ratings and reviews matter! Please leave us a review on iTunes. Want to stay updated on all things Law to Fact? Join our mailing list by visiting us at www.lawtofact.com. This episode is sponsored by Kaplan Bar Review. Getting ready for the bar exam means you’ll need to choose the study program that’s right for you. Kaplan Bar Review will get you ready to take on t

Marne war beim Fußologen und Karlotta wirbt für Zahnreinigungen. Hört die Leidensgeschichte des Aals und längst vergangene Elefantenwanderungen. Außerdem treffen wir mit Paintball thematisch ins Schwarze.

(0.5 General California MCLE)  Rapid technological advancement is changing the way law enforcement operates and interacts with the public. Professor Bennett Capers explains to host, Joel Cohen, how new technologies are being used by police departments across the country and the legal issues implicated. Bennett Capers is a professor at Brooklyn Law School and an expert in criminal law and procedure, and evidence law. Prior to teaching, he spent nearly ten years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York. In 2013, he served as Chairperson of the AALS 2013 Conference on Criminal Justice.  That same year, Judge Scheindlin appointed him to Chair the Academic Advisory Council to assist in implementing the remedial order in the stop-and-frisk class action Floyd v. City of New York.

Bio Alfred Mathewson (@hubisoninthe505) is the former Emeritus Professor of Law and Henry Weihofen Chair of Law at the University of New Mexico School of Law. He joined the UNM law faculty in 1983 after working as a corporate, securities and banking lawyer in Denver. He was named the Director of the Africana Studies Program in 2013 after having served as Acting or Interim Director since 2009. From 1997 through 2002, he was Associate Dean of Academics. In that position, he oversaw the curriculum, clinical law program, faculty appointments, the faculty promotion and tenure process, library, faculty development and related issues. Professor Mathewson served as a Co-Dean of the law school from 2015 to 2018. Mathewson's teaching and research focuses on antitrust law, business planning, sports law, minority business enterprises and corporate governance. He frequently supervises in the Business and Tax law Clinic and has served occasionally as Acting Director of the Clinical Law Program during the summer. He recently added Transactional Negotiations to his teaching portfolio. He has published numerous articles and given speeches in these areas and he brings this expertise to his teaching. He is a member of the American Bar Association and the American Law Institute. He has served on several ABA accreditation inspection teams. He is a member of the AALS Section on Law and Sports Law, of which he has previously served as chair. He currently is serving another stint as chair of the UNM Athletic Council. He serves as the faculty adviser of the UNM Chapter of the Black Law Students Association. He is active in various community organizations, including the Albuquerque Council on International Visitors. He has served as the president of the New Mexico Black Lawyers Association and the Sam Cary Bar Association (Denver). His recent publications include The Bowl Championship Series, Conference Realignment and the Major College Football Oligopoly: Revolution Not Reform, 1 Miss. Sports L. Rev. (2012) and Remediating Discrimination Against African American Females at the Intersection of Title IX and Title VI, 2 Wake Forest J. L. & Policy (2012). He presented “Times Have Changed: A New Bargain for Sharing the Revenue Stream in Intercollegiate Athletics with Student Athletes,” a paper prepared for panel at AALS 2014 Annual Meeting Section on Law and Sports program entitled, “O'Bannon v. NCAA: Is There An Unprecedented Change To Intercollegiate Sports Just Over The Horizon?” Resources Race in Ordinary Course: Utilizing the Racial Background in Antitrust and Corporate Law Courses by Alfred Mathewson, 23 St. John’s J. Legal Comment 667 (2008). Frederick Douglass: Prophet of Freedom by David W. Blight Civil Rights and the Anti-trust Laws by Philip Marcus Race, Markets and Hollywood’s Perpetual Dilemma by Hosea R. Harvey Amazon Antitrust Paradox by Lina M. Khan News Roundup Google walkout organizer leaves the company Claire Stapleton, one of the organizers of last year’s global walkout at Google following revelations that the company allegedly hid sexual harassment allegations against Android developer Andy Rubin, has left the company, saying she was retaliated against. She wrote in an internal document, later posted on Medium by Google Walkout for Real Change, “These past few months have been unbearably stressful and confusing. But they’ve been eye-opening, too: the more I spoke up about what I was experiencing, the more I heard, and the more I understood how universal these issues are.” Stapleton said she’s leaving the company because she’s having a baby. Google has refuted the allegations. Maine signs robust privacy bill The State of Maine’s governor, Janet Mills, signed a new privacy bill into law last week requiringcarriers to get consumers’ permission before selling their data to third parties. It specifically prohibits ISPs from retaliating against consumers for refusing to allow their data to be sold.     YouTube Revokes Steven Crowder’s Ads   YouTube shifted gears and revoked the ads of far-right commentator Steven Crowder over Crowder’s use of homophobic language. The company backtracked following outcry over the company’s initial defense of Crowder. But the ban isn’t permanent. Crowder simply must remove the offensive content, including the homophobic t-shirts he was selling in his online store.   FCC permits carriers to block more robocalls   The FCC allowed carriers last week to ban even more robocalls by allowing them to stop calls on behalf of subscribers.  The order had bipartisan support, but Democrat Jessica Rosenworcel said it opens the door for carriers to charge for the service since the order doesn’t contain any language to prevent that from happening.   Pew reports lagging tech adoption in rural   Pew reports that rural communities lag the rest of the country when it comes to tech adoption. At 63%, rural households are 10 points lower than the rest of the country. Smartphone penetration, at 67%, is also 10 points lower. Tablet penetration and the number of households with desktop computers also lags.   Congress kills bill provision preventing IRS from setting up free filing service   Finally, it looks like you’re going to have an alternative to Turbo Tax. The tax preparation service is facing some competition from the IRS itself. Congress has killed a provision of the Taxpayer First Act that would have prevented the IRS from creating its own, free online tax filing service.   Events   Tues., 6/11   NCTA/Rural Broadband Caucus Trailblazing a Path for Rural Broadband 11:30AM-1:00PM   Uber Elevate Summit 2019 Reagan International Center Today & Tomorrow   Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood & Color of Change Digital Privacy Briefing Rayburn 2322 3:30-5:00pm   Entertainment Software Association ES3 LA Convention Center Today through Wednesday   House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Online Platforms and Market Power, Part 1: The Free and Diverse Press Rayburn 2141 2PM   Wed., 6/12   Federal Communications Commission Tribal Workshop Riverwind Casino in Oklahoma Wed. and Thurs.

Aale über Osaka Die Reise hat noch nicht begonnen (also betrachtet von dem Punkt, an dem ich dies schreibe schon, damals abaer noch nicht), doch kann man sich ja mal ein Bild von der Stadt an sich machen. Also gibt es ganz viele Hörerfragen, ein ganz wenig Geschichte, Geografie, ein paar Anekdoten und Nachrichten. Habt also Spaß und macht, dass der Aal passt, damit ihr euch nicht von ihm trennen müsst. Podcast herunterladen

LOOK OUT! It’s only Films To Be Buried With! Join your host Brett Goldstein as he and his guest go deep into the subject of mortality via cinema, and good lord this week it’s a good’un - yes, you are warmly welcomed to sit in on his chat with acting and comedy champ JACK WHITEHALL!Jack Whitehall! Yes indeed. Brett’s been mates with Jack for a long while now, starting out in comedy circles around the same time and blazing the open mic circuit leaving a trail of smoke and ash behind them. This right here is the perfect chance to find out how Jack’s life has branched out ever since those younger, more innocent days and how he went from parka to poetry with consummate ease, his love of Disney and Robin Hood (and tights, by proxy), he and Brett sewing seeds of a future football film or series (that would be amazing and I hope they make good on that), his rise to full stardom through comedy and acting which led to his current high watermark of acting alongside The Rock, and some fine crying on plane talk. Crying on a plane while watching a film is known as “AALS” by the way, in case you’re pondering - or “altitude adjusted lachrymosity syndrome”. Whip that one out next time at yer pub quiz eh? So relax, throw on a pair of tights (it’s what Jack would have wanted yo to do), and enjoy these two getting their chat on about movies and all things besides.DON'T FORGET!!! FILMS TO BE BURIED WITH - Live at the BFI - November 3rd!!! Links to come...––––– ––––– –––––THIS WEEK'S LINKS:• JACK WHITEHALL on TWITTER!• JACK WHITEHALL on THE INTERNET!• JACK on INSTAGRAM!• JACK on IMDB!• BRETT GOLDSTEIN on TWITTER!• BRETT GOLDSTEIN on INSTAGRAM!• 'SUPERBOB' - Brett's 2015 feature film!• 'CORNERBOYS' with BRETT & SCROOBIUS PIP!• DISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on FACEBOOK• DISTRACTION PIECES NETWORK on INSTAGRAM See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The Social Network Show welcomes Professor Nancy Kim back for the December 15, 2014 episode. We have spoken before with Law Professor, Nancy Kim about online contracts and how they can take away our privacy rights and the ability to enact a law suit. On this episode of The Social Network Show, Professor Kim explains why we continue to click "agree", why we do not dispute the contracts that we clearly do not understand, and why online companies have no incentive to create consumer friendly contracts. Nancy Kim is a professor of Law at California Western School of Law, Visiting Professor at the Rady School of Management at University of California, San Diego (UCSD), Chair of the Contracts Section of the Association of American Law Schools and a past member of its Executive Committee of the Internet and Computer Law Section. She is also an elected member of the American Law Institute. Professor Kim is the author of Wrap Contracts: Foundations and Ramifications (Oxford University Press, 2013) which focuses on how contracts affect and control online behavior. Before working in academia, Professor Kim worked for several technology companies and two major law firms. She has published many articles and essays and her name has appeared in the Boston Globe, slate.com, the San Diego Union Tribune, and the Sacramento Bee, just to name a few. She is also a Contributing Editor to the Contracts Law Prof Blog, which is the official blog of the AALS section on Contracts. You can read more about Professor Kim at California Western School of Law

The Social Network Show welcomes the return of Professor Nancy Kim to the August 22, 2014 episode. Nancy Kim, a professor of Law and Chair of the Contract Section of the Association of American Law Schools tells us the good and bad news about the "Terms of Use" agreements that we sign when we become users of a social network or other websites. Hear what she says about a particular case of a couple being fined for posting a negative review; hear how some companies are using their Terms of Use agreements to participate in "questionable" business practices; hear how we are being treated like guinea pigs by some social networks; hear about what Nancy thinks about how some social networks are powerful enough to change social norms; hear about how we could be manipulated in a way that we are not aware of. Nancy Kim is a professor of Law at California Western School of Law, Visiting Professor at the Rady School of Management at University of California, San Diego (UCSD), Chair of the Contracts Section of the Association of American Law Schools and a past member of its Executive Committee of the Internet and Computer Law Section. She is also an elected member of the American Law Institute. Professor Kim is the author of Wrap Contracts: Foundations and Ramifications (Oxford University Press, 2013) which focuses on how contracts affect and control online behavior. Before working in academia, Professor Kim worked for several technology companies and two major law firms. She has published many articles and essays and her name has appeared in the Boston Globe, slate.com, the San Diego Union Tribune, and the Sacramento Bee, just to name a few. She is also a Contributing Editor to the Contracts Law Prof Blog, which is the official blog of the AALS section on Contracts. You can read more about Professor Kim at California Western School of Law and connect with her on LinkedIn

The Social Network Show welcomes back Law Professor Nancy Kim to talk about the "Terms and Conditions" that we agree to when we visit a website. How many of us click on the "I Agree" button on a website without reading the "Terms and Conditions" of that website? Professor Kim talks about these non-traditional, non-negotiable online "contracts" (Wrap contracts) and why we agree to their conditions. It is virtually impossible these days to be on the internet without agreeing to the terms and conditions of each website, so hear what Professor Kim says about what we can do as consumers to protect ourselves. Listen to the show to hear what happened with General Mills and Instagram when they changed their "Terms of Use" and how the consumers responded. Hear her talk about what privacy policies do and who is tracking us. Nancy Kim is a professor of Law at California Western School of Law, Visiting Professor at the Rady School of Management at University of California, San Diego (UCSD), Chair of the Contracts Section of the Association of American Law Schools and a past member of its Executive Committee of the Internet and Computer Law Section. She is also an elected member of the American Law Institute. Professor Kim is the author of Wrap Contracts: Foundations and Ramifications (Oxford University Press, 2013) which focuses on how contracts affect and control online behavior. Before working in academia, Professor Kim worked for several technology companies and two major law firms. She has published many articles and essays and her name has appeared in the Boston Globe, slate.com, the San Diego Union Tribune, and the Sacramento Bee, just to name a few. She is also a Contributing Editor to the Contracts Law Prof Blog, which is the official blog of the AALS section on Contracts. You can read more about Professor Kim at California Western School of Law  

In der Literaturübersicht wird der derzeitige Kenntnisstand zum epizootischen ulzerativen Syndrom (EUS), einer Erkrankung bei zahlreichen Süß- und Brackwasserfischen, die sich innerhalb kurzer Zeit in vielen Teilen der Welt ausgebreitet hat und eine potentielle Bedrohung für europäische Süß- und Brackwasserfische darstellt, zusammengefasst. Ziel der vorliegenden Arbeit war es zuallererst, eine PCR-Methode geeignet zum Nachweis von Aphanomyces invadans direkt aus erkrankten Fischen zu entwickeln, und weiterhin, die Empfänglichkeit ausgewählter Süßwasser-fischarten, die von Bedeutung für die europäische Aquakultur sind, gegenüber diesem Erreger zu untersuchen. Hierzu wurde eine Semi-Nested PCR-Methode angewandt, die Teile der ITS-Region amplifiziert (Genabschnitte, die zwischen den die ribosomale RNA kodierenden Genen liegen). Die PCR-Methode erwies sich sowohl als hochspezifisch gegenüber allen untersuchten Aphanomyces invadans-Stämmen als auch hochsensitiv. Die Spezifität wurde unter Einsatz von DNA verschiedener Oomyceten, anderer relevanter Pathogene und Kommensalen sowie Wirts-DNA in die PCR untersucht. Die untere Nachweisgrenze der Semi-Nested PCR lag bei Einsatz von genomischer DNA aus Mycel bei 25 fg und bei Einsatz von Aphanomyces invadans-Zoosporen in die DNA-Extraktion bei 0,025 Zoosporen. Um die PCR-Methode an diagnostischen Proben zu testen, wurden Infektionsversuche durchgeführt. Hierzu wurden Blaue Fadenfische (Trichogaster trichopterus) und drei in Deutschland wirtschaftlich bedeutsame Fischarten ausgewählt: Regenbogenforellen (Oncorynchus mykiss), Europäische Welse (Silurus glanis) und Europäische Aale (Anguilla anguilla). 36 Fischen von jeder der vier Spezies wurde intramuskulär eine Aphanomyces invadans-Sporensuspension injiziert. Während eines Versuchszeitraumes von 35 Tagen wurden laufend Fische zu vorher festgelegten Entnahmezeitpunkten euthanasiert, auf Hautveränderungen untersucht und Probenmaterial aus dem Injektionsbereich für die PCR-Untersuchung und eine histopathologische Untersuchung entnommen. Die Fadenfische und die Welse zeigten im Versuchsverlauf deutlich sichtbare, teilweise ulzerative Hautläsionen. Während bei der histopathologischen Untersuchung der Fadenfische die EUS-typischen mykotischen Granulome, die die Hyphen umschlossen, auftraten, konnten bei den Welsen zwar zahlreiche Hyphen nachgewiesen werden, die Entzündungreaktion bestand hier jedoch aus einer losen Anordnung von Makrophagen, wenigen Lymphozyten und Riesenzellen. Bei den Regenbogenforellen traten nur geringgradige, bei keinem Tier ulzerative Hautveränderungen auf. Nur bei vier Regenbogenforellen konnten die EUS-typischen mykotischen Granulome nachgewiesen werden. Keiner der Aale wies makroskopisch sichtbare Hautveränderungen auf mit Ausnahme eines Aals mit einer geröteten Injektionsstelle, der an Tag 2 post infectionem entnommen wurde. Bei diesem Tier konnten mit Hilfe der Grocott-Reaktion lokalisiert einzelne Hyphen sichtbar gemacht werden. Das Auftreten mykotischer Granulome oder einer zellulären Wirtsreaktion konnte bei den Aalen nicht beobachtet werden. Die PCR-Methode wurde für den Nachweis von Aphanomyces invadans aus den Fischen der Infektionsversuche angewandt. Der Erregernachweis gelang bei allen Fischen, die makroskopisch sichtbare Hautläsionen zeigten. Bei den Fadenfischen und den Welsen gelang der Erregernachweis bei allen Versuchsgruppen ab dem ersten Entnahmezeitpunkt an Tag 1 p. i. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die PCR-Methode sich für den Nachweis von Aphanomyces invadans bei erkrankten Fischen eignet. Zur Empfänglichkeit von Europäischen Welsen und Aalen lagen bisher keine Daten vor. Die Ergebnisse der Infektionsversuche liefern klare Hinweise dafür, dass Europäische Welse gegenüber dem EUS empfänglich sind, während Aale nicht und Regenbogenforellen nur geringgradig empfänglich zu sein scheinen.