POPULARITY
5 episodes with aliza shatzman
3 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
2 episodes with aliza shatzman
Aliza Shatzman joined Robert on this episode. Aliza is the President and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project. The Project's mission is to "ensure law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not." Aliza shared her experience as a law clerk and explained the Project's great resources for future law clerks. She and Robert also discussed the kerfuffle at a recent federalist society event where two judges from the Fifth Circuit and Professor Steve Vladeck went a few rounds on judicial independence.Follow Aliza on LinkedIn. Watch the FedSoc debate here.Thank You SponsorsThis podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.Send your questions, comments, and feedback to summarilypod@gmail.com.Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services. The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice. You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer. The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast's advertisers. This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only. Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast's creator is prohibited.
Uncover the shocking truth about judicial clerkships in this eye-opening episode of the Lawyerist Podcast. Today, Stephanie sits down with Aliza Shatzman, president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project, to discuss the crucial need for transparency and accountability within the judiciary. Aliza shares her personal journey through a challenging clerkship experience, highlighting the lack of Title VII protections for law clerks and the systemic issues plaguing judicial clerkships. Discover how the Legal Accountability Project's centralized clerkship database empowers clerks and enhances judicial transparency. Links from the episode: Visit LAP's Centralized Clerkships Database to submit a post-clerkship survey or register for Database access. If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free!
Uncover the shocking truth about judicial clerkships in this eye-opening episode of the Lawyerist Podcast. Today, Stephanie sits down with Aliza Shatzman, president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project, to discuss the crucial need for transparency and accountability within the judiciary. Aliza shares her personal journey through a challenging clerkship experience, highlighting the lack of Title VII protections for law clerks and the systemic issues plaguing judicial clerkships. Discover how the Legal Accountability Project's centralized clerkship database empowers clerks and enhances judicial transparency. Links from the episode: Visit LAP's Centralized Clerkships Database to submit a post-clerkship survey or register for Database access. If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free!
Aliza is a Washington Univesrity of St. Louis School of Law and currently works as the President and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project. In this episode, I sit down with Aliza, a legal trailblazer whose journey is marked by pivotal experiences that shaped her mission to create meaningful change. Before law school, Aliza's time at Planned Parenthood and her work in Senator Elizabeth Warren's office forged her worldview and set her on a path to law school with a clear purpose.We unpack her law school years, exploring the crucial decisions that steered her away from public interest law and towards a passion for justice reform. Aliza's story is a masterclass in discovering what you truly want from a legal career—and more importantly, what you don't.The conversation reaches a turning point as Aliza shares the catalyst behind her groundbreaking initiative, the Legal Accountability Project. After a harrowing experience during a judicial clerkship and the subsequent, shocking realization that there were no avenues for redress, Aliza knew she had to act. Her journey through the legal maze led her to create a platform that now empowers others to hold the judiciary accountable.This episode is packed with eye-opening insights and a fresh perspective on the legal landscape, especially regarding law clerkships. Aliza's deep dive into the Legal Accountability Project is not just informative—it's transformative. Whether you're in law or simply interested in the mechanics of systemic change, this is a conversation you won't want to miss.Aliza's LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223Legal Accountability Project: https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/Be sure to check out the Official Sponsors for the Lawyers in the Making Podcast:Rhetoric - takes user briefs and motions and compares them against the text of opinions written by judges to identify ways to tailor their arguments to better persuade the judges handling their cases. Rhetoric's focus is on persuasion and helps users find new ways to improve their odds of success through more persuasive arguments. Find them here: userhetoric.comThe Law School Operating System Recorded Course - Use this Link (https://www.lisablasser.com/offers/nAytQusX?coupon_code=LSOSNATE10) or go to LisaBlasser.com for 10% off her recorded course! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit lawyersinthemaking.substack.com
A judicial clerkship can put a young lawyer on a path to a dream career. But if the judge is abusive or unethical, that dream can very quickly turn into a nightmare. That's what happened to Aliza Shatzman, a former clerk who had a terrible experience working for a judge. Shatzman went on to found the Legal Accountability Project, a group advocating for more workplace protections for clerks and other judicial branch employees. Shatzman joins our On The Merits podcast in the wake of a scandal involving an Alaska federal judge who resigned amid allegations of pervasive harassment and abuse of his clerks. We also hear from Bloomberg Law reporter Jacqueline Thomsen about why courts have their own system for handling employee disputes and why they don't want Congress to interfere with it. Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.
Justice Anita Earls of the North Carolina Supreme Court knows about some reforms that will improve our justice system. But she also knows about some that will provoke an unhappy response—including an investigation against her personally.In this second half of our interview, Justice Earls talks about how she found herself under investigation for calling for judicial reform.We previously asked Aliza Shatzman why the Legal Accountability Project is necessary: don't judges police their own, we asked? The answer is: yes, but not in the way you'd hope.Anita Earls' wiki, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter/X feed.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal's weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.Other items discussed in the episode:https://www.fd.org/news/lone-black-nc-supreme-court-justice-drops-suit-over-diversity-comments-probe-droppedhttps://apnews.com/article/north-carolina-justice-ethics-drops-lawsuit-24763cfa64aca0fc58e559ca4ffe5cf9https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/31/us/north-carolina-supreme-court-anita-earls-bias.htmlhttps://news.un.org/en/story/2024/02/1146202https://apnews.com/article/north-carolina-supreme-court-justice-ethics-panel-b9ce0a7b9e5ab2c7dcbed02d6c74faedAdditionally, an interview she conducted with State Court Report and NYU Law Review: https://statecourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/conversation-justice-anita-earls-north-carolina-supreme-courtEpisode 39 with Aliza Shatzman on the Legal Accountability Project.Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal's YouTube channel.
In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, speaks with Karyn Polak, Founder and President of Shift the Prism, about judicial accountability and how to protect law clerks from workplace mistreatment. They discuss the scope of the problem, including gender discrimination and harassment, and Aliza offers suggestions for what members of the legal profession can do to help. Aliza spoke on the NAWL Podcast in 2022 and in this episode, we get an update on the work of Aliza's nonprofit, The Legal Accountability Project, which aims to ensure that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not.
You should authentically embody your personal brand, regardless of who you interact with. Your personal brand should also reflect your values and evolve based on your experiences. Your brand should show up in your advocacy. This is why I invited Aliza Shatzman to be on the podcast. Her personal experiences in clerkship drive her authentic advocacy. Now, as the founder and president of The Legal Accountability Project, she aims to ensure that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who don't.In this episode of the Branding Room Only podcast, you'll learn about what Aliza's doing to fight for greater judicial accountability and to arm law students and law schools with more information about clerkship experiences. 1:09 - How Aliza defines a personal brand, herself in three words, reveals her favorite Hillary Clinton quote2:45 - How growing up in a progressive Jewish community in suburban Philadelphia shaped Aliza and her view of the world5:06 - Aliza's professional journey, the pushback against change in the judiciary, and her refusal to stay silent11:35 - The clerkship incident that led Aliza to launch her judicial accountability-focused organization18:14 - My negative experience interviewing with a judge to be a judicial intern and strong feelings on the need for (and lack of) accountability25:01 - How law students and young lawyers can start making a difference with judicial accountability right now29:13 - How a lot of people's personal brands are very tied to their clerkship (and judgeship) in a dishonest way32:40 - What drives Aliza and how she aligns her personal brand with her advocacy while maintaining professional integrity and ethics39:01 - What Aliza does for fun every day, the aspect of her brand that'll always exist, and her Branding Room Only magicMentioned In How Aliza Shatzman Is Fighting for Accountability and Change In the Judiciary“2024 Intention and Goal Setting Webinar” | YouTubeThe Legal Accountability Project | Twitter/X | LinkedInAliza Shatzman on Twitter/XAliza Shatzman on LinkedInSponsor for this episodeThis episode is brought to you by PGE Consulting Group LLC.PGE Consulting Group LLC is dedicated to providing a practical hybrid of professional development training and diversity solutions. From speaking to consulting to programming and more, all services and resources are carefully tailored for each partner. Paula Edgar's distinct expertise helps engage attendees and create lasting change for her clients.To learn more about Paula and her services, go to www.paulaedgar.com or contact her at info@paulaedgar.com, and follow Paula Edgar and the PGE Consulting Group LLC on LinkedIn.
Judicial clerkships can provide unparalleled access and prestige to young lawyers just entering practice. But because the judiciary requires confidentiality and secrecy to operate properly, often law students don't know what to expect. The Legal Accountability Project is working to change that by making the system more transparent for law schools and law students. In this episode, Todd Smith and Jody Sanders explore the Legal Accountability Project's goals in a discussion with LAP founder Aliza Shatzman and board member Appellate Court of Maryland Judge Doug Nazarian. They discuss their new initiative for judges, the Legal Accountability Project Pledge, which they are using to help create a more transparent, diverse, and rewarding clerkship system. They also talk about the rollout of LAP's clerkship database of surveys from clerks on the various judges. Finally, Judge Nazarian shares his experience working in Maryland appellate courts.Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share!A special thanks to our sponsors:Court Surety Bond AgencyThomson ReutersProudly presented by Butler Snow LLPJoin the Texas Appellate Law Podcast Community today:texapplawpod.comTwitterLinkedInYouTube
Today's podcast episode brings back a previous guest to update listeners. Aliza Shatzman previously appeared to talk with Sarah about The Legal Accountability Project. She co-founded this project based on a nightmare clerkship scenario she faced and wanted to help lawyers find recourse if they find themselves in this situation. She is sharing where things are today and the initiatives they've made progress on in the last year. See show notes at formerlawyer.com/219
This Day in Legal History: W.E.B. DuBois is BornOn this day in legal history, February 23 commemorates the birth of W.E.B. DuBois in 1868, a seminal figure in the realm of civil rights and one of the founding members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). DuBois was not only instrumental in the creation of the NAACP but also served as a beacon of intellectual and social advocacy, championing the rights and advancement of African Americans throughout his life. His scholarship, particularly his seminal work "The Souls of Black Folk," challenged the pervasive racial injustices of his time and offered a compelling narrative that underscored the importance of civil rights, social justice, and equality.DuBois's advocacy extended into the legal sphere, where his efforts helped to lay the foundation for future legal challenges against segregation and discrimination. He was a proponent of using legal action as a means to achieve civil rights, influencing key figures and strategies in subsequent civil rights movements. His international work, including his role in the Pan-African Congresses, aimed at garnering global support against racism and imperialism, highlighting the interconnectedness of the struggle for justice worldwide.Moreover, DuBois's commitment to education and political activism paved the way for future generations of African American lawyers, scholars, and activists. His insistence on the right to education and political participation for African Americans contributed to the desegregation of schools and expanded voting rights, themes that would find their echoes in landmark legal decisions throughout the 20th century.Through his life, W.E.B. DuBois exemplified the power of combining scholarly research with activism. His legacy is not just in the organizations he helped to found or the immediate legal battles he influenced, but also in his enduring impact on the strategies and philosophies of the civil rights movement. His birthday serves as a reminder of the ongoing struggle for equality and the importance of relentless advocacy and intellectual engagement in pursuing social justice.Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta Platforms Inc., is aiming to be exempt from personal liability in lawsuits alleging that social media platforms have addicted children. These lawsuits, currently pending in a California federal court, target not just Meta but also Zuckerberg individually. The core of these legal challenges involves accusations that Zuckerberg ignored warnings about the dangers of Instagram and Facebook to minors, choosing instead to misrepresent the safety of these platforms publicly. Plaintiffs argue that Zuckerberg, as the prominent figure of Meta, bears a direct responsibility to be truthful about the risks posed to children's health by the company's platforms.The lawsuits leverage a notable quote from Spider-Man comics to underline their argument: "With great power comes great responsibility," criticizing Zuckerberg for not adhering to this principle. Zuckerberg's defense hinges on the assertion that his role as CEO does not inherently make him personally responsible for the company's actions. His legal team further contends that any statements he made are protected under the First Amendment, arguing there was no obligation for him to disclose internal safety findings.The litigation against Zuckerberg forms part of a broader wave of legal action targeting social media companies, with over a thousand lawsuits filed in various courts. These cases accuse companies like Meta, Google, TikTok, and Snap of contributing to mental health issues among young users. The outcomes of these cases could have significant implications, potentially setting precedents for holding high-ranking executives personally liable for their companies' actions.In addition to these suits, Zuckerberg faces personal liability in a separate case related to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, highlighting the ongoing legal challenges for social media executives over their platforms' impacts and their personal roles in company practices. The legal scrutiny extends beyond the courtroom, with social media's influence on youth mental health and its role in spreading harmful content drawing critical attention from lawmakers and the public alike.Mark Zuckerberg Wants Out of Social Media Addiction LawsuitsThe Legal Accountability Project is launching a Centralized Clerkship Database in March, aimed at providing prospective law clerks with insights into judges they may work for, based on hundreds of surveys from former clerks. This initiative, spearheaded by Aliza Shatzman, who founded the group after a negative clerking experience, seeks to "democratize information" about the often opaque and rumor-driven process of selecting clerkships. The database, accessible to those who register and pay a $20 subscription fee, offers a platform for sharing candid experiences, aiming to break the traditional silence surrounding clerkships, especially those marked by negative or neutral experiences. Shatzman emphasizes that the database addresses a critical need for transparency in the clerking process, where young lawyers and law students can find themselves in vulnerable positions due to the significant power imbalance between them and the judges they serve. Over 800 responses have been collected for the database, with respondents given the option to remain anonymous or be named, provided their identities can be verified to ensure the integrity of the information shared.The platform not only allows for the sharing of experiences but also serves as an accountability tool, highlighting the behavior and management styles of judges, thus potentially influencing future clerking decisions. It represents a significant step towards transparency in the judiciary by allowing prospective clerks to make informed decisions based on the experiences of their predecessors.Judge Clerkship Database to Launch With Hundreds of TestimonialsFormer U.S. President Donald Trump has requested a federal judge to dismiss the criminal charges against him, which accuse him of mishandling sensitive national security documents after leaving office. Trump's legal team argues that the prosecution is flawed, challenging the appointment of Special Counsel Jack Smith, claiming a conflict with U.S. laws on presidential records, and stating that the main charge is vaguely defined. Trump, who faces a 40-count indictment in Florida for retaining classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort, has pleaded not guilty. His defense includes claims of presidential immunity, stating that the allegations are based on decisions made during his presidency. Prosecutors have dismissed Trump's immunity claim as "frivolous," highlighting that the charged conduct occurred after he left office. With a trial set for May, Trump has sought a delay, while his lawyers also intend to argue for dismissal based on claims of selective prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct. The case's progression may be affected by Trump's ability to appeal against a potential denial of his immunity claim, as seen in other legal challenges he faces.Trump moves to dismiss charges accusing him of mishandling classified documents | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and brought to us thanks to the Internet Memory Foundation (formerly the European Archive Foundation) which is a non-profit foundation whose purpose is archiving content of the World Wide Web. It supports projects and research that include the preservation and protection of digital media content in various forms to form a digital library of cultural content.Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, born on January 27, 1756, in Salzburg, Austria, is revered as one of the most prolific and influential composers in the history of classical music. His extensive body of work encompasses a wide range of genres, including symphonies, operas, concertos, and chamber music, reflecting both his genius and the breadth of his contributions to the musical world. Mozart's ability to meld intricate harmonies with the expressive depth and the innovative complexity of his compositions has made his music timeless, resonating with audiences centuries after his death.One of Mozart's most beloved compositions is the "Serenade in G Major," K. 525, popularly known as "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" ("A Little Night Music"). Composed in 1787, this serenade is notable for its lively, joyful melodies and its elegance, embodying the quintessential characteristics of the Classical era. The first movement, "I. Allegro," in particular, stands out for its memorable opening motif and the graceful interplay of musical lines, showcasing Mozart's mastery in crafting themes that are at once sophisticated and accessible."Romance," the second movement of "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik," is a serene contrast to the vivacity of the first, offering listeners a moment of calm and introspection. This movement exemplifies Mozart's skill in creating music that speaks to the human experience, weaving melodies that capture a wide range of emotions within a single composition. The piece's enduring popularity attests to its universal appeal and the genius of its creator, who, even in a work intended as light evening entertainment, could touch the depths of the human soul.Mozart's legacy extends far beyond his compositions; he is a symbol of artistic perfection and the eternal beauty of music. "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik," with its blend of elegance, clarity, and emotional depth, serves as a perfect introduction to Mozart's oeuvre, offering a glimpse into the mind of a composer whose works have defined the classical canon and continue to inspire musicians and music lovers around the world.Without further ado, Mozart's second movement of Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Federal judges have lifetime tenure with little to no oversight. Despite employing thousands of new law school graduates as law clerks, they aren't subject to anti-discrimination or other workplace laws. How is it possible that federal courts do not have to follow the same federal labor laws they enforce? In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, founder of the Legal Accountability Project, describes the experience that inspired her to create LAP and what needs to change to hold federal judges accountable.
This Day in Legal History: Jamaican Independence On this day in legal history, February 9, 1962, marks a significant milestone for Jamaica as it achieved full independence, breaking away from the Federation of the West Indies. This pivotal moment in Jamaican history was the culmination of a long journey towards sovereignty, reflecting the island nation's desire for self-governance and control over its own destiny. Despite its newfound independence, Jamaica chose to remain a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations, signifying a continued, albeit altered, relationship with the United Kingdom.The transition to independence was not merely a political formality but a transformative legal and social shift that laid the foundation for Jamaica's future. As a fully independent nation, Jamaica adopted its own constitution, which established the legal framework for the government and guaranteed the rights and freedoms of its citizens. This constitution reflected Jamaica's unique identity and aspirations, incorporating both the legacy of British legal traditions and the influences of Jamaican culture and values.The decision to remain within the Commonwealth underscored Jamaica's commitment to maintaining ties with other nations that shared a common history and set of values, while also asserting its autonomy on the world stage. This dual approach allowed Jamaica to forge its path in international relations, trade, and legal cooperation, benefiting from the solidarity and support of the Commonwealth network.Jamaica's independence day is not only a celebration of its past struggles for sovereignty but also a recognition of the legal and democratic principles that continue to guide the nation. It serves as a reminder of the importance of self-determination, the rule of law, and the ongoing quest for justice and equality. As Jamaicans reflect on their journey since 1962, they celebrate the resilience and spirit that have defined their nation's history and look forward to a future shaped by their own hands.In the years following independence, Jamaica has made significant strides in developing its legal system, economy, and social structures, striving to address the challenges that face a modern nation while preserving the rich cultural heritage that is uniquely Jamaican. The anniversary of independence is not just a moment to reflect on the past but an opportunity to renew the commitment to building a just, prosperous, and equitable society for all Jamaicans.The recent affirmation of the suspension of 96-year-old Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman has sparked debate over the ethics laws governing the evaluation of federal judges for potential disability and misconduct. This decision, upheld by the US Judicial Conference's Committee on Conduct and Disability, marks only the third written decision in over three years by the panel, emphasizing the rarity of such actions. The Committee found no error in the investigation led by Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore, indicating thorough compliance with procedural standards. However, this has led to discussions about whether the deference shown to the Judicial Council's decision was appropriate, particularly in the context of suspending an Article III judge.Legal experts are divided on the matter. While some, like Professor Arthur Hellman of the University of Pittsburgh, suggest that the standard of review might need to be more stringent when suspending a judge appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, others like Professor Paul Gugliuzza of Temple Law School see the Committee's deferential standard as fitting within typical appellate review practices. The case has also highlighted concerns over how the judiciary handles investigations of its own, with some arguing that there is generally too much deference to judges investigating peers, yet acknowledging that the Newman case is an example of the judiciary attempting accountability.Aliza Shatzman, from the Legal Accountability Project, pointed out broader issues related to the aging federal judiciary and the silence often maintained by judicial clerks and employees due to fear of reputational damage. The Newman case involved complaints from a former judicial assistant and a clerk about being assigned personal tasks, which Judge Newman allegedly dismissed as insignificant.Jeremy Fogel, a retired federal judge, suggested that the judiciary lacks a sophisticated system for assessing judges' cognitive functions, leading to ad hoc and confrontational situations. He proposed a regular assessment protocol to avoid personal conflicts and ensure fair evaluations. The controversy surrounding Judge Newman's suspension underscores the need for a more refined system to address the challenges posed by an aging judiciary, balancing the need for accountability with respect for the complexities of judicial service.Judge Newman's Upheld Suspension Has Some Questioning Ethics LawAt the U.S. Supreme Court, former President Donald Trump's legal challenge against being disqualified from the Colorado ballot for his alleged role in the 2021 Capitol insurrection appeared likely to succeed. During the proceedings, justices from both conservative and liberal wings expressed skepticism toward the argument that Trump could be removed from the ballot under the 14th Amendment, which prohibits individuals who engaged in insurrection against the U.S. from holding office. The case, triggered by a Colorado court's decision, has significant implications for the 2024 presidential election, where Trump is a leading Republican contender.The justices grappled with the application of the 14th Amendment's Section 3, questioning whether a state could unilaterally impact the national election outcome by disqualifying a presidential candidate. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Elena Kagan highlighted the potential for a few states to dictate election results, emphasizing the national scope of presidential eligibility. Meanwhile, Justice Brett Kavanaugh pointed out the democratic principle of allowing people to choose their candidates, suggesting that disqualifying Trump could disenfranchise voters.The attorney for the plaintiffs, Jason Murray, argued that Trump's actions to undermine the 2020 election results justified his disqualification, whereas Trump's lawyer, Jonathan Mitchell, contended that even if a candidate admitted to insurrection, Section 3 would allow them to run and potentially win, leaving any sanctions to post-election congressional action.Trump, speaking in Florida, expressed confidence in the Supreme Court and his legal arguments, viewing the case as part of a broader attempt to exclude him from the ballot. This Supreme Court case echoes the institution's critical role in the 2000 presidential election, with the justices revisiting historical precedents to interpret Section 3's enforcement.The debate also touched on the nature of the January 6 Capitol riot, with Mitchell asserting it was a riot rather than an insurrection, a point challenged by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The case underscores the complex interplay between constitutional law, electoral politics, and the judiciary's role in adjudicating disputes that have far-reaching consequences for American democracy.Trump ballot disqualification bid gets skeptical US Supreme Court reception | ReutersGenesis Global, a cryptocurrency lender, has reached a settlement in a lawsuit brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, marking a significant step in resolving its legal challenges amid bankruptcy proceedings. The lawsuit, filed last year by James, accused Genesis, along with its parent company Digital Currency Group (DCG) and the crypto firm Gemini Trust Co, of defrauding investors out of over $1 billion through the Gemini Earn program. This program allowed customers to lend their crypto assets to Genesis in return for interest.The settlement, pending approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, entails Genesis agreeing to halt its business operations within New York state. This development follows closely on the heels of Genesis settling another lawsuit with the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission concerning the same Earn program. As part of that settlement, Genesis agreed to a $21 million fine, contingent upon its ability to fully reimburse its customers during the bankruptcy process.These legal resolutions represent a crucial phase for Genesis as it navigates through bankruptcy, aiming to alleviate its legal entanglements and financial obligations. The outcomes of these settlements could significantly impact Genesis's future operations and its efforts to address the claims of its creditors and customers. Bankrupt Genesis Global settles NY Attorney General's lawsuit | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Luigi Boccherini. Born on February 19, 1743, in Lucca, Italy, Boccherini was a distinguished composer and cellist of the Classical era, celebrated for his significant contributions to chamber music. His rich musical legacy is characterized by elegance, lyrical beauty, and the sophisticated use of the cello, an instrument he profoundly mastered and elevated in the classical music canon. Boccherini's extensive body of work includes over one hundred string quintets, quartets, and trios, alongside numerous symphonies and concertos. Despite his substantial output and unique style, Boccherini's compositions were somewhat overshadowed by his contemporaries, such as Haydn and Mozart. However, his works have gained increased recognition and appreciation over time for their inherent grace, inventiveness, and the delicate balance he achieved between melodic and harmonic elements, marking him as a pivotal figure in the development of chamber music in the Classical period. He is said to have evolved chamber music from the format developed by Haydn, elevating the cello to an equal place with the violin and viola. Today's piece is brought to us courtesy of The Internet Memory Foundation (formerly the European Archive Foundation) which is a non-profit foundation whose purpose is archiving content of the World Wide Web. It supports projects and research that include the preservation and protection of digital media content in various forms to form a digital library of cultural content.The piece we'll be closing out with is the minuet from his Quintet in C. Major, we hope you enjoy. Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe
Get a free trial of Audible using this LINK! Support the showFollow us on Instagram @theladieswholawpodcast
In this episode, Aliza Shatzman of the Legal Accountability Network discusses her article "The Clerkships Whisper Network: What It Is, Why It's Broken, And How To Fix It," which is published in the Columbia Law Review. Shatzman is on Twitter at @AlizaShatzman.This episode was hosted by Peter Romer-Friedman on PRF Law. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In the 11th episode of The Newfangled Lawyer Podcast, host Patrick Patino engages in a conversation with Aliza Shatzman, President of the Legal Accountability Project. Aliza shares her inspiring journey from law school to a horrible clerkship experience that ignited her passion for changing the legal profession. They discuss the urgent need for transparency and reform in clerkships, revealing shocking realities and the culture of silence that surrounds law clerk mistreatment. Join this thought-provoking discussion about the legal profession, authenticity, and the call for justice. Explore what it means to be a "newfangled lawyer" as they challenge norms and pave the way for a brighter legal future. About Aliza: Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former D.C. judge, in order to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act, legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability, clerkships, and diversity in the courts. She has been published in numerous law journals and mainstream publications. https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/ https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/
Aliza Shatzman, President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, shares her thoughts on how the U.S. judicial clerkship process should change. For Aliza, this issue is personal (you can read her U.S. Congressional testimony on gender discrimination and harassment here), but our conversation takes a broader systems-based perspective. We discuss the power dynamics existing between judges and their clerks and how one might address misconduct within such an environment—possibly through both non-profit and legislative responses. All of these topics and more are included in this episode of The Justice Podcast. This podcast isn't financial, legal, or medical advice, but we do discuss how we might invest our resources in systems and policies for a healthier society. If you'd like to learn more about today's topic and other public policy issues, check out the website: TheJusticePodcast.com --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/bobby-stroup/support
The legal profession places an enormous premium on getting judicial clerkships, which usually offer both valuable learning experiences and a major boost to a young lawyer's future prospects. But, are there potential downsides to clerkships? Some law clerks have a wonderful experience, but too many have had an experience marked by harassment and mistreatment at the hands of an abusive judge. Molly Ranns and JoAnn Hathaway welcome Aliza Shatzman to talk about her personal story and her efforts to bring transparency and awareness about the full range of clerkship experiences to lift current stigmas and prevent future judiciary workplace mistreatment. Aliza Shatzman is the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project.
The legal profession places an enormous premium on getting judicial clerkships, which usually offer both valuable learning experiences and a major boost to a young lawyer's future prospects. But, are there potential downsides to clerkships? Some law clerks have a wonderful experience, but too many have had an experience marked by harassment and mistreatment at the hands of an abusive judge. Molly Ranns and JoAnn Hathaway welcome Aliza Shatzman to talk about her personal story and her efforts to bring transparency and awareness about the full range of clerkship experiences to lift current stigmas and prevent future judiciary workplace mistreatment. Aliza Shatzman is the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project.
Ben and Nathan are joined by Aliza Shatzman, founder of the Legal Accountability Project. Aliza describes the project's mission to bring greater transparency to judicial clerkships and to promote positive clerkship experiences. She and the guys discuss why law schools sometimes obscure the truth about judicial clerkships, how the Legal Accountability Project will democratize information regarding clerkships, and what future law students can do now to prepare for clerking. You can find Aliza on LinkedIn and Twitter @AlizaShatzman. Follow the Legal Accountability Project on Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter @The_LAP_ LSAT Demon LSAT Demon iOS App LSAT Demon Daily Watch Episode 418 on YouTube Thinking LSAT YouTube LSAT Demon YouTube 1:12 - The Legal Accountability Project - Special guest Aliza Shatzman recounts how the harassment and discrimination she faced as a judicial clerk led her to create the Legal Accountability Project. She advocates greater transparency and workplace protections for judicial clerkships. Read Aliza's testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet. 11:51 - Clerkships Database - Aliza introduces the Legal Accountability Project's Clerkships Database, which aims to democratize information about judges and serves as a “Yelp for clerkships.” Aliza describes how she's working to gain the support of judges and law schools. 36:19 - Advice for Future Law Students - Aliza offers advice to future law students who may want to pursue judicial clerkships: Start networking with judges and professors early, apply broadly, and don't assume that your law school's guidance is sound. Aliza also explains why federal clerkships aren't always better than state clerkships.
In the third part of this coverage of the sexual misconduct allegations against ex-George Mason University law professor and former FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright, Irina speaks with a victim of judicial harassment and retaliation, attorney and activist Aliza Shatzman who founded the Legal Accountability Project. After graduating from the Washington University School of Law in 2019, Aliza began clerking for a judge in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. After subjecting her to harassment and sex discrimination, the judge fired her and then went on to derail her legal career by providing false statements during her final reference check for a prestigious position as a federal prosecutor in such a manner that she lost the position. Irina and Aliza discuss how little has changed in the twenty years between when Irina started law school--a time of shady "open secrets" at her own alma mater and in the judiciary--and today. They talk about the roots of the culture of silence and its reinforcement via tools such as defamation lawsuits, like potentially the one currently faced by two of Josh Wright's alleged victims, and what true change and principled allyship look like.SOTI ep. 39 with Prof. Christa LaserSOTI ep. 40 with Prof. Brandy WagstaffAliza Shatzman's profile Aliza Shatzman's TwitterThe Legal Accountability Project (LAP) websiteDaily Mail article about the allegations against Joshua WrightGlobal Competition Review article about GMU's reaction to the allegationsNote: According to a statement printed in the media by Lindsay McKasson, counsel to Joshua Wright at Binall Law Group "all allegations of sexual misconduct are false," "These false allegations are being made public after unsuccessfully demanding millions of dollars behind closed doors," and "We look forward to total vindication in court." According to a tweet by Prof. Christa Laser, "I don't appreciate that his attorney falsely suggests we are all lying (1/2 was in writing!) & want $ (this is a lie–I only want him gone)."Joshua Wright's defamation lawsuit against Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry (redacted by Christa Laser) Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
In this week's episode, Sigalle interviews Aliza Shatzman, President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit that ensures that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza shares how her clerkship experience quickly became one of mistreatment and harassment. Realizing there were no resources to support or protect her, Aliza persevered by filing a judicial complaint, advocating for legislation to extend to law clerks and federal public defenders, and ultimately creating a platform to provide more transparency and accountability for in the clerkship system. Aliza's story shows how speaking up about our personal experiences, even when faced with those who hold more power than us, can create real and systemic change. Visit https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org to learn more.
In today's episode I speak with Aliza Shatzman who is the Founder and President of the non-profit Legal Accountability Project based in Washington, DC an organization dedicated to ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza writes and speaks about judicial accountability, clerkships, and diversity in the courts and has submitted written testimony before Congress and published extensively in both academic publications and in the popular press. She is a graduate of Williams College where she was a member of the golf team. Prior to Law School she worked on Capitol Hill of three years. She then graduated from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law and following law school, Aliza clerked in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. In our conversation we discuss her decision to become a lawyer, her own clerkship experience and why she founded LAP as a result, her mission to improve the judicial clerkship system by making it a safer and more transparent training ground for junior lawyers, the ups and downs of founding a non-profit advocacy group as a young lawyer, and more. This episode is sponsored, edited, and engineered by LawPods, a professional podcast production company for busy attorneys.
The Judge Pauline Newman saga reached a tentative end—or a respite—when the Federal Circuit imposed a year-long probation on the 96-year-old federal appellate judge. Aliza Shatzman of the Legal Accountability Project discusses the allegations of cognitive decline and workplace misconduct against her, and how the investigation and report may be a model for more transparency into judicial officers.Aliza notes:There is a kind of “omerta” code among clerks against sharing negative experiences.But Aliza is seeing the beginning of a cultural change in the legal community toward more transparency.Coming Spring 2024, the Legal Accountability Project will offer a database to aspiring clerks with at least 1,000 entries about former judicial clerk experiences.To the calls for more transparency, Aliza is not seeing any opposition from judges.…but there is some resistance from some law schools.Judge Newman has a storied career: pilot, racecar driver, bartender on the Seine River, inventor, maverick IP attorney, and finally, brilliant—and often contrarian—federal appellate judge. How does one assess a complaint that Judge Newman, an extraordinary individual, is acting out of the ordinary? Ultimately, the court based its sanctions ruling not on Judge Newman's cognition but on her refusal to comply with the investigation.This investigation vindicates the rule of transparency in the Judicial Conduct & Disability Act and may serve as a model for future investigations.Why the Judge Newman saga does not portend an opening of a “floodgates” of complaints against judges.Aliza Shatzman's biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Not To Be Published, Tim Kowal's weekly legal update, or view his blog of recent cases.The California Appellate Law Podcast thanks Casetext for sponsoring the podcast. Listeners receive a discount on Casetext Basic Research at casetext.com/CALP. The co-hosts, Jeff and Tim, were also invited to try Casetext's newest technology, CoCounsel, the world's first AI legal assistant. You can discover CoCounsel for yourself with a demo and free trial at casetext.com/CoCounsel.Other items discussed in the episode:Our June 2022 interview with Aliza.The Legal Accountability Project's website.Aliza Shatzman's published articles on the subject of Judge Newman in Slate and Above the Law.Aliza Shatman's article with the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, entitled "Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it."Our episode 90 on the California Bias Prevention Committee.Videos from this episode will be posted at Tim Kowal's YouTube channel.
Introducing the latest episode of The Law of Tech podcast subseries 'LegalTech Startup Spotlight', where we zoom in on some of the amazing LegalTech companies across the globe and the incredible minds behind them. Joining us for this episode of the LegalTech Startup Spotlight is Aliza Shatzman, president and founder at the Legal Accountability Project. Take a listen to the podcast episode on your podcast platform of preference!
Aliza Shatzman is President and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at extending support and resources to law clerks to ensure that they have a positive clerkship experience. Aliza talks about the mistreatment that she experienced as a law clerk. Her experience led her to discover the shocking lack of labor protections for clerks and the enormous power disparity between clerks and judges. Aliza was ultimately inspired to take on the deeply entrenched status quo in the clerking system. Tune in to hear about: • The power dynamic that exists today which gives judges the power to mistreat clerks and potentially derail their clerks' careers • How law schools and their clerkship offices have been complicit in protecting bad actors and withholding information about bad judges from clerkship applicants • How Aliza has improved accountability for judges and raised awareness in the community of law clerks • What law clerks experiencing mistreatment can do to get help • What changes need to be made to improve working conditions for clerks • The centralized clerkship database created by the Legal Accountability Project that democratizes information about judges and clerkships: https://bityl.co/K4ND You can read Aliza's testimony to the House Committee on the Judiciary here: https://bityl.co/K6EO DEIB for the People – a Collection of DEIB Content for Your Screens Mary Ellen – Radical Queer Witches (https://bityl.co/K6EV) Angie – Women Talking (https://amz.run/6vjB) Tanya – Wednesday (https://bityl.co/K6EW) a recommendation to watch and to investigate bias: (https://bityl.co/K6Ei)
Welcome back to Powerhouse Lawyers with Erin Gerner! PHL Retreat [00:00] Join us for an in-person community building experience. Reserve your spot now: https://www.eringerner.com/Powerhouse-Lawyers-Retreat Intro [01:44] Guest introduction: Aliza Shatzman [02:13] Aliza is a graduate of Washington University in St. Louis Law school. She had intentions to use her legal background to support reproductive services in the United States. Aliza became a clerk to boost her resume and professional development. She founded The Legal Accountability Project after experiencing workplace harassment during her clerkship program. Aliza's Clerkship [04:57] Aliza shares her experience with gender based harassment with the judge that she was assigned to. After reaching out for support to other lawyer mentors, Aliza was instructed to “stick it out” for the remainder of her clerkship program. Unfortunately, employee dispute plans did not exist where she worked and don't exist for many other clerkship programs. Why is the judicial clerkship process important? [11:29] The Legal Accountability Project [16:00] The Legal Accountability Project is a nonprofit organization founded on Aliza's experience with workplace harassment. The mission of the organization is to support and protect the clerks throughout their clerkship programs. The most transformative service LAP provides is through building a database of clerk experiences with their previous judge mentor. Advice for future clerks [32:50] Aliza advices future clerks to share their clerkship experience and seek others experiences too. Your experience is not rare. The messaging is that you must stay silent. That helps no one in the long run. Closing [38:19] Burnout and overwhelm may be a part of your everyday life, but it doesn't have to be! Here are five action steps that helped me crawl my way out of the weeds of life and into building the life I wanted and knew I deserved. Eliminate overwhelm in life AND law, now! https://www.eringerner.com/eliminating-overwhelm Powerhouse Lawyer Retreat: https://www.eringerner.com/Powerhouse-Lawyers-Retreat Find Aliza Shatzman: The Legal Accountability Project https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Share your clerkship experience https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/clerkships-database-1 LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-legal-accountability-project/ Twitter https://twitter.com/The_LAP_ Email aliza.shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org Stay connected with Erin Gerner Website eringerner.com LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/erin-gerner/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/erin.w.gerner Instagram https://www.instagram.com/eringerner/?hl=en
Aliza Shatzman is a judicial clerkship advocate. After a poor clerkship experience, Aliza created the Legal Accountability Project to bring transparency and accountability to the federal clerkship process. Find out how this pioneer and founder ensures the next generation of clerks is protected from bad judges. The Power of Judicial ClerkshipsClerkships are an important tool for lawyers interested in working in academia, trial lawyers, and Big Law associates, and they are a great way to hone your legal writing and reading skills. During the spring semester of 1L year, many law students participate in on-campus interviewing to work for large law firms or with governmental agencies. Kyla Denanyoh was surprised to learn that judicial clerkships are not “pitched” or hold job fair-type events at law schools to find law students.Whistleblowing in the JudiciaryAliza told the HR department about the harassment and gender-based discrimination she faced during her judicial clerkship. The HR department didn't do anything. Then Aliza contacted her law school and was informed that the judge's conduct had not raised any flags or concerns.There are multiple levels of harassment - Aliza received harassment and a poor reputation with a job revoked. But there are also issues that a lawyer would face when they appear before a judge. Judges have enormous power, and judiciary workplaces are exempt from Title VII of the Fair Employment practices that regulate workplace conduct, which is backward and impractical. There are state and federal bar rules and judicial rules of conduct, but other judges need to enforce these rules. Despite her experiences, Aliza wants to maintain judicial clerkships. Aliza created the Clerkships Database, which allows law schools to pay to have their law school participate in the database and leave true and honest references about What Can You Do with a Law DegreeAliza Shatzman did not have a positive judicial clerkship experience. Aliza received negative references when her clerkship ended, and her employment position was revoked. However, Aliza took the unfair situation and decided to rally for every future judicial clerk. When Aliza Shatzman created the Legal Accountability Project, she wanted to ensure that other clerks would learn from her terrible clerkship experience. Aliza is frequently contacted by members from affinity student bar associations, for example, LGBT, Haitian-American, Arab-American, Deaf, and Hard of Hearing, Japanese-American, and Black American bar members.Lawyer Side HustlesAlthough Aliza Shatzman has always enjoyed public speaking and writing, traveling to law schools, teaching CLEs, and sharing her experiences are valuable assets to revolutionizing the clerkship process. There have been a few bumps and pivots in the entrepreneurship process. Still, Aliza is grounded in reaching every regional or top 5 law school to ensure that every law student understands the clerkship process.As Aliza tours different law schools and talks to students about their experiences and the availability of clerkships, she finds that the process varies wildly based on the law school's resources.Join the FREE mailing list!Get behind-the-scenes content from You Are A Lawyer. 1) Visit www.youarealawyer.com2) Add your email address to the Subscribe pop-up box OR3) Enter your email address on the right side of the screen4) Get emails from me (I won't fill your inbox with junk)!Interact with You Are A LawyerKyla Denanyoh hosts the You Are A Lawyer podcast. Follow the podcast:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@youarealawyerInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/youarealawyer/Twitter: https://twitter.com/YouAreA_LawyerWebsite: https://www.youarealawyer.com
In this episode of On Record PR, Leslie Richards goes on record with Aliza Shatzman, the president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project, to discuss how to help law clerks receive the support they need to move forward in their careers. Learn More Aliza Shatzman is the president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences and extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in DC Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing on the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former DC judge, in order to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability and clerkships. She has been published in numerous law journals and other forums.
In this episode, we pass the mic to Aliza Shatzman to discuss federal judicial clerkships and The Legal Accountability Project. Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former D.C. judge, in order to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act, legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability and clerkships. She has been published in numerous law journals and other forums. Fun fact I'm a golfer - I played on the women's varsity golf team at Williams College. Fun fact I'm a golfer - I played on the women's varsity golf team at Williams College. www.journeytoesquire.com info@journeytoesquire.com @JourneytoEsquire --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/journey-to-esquire/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/journey-to-esquire/support
When judges mistreat their clerks, who holds them accountable? Where can clerks turn to for help? What workplace protections exist? In this episode, Francesca and Jacob talk to Aliza Shatzman, president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections for judiciary employees, detailing her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former DC Superior Court judge. Now, Aliza advocates for other clerks through her nonprofit, helping to ensure they have positive experiences while providing resources to those who do not.
In this episode I talk to Aliza Shatzman, President and Founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit focused on ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences. Aliza got her JD from Washington University School of Law where she was an associate editor for the Journal of Law and Policy. After Law School. Aliza clerked in the DC Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term, an experience we discuss at length in the episode. Aliza writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability and clerkships based on her personal experience with harassment and retaliation during and after her clerkship. She has been published in numerous forums, including the Administrative Law Review, Harvard Journal of Legislation, UCLA Journal of Gender and Law, Yale Law and Policy Review, NYU Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Above the Law, Law 360, Slate, and a number of other publications. If you have input, criticism, or guest suggestions (including yourself) for the podcast, shoot me an email at Joseph@excellentatlife.com. Check out my unbelievably amazing personal growth newsletter at ExcellentatLife.com. The critics are going mad over it so I'm sure you will as well.In the meantime, may you walk your own winding path well.Joseph Gerstel
It's essential to stand up and take necessary actions against harassment in the workplace. Employees have the right to feel safe and positive, both mentally and physically, where they work. This can be especially harrowing when the harassment takes place in a judge's chambers. This week's episode of the Tech Savvy Lawyer podcast features Aliza Shatzman, president and founder of the Legal Accountability Project. She joined us today to talk about using technology to hold federal judges accountable for their behavior toward their clerks. Aliza is an attorney and an advocate based in Washington, DC, who writes and speaks about judicial accountability. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearingabout the lack of workplace protections for judiciary employees, detailing her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former DC Superior Court judge. This led Aliza to create The Legal Accountability Project. As President of The Legal Accountability Project, Aliza's mission is to ensure that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Through data collection, analysis, programming, and partnerships with law schools and other stakeholders, Aliza is quantifying the scope of harassment, discrimination, and diversity issues in the courts, and using the results to craft effective solutions. Join Aliza and me as we discuss the following three questions and more! 01. What programs are you using to collect, manage, and utilize all this information and how do you use computer engineers to assist you? 02. How did you find the appropriate engineers to assist you? And why did you not create the database for LAP yourself? 03. What are three ways you're being mindful of the customer when using technology? So it doesn't seem that to the user that it's just a soulless process? In our conversation, we cover: [00.09] Tech setup – Starting the conversation, we dive into a quick look at Aliza's current tech setup and her background. [06.47] Whitelisting system – Aliza explains the whitelisting system and how it operates in the legal accountability project. [08.47] Lack of reporting—Aliza explains why attorneys are reluctant to report any type of mistreatment in the clerkship. [13.03] A safe space – Aliza explains how they are maintaining transparency in their program and the outcomes of it. [18.06] Security: Aliza demonstrates how they protect data from breaches and their data privacy policy. [25.51] Vetting process – Aliza shares the vetting process to get her engineers and the importance of them understanding the project and being responsive. [30.00] Aliza's experience – At the end of our discussion, Aliza shares her experience with harassment and gender discrimination when she was a law clerk and how she empowers the new generation to speak publicly. Resources Connect with Aliza LinkedIn - linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/ Website - legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Twitter - twitter.com/AlizaShatzman Equipment Mentioned in the Podcast ● MacBook Air - apple.com/macbook-air/ ● iPhone xs - gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_xs-9318.php ● iPod – ● Webcam - elgato.com/en/facecam - logitech.com/en-us/products/webcams.html ● Microphone - bluemic.com/en-us/products/yeti/ Software & Services Mentioned in the Podcast ● AWS cloud storage - aws.amazon.com/products/storage/
Wow, what a blockbuster episode! Aliza Shatzman, President and Co-Founder of the Legal Accountability Project, shares her harrowing story of harassment and retaliation in her clerkship at the hands of a former judge. Fueled by lack of effective means of redress, and the cloak of secrecy around judicial misconduct, Aliza is now seeking to remedy that situation. She is attempting through her non-profit to bring transparency to the clerkship process and support for the law clerks. She details her disturbing story of mistreatment by a former DC judge, and the hurdles she faced in seeking relief from the retaliation. She lost her dream legal position as a result. But that did not stop her. Aliza's story is one of courage, resilience and passion. She is now attempting to bring dramatic changes to judicial accountability. Your eyes will be opened when you hear Aliza's journey and how she is creating a new clerkship world. Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former D.C. judge, in order to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act, legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability. Want to help?? You can contact her directly at Aliza.Shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org, https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Connect with her on LinkedIn / Follow her on Twitter @AlizaShatzman Want to learn more? See her written testimony, submitted to the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet on March 17, 2022; her article with the Harvard Journal on Legislation, The Conservative Case for the Judiciary Accountability Act; her article with the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it; her article with the Administrative Law Review, The D.C. Courts Are Article I Federal Courts, and They Should Be Regulated That Way; and The Legal Accountability Project's website: legalaccountabilityproject.org.
Have you experienced workplace abuse and harassment that resulted in you being blackballed? And you're trying to pick up the pieces in your life and career? In this episode, we discuss: - Why women need to stop waiting to be invited to the table and take the seat at the table. - The real and devastating effects that workplace abuse has on your life, career, and mental health. - The unchecked power that judges have over newly graduated law clerks. - The fact that those who face abuse by judges have no recourse, and how this needs to change. - How women who are supposed to be our ally can be part of the problem, and what to do when you face this. - Why we need to stop telling victims to stay silent, and the power of telling our stories. - What Aliza and the Legal Accountability Project are doing to create transparency and change. Learn more about judicial accountability from Aliza's written testimony from the March 2022 House Judiciary subcommittee hearing and at www.legalaccountabilityproject.org. Connect with Aliza at www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223. Connect with Samorn at www.linkedin.com/in/samornselim. Get a copy of Samorn's book, “Belonging: Self Love Lessons From A Workaholic Depressed Insomniac Lawyer” at https://tinyurl.com/swpc578c. Get weekly career tips by signing up for our newsletter at www.careerunicorns.com.
Episode Title: Exploring Legal Accountability; Improving The Courts, One Clerkship At A TimeEpisode summary: Aliza Shatzman went to school for law and became a clerkship so she could get a government job. She needed to clerk under a judge for 1 year, that was the last of her requirements. Unfortunately, she was unknowingly assigned to a judge who had a history of mistreatment of clerks. He discriminated against women and Aliza was no exception. He mistreated her as well and ended the clerkship early. Aliza tried everything in her power to get a job, but with the clerkship ending early, it made it almost impossible. After a year, she finally landed her dream job only for it to be revoked because the judge made a bad statement about her. Not only did this revoke her job offer, but it revoked all the job interviews she had. Not only had this judge harassed her then, but he continues to do damage. So what is Aliza to do? She created a non-profit organization aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Guest Name & Bio: Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law, where she served as an Associate Editor for the Journal of Law & Policy. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term.In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former D.C. judge. Aliza now regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, Yale Law & Policy Review, NYU Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and Balls & Strikes.Contact Info: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/Website: https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Thank you for listening!Please subscribe on iTunes and give us a 5-Star review! https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-mindset-and-self-mastery-show/id1604262089Listen to other episodes here: www.TheMindsetAndSelfMasteryShow.comLearn more about your host: www.NickMcGowan.comWatch Clips and highlights: www.youtube.com/channel/UCk1tCM7KTe3hrq_-UAa6GHAGuest Inquiries right here: www.TheMindsetAndSelfMasteryShow.comShare your thoughts here: nick@nickmcgowan.com- Your Friends at “The Mindset & Self-Mastery Show”
Aliza Shatzman is the President and Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit that ensures that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former D.C. judge. The intent of her written testimony was to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act, legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks.Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the Harvard Journal on Legislation, UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, Yale Law & Policy Review, NYU Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, Administrative Law Review, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and Balls & Strikes.You can follow Aliza on Twitter @AlizaShatzman or email her at Aliza.Shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org to learn more and get involved.
This episode provides a first-person roadmap through the seat of Aliza to the creation of a new nonprofit mission, a go-to-market strategy for nonprofits, sustainable fundraising approaches, and the approaches to overcoming challenges as a leader who's “first to market” on an issue. Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary Subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former D.C. judge, order to advocate for the Judiciary Accountability Act, legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the Harvard Journal on Legislation, UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, Yale Law &; Policy Review, NYU Journal of Legislation &; Public Policy, Administrative; Law Review, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and more. Check out this link to Aliza's House Judiciary Committee written testimony.
Today I am speaking with Aliza Shatzman, and it was a real honor because it has been a couple years since she graduated law school and she has started the Legal Accountability Project, where she helps law students to choose clerkships that are the right fit for them by giving them accurate information about the experiences they are about to enter. She tells us why this is such an important initiative, how she got started, and how we can support the accountability by dismantling the ways we perpetuate the hierarchies that do not serve us. Visit The Legal Accountability Project website here: https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Learn how to work with Angela: angela-han.com/start
In the midst of a nightmarish judicial clerkship, Aliza Shatzman found that there was almost no protection for her, a lowly clerk, suffering harassment at the hands of a seemingly all-powerful judge. This experience and its aftermath spurred Aliza on to create The Legal Accountability Project. Host DeMario Thornton talks with Aliza about how the Project's research and partnerships are bringing much-needed transparency to the judicial clerkship experience to create more resources and ensure better outcomes for future clerks. Aliza Shatzman is the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project.
In the midst of a nightmarish judicial clerkship, Aliza Shatzman found that there was almost no protection for her, a lowly clerk, suffering harassment at the hands of a seemingly all-powerful judge. This experience and its aftermath spurred Aliza on to create The Legal Accountability Project. Host DeMario Thornton talks with Aliza about how the Project's research and partnerships are bringing much-needed transparency to the judicial clerkship experience to create more resources and ensure better outcomes for future clerks. Aliza Shatzman is the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project.
Aliza Shatzman visits the SnapCast to talk about The Legal Accountability Project. She shares her journey as a law clerk, the problems she experienced and the solutions she's developed to hold power to accountability. We welcome support of the Nonprofit SnapCast via Patreon. We welcome your questions and feedback via The Nonprofit Snapshot website.
Improving the courts, one clerkship at a time...Do you feel empowered in your role within the law industry to speak up and report when something is wrong? Particularly if you are working as a law clerk, do you feel it easy to be able to complain and report a Judge and their wrongdoings?This week on the Legally Speaking Podcast, our host Robert Hanna is chatting to Aliza Shatzman, President and Co-Founder of the Legal Accountability Project!Aliza is a passionate advocate for bringing awareness about harassment in the judiciary and served as a law clerk herself in the Superior Court of District of Columbia. Aliza's experience in the legal industry stretches far and wide - as well as working as a law clerk, she has previously worked as a legal intern at the US Department of Justice, the US Attorney's Office and US Senate and US houses of Representatives. Aliza and the team at the Legal Accountability Project are on a mission to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not.
In this episode, Kathryn welcomes Aliza Shatzman, an attorney, advocate, and former DC Superior Court law clerk, to talk about her experience as a clerk in the DC Superior Court where she faced gender discrimination, harassment, and ultimately retaliation by the now former judge for whom she clerked. She also discusses how she reached out to her law school for support and assistance, only to find out that the judge had a history of misconduct that law school officials were aware of. Due to her experience, Aliza co-founded and launched The Legal Accountability Project, a non-profit organization dedicated to addressing issues of judicial accountability. Who's The Guest? Aliza Shatzman is an attorney, an advocate, and a former DC Superior Court law clerk. She regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability. Aliza is also the President & Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at protecting law clerks from workplace mistreatment and holding judges accountable for misconduct. Episode Resources https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU03/20220317/114503/HHRG-117-JU03-20220317-SD005.pdf https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Untouchable Judges? What I've Learned about Harassment in the Judiciary, and What We Can Do to Stop It The Conservative Case for the Judiciary Accountability Act https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/ https://twitter.com/AlizaShatzman Episode Highlights What was Aliza Shatzman's clerkship experience like? The Legal Accountability Project: From clerkship to advocacy The impact of clerkship misconduct on law students' career prospects Importance of the Clerkship Whisper Network Why law schools should be open with the reports of alumni and students The best way of data transparency and sharing Conducting a workplace assessment and reporting any data on workplace culture Getting assessments from non-lawyers working in the legal field. How persuasive harassment can be Episode Sponsored By https://pli.edu/telecomregulation Subscribe, Share, and Review To get the next episode subscribe with your favorite podcast player. Subscribe with Apple Podcasts Follow on Spotify Leave a review on Apple Podcasts
I spent an amazing year clerking on the Ninth Circuit for Judge Diarmuid F. O'Scannlain, who could not have been a better boss. And after speaking to numerous clerks over the years, I believe that most enjoy positive clerkship experiences like mine. When law students and young lawyers ask for my opinion on clerking, I generally recommend it (depending on the individual's particular circumstances).But not every law clerk is as fortunate as I was. As we have learned in recent years, some clerks are subjected to harassment and abuse from the judges they clerk for. And because of judges' power and prestige, as well as structural problems that exempt the judiciary from most forms of workplace accountability, clerks often find themselves with nowhere to turn when mistreated by their judicial employers.Aliza Shatzman wants to change that. After being harassed and discriminated against by the judge for whom she clerked, she has become a leading advocate for greater judicial accountability and transparency. She has submitted testimony to Congress, written and spoken widely about these issues, and co-founded the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit devoted to “ensur[ing] that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not.”I was pleased to welcome Aliza to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. We talked about her harrowing clerkship experience, the need to pass the Judiciary Accountability Act, why she launched the Legal Accountability Project, and the Project's current initiatives, including a centralized clerkships reporting database. You can listen to our conversation by clicking on the embed above.Show Notes:* Statement for the Record of Aliza Shatzman, Former DC Superior Court Law Clerk, House Judiciary Committee* The Conservative Case for the Judiciary Accountability Act, by Aliza Shatzman for the Harvard Journal on Legislation* Law schools are part of the problem—but they can (and should) be part of the solution, by Aliza Shatzman for the Yale Law & Policy Review* The Legal Accountability Project, official websitePrefer reading to listening? A transcript of the entire episode appears below.Two quick notes:* This transcript has been cleaned up from the audio in ways that don't alter meaning—e.g., by deleting verbal filler or adding a word here or there to clarify meaning.* Because of length constraints, this newsletter may be truncated in email. To view the entire post, simply click on "View entire message" in your email app.David Lat: Hello, and welcome to the Original Jurisdiction podcast. I'm your host David Lat, author of a Substack newsletter about law and the legal profession also named Original Jurisdiction, which you can read and subscribe to by visiting davidlat.substack.com.You're listening to the sixth episode of this podcast, recorded on Monday, November 28. My normal schedule is to post episodes every other Wednesday.One of the nice things about having your own podcast is the ability to cover topics that are important to you. One topic near and dear to my own heart is clerking. I have written about law clerks and judicial clerkships for years, dating back to my first blog, Underneath Their Robes, and my novel, Supreme Ambitions, is also set in the clerkship world.I had a wonderful experience clerking for Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain of the Ninth Circuit, who continues to be a mentor and friend more than two decades after my clerkship, and I want every law clerk to have such a great experience. So I was pleased to welcome to the podcast Aliza Shatzman, co-founder and president of the Legal Accountability Project. The goal of the Project is to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not.Aliza is an attorney and advocate based in Washington, D.C. She graduated from Williams College and the Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza moved to Washington to clerk for a judge on the D.C. Superior Court. Unfortunately, she endured terrible harassment and abuse during her clerkship, as well as retaliation afterwards. She has shared her story—in congressional testimony, articles, and interviews like this one—in order to increase judicial accountability and transparency.As Aliza discusses, one reason it can be so hard to hold judges accountable for mistreating law clerks is the culture of “hero worship” that surrounds judges. And here I have a confession to make: I have definitely contributed to the culture of “judicial celebrity” over the years, which I have come to increasingly regret over time. Without further ado, here's my interview of Aliza Shatzman.DL: Thanks so much for joining me, Aliza!Aliza Shatzman: Thanks for having me on the show.DL: So let's start at the beginning, before we get into your work with the Legal Accountability Project. Why did you decide to go to law school?AS: I went to law school because I wanted to be a reproductive-rights litigator. I wanted to be a trial attorney at Planned Parenthood. I'd always had kind of a sense of moral outrage, particularly on injustices affecting women. Between college and law school, I took a couple of years—I interned and worked on the Hill, did some internships at Planned Parenthood and the National Women's Law Center, and was really just moved by some of the personal stories I heard. So I went to law school knowing I wanted to do public-interest work.DL: And you were at Wash U, I believe, for law school?AS: I was, yes. I was a transfer, so I spent my 1L year at UNC and then transferred to Wash U.DL: And did your plans change in law school in terms of what you wanted to do? It seems like you certainly wanted to stay in public interest, but did your interests shift?AS: They definitely did. Pretty early in law school, I got the prosecutor bug. I did four different internships with the Justice Department during law school, and then decided that I wanted to become a homicide prosecutor in the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office.DL: And what did you do towards that end? You mentioned the internships—what did you do right after law school?AS: I decided to clerk in D.C. Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. I knew that D.C. AUSAs appeared before D.C. Superior Court judges, so I was really focused on clerking in that courthouse.DL: As I recall from some of your writing, and you've written quite a bit about your clerkship experience, you were initially pretty excited about it, right? And you had heard from professors or references or recommenders good things about the judge you were going to clerk for?AS: Yes, I was excited to launch my career, and definitely Wash U professors made calls on my behalf to help me secure the clerkship. I was definitely excited when I went into it, and the messaging at Wash U Law, like at most law schools, was uniformly positive. This was going to be a lifelong mentor-mentee relationship; the position was going to confer only professional benefits. Nobody back when I was applying for clerkships, or when I started my clerkship, talked about any potential downsides to clerking.DL: And of course it's also good for the law schools to send graduates into these prestigious positions.AS: Indeed it is. They report those clerkship numbers publicly in a variety of fashions, and especially with similarly ranked schools, it goes to their ability to get the most competitive applicants to law school and the best professors who come with their own clerkship networks and relationships with the judiciary. So the relationship between the judiciary and law schools is very closely intertwined in a way that I don't think I fully realized until I started writing and speaking about this.DL: That's so true, and I would also add: applicants are much more savvy than say I was. When I went to law school, I didn't even really know what a clerkship was. But I get calls every year from people who are thinking about law school and a lot of them will ask, “Oh, if I want a clerk, is this a good law school for that?” People are more aware than they were maybe when you were in law school, and certainly when I was in law school, about the value professionally and as a credential of a clerkship.AS: Definitely. I would caution that the law schools that report the highest number of clerks per year are not necessarily the ones most focused on ensuring a positive clerkship experience. And this is based on a lot of conversations with law schools, a lot of conversations with students. But yes, there is a huge push toward clerking. And even now, I'm not dissuading anybody from clerking in the work I'm doing now. It's really about ensuring a positive clerkship experience. And that is different for every student. That is different for every applicant. There is no one-size-fits-all model, and I remain concerned that law schools are just trying to funnel students into as many clerkships as possible.DL: Yes. Weren't you told when you were applying to accept the first clerkship you were offered because this is such a plum position?AS: I absolutely was. And there are still law schools that are giving that advice, which is bad advice, and some have backed off it in recent years, maybe because I'm poking at them and telling them to stop giving that advice. I was told to apply broadly, across the U.S. and across the political spectrum, and to accept the first clerkship I was offered. I did all those things. I should not have done those things, but I did.DL: That brings us to your clerkship in D.C. Superior Court. I think some of my—or many of my—listeners might be familiar with your experience. But for those who are not, can you talk about it?AS: Definitely. I think it's important to share my experience. My experience is not rare, but it is one that is rarely shared publicly, and every clerkship application cycle, so much ink is spilled, so many statements are made, to highlight the best of circumstances. Nobody's talking about the worst of circumstances.I started this clerkship in D.C. Superior Court in August 2019, and just weeks into it, the judge for whom I clerked began to harass me and discriminate against me because of my gender. He would kick me out of the courtroom, telling me I made him “uncomfortable” and he “just felt more comfortable” with my male co-clerk. He told me I was “bossy” and “aggressive” and had “personality issues.” The day I found out I passed the D.C. bar exam—a big day in my life—he called me into his chambers, got in my face and said, “You're bossy. And I know bossy because my wife is bossy.”DL: Oh my gosh. You would've thought, “Congratulations on passing the bar!”AS: I think he also said, “I didn't think you'd pass.”DL: Oh my gosh. Wow.AS: Yeah, I'm painting a picture of this judge. I was just devastated. I remember crying in the courthouse bathroom, crying myself to sleep at night. This was my first legal job out of law school. This judge just seemed to be singling me out for mistreatment. I wished I could be reassigned to another judge. My workplace didn't have an employee dispute resolution or “EDR” plan that might have enabled that to happen. I did confide in some attorney mentors and some other clerks, who advised me to stick it out, and I knew that I needed a year of work experience to be eligible to apply to the U.S. Attorney's Office. So I really tried to.DL: So you were just going forward, crying in the bathroom, putting up with this abuse and harassment, but the best advice—or not the best, but the advice you were given—was, just keep on trucking?AS: Yes, that's correct.DL: Okay, and then what happened?AS: Pandemic happened. March 2020, I moved back to Philly to stay with my parents and worked remotely, and the judge basically ignored me for six weeks, before he called me up and told me he was ending my clerkship early because I made him “uncomfortable” and “lacked respect” for him, but he “didn't want to get into it.” Then he hung up on me.DL: Oh my gosh. So he did that. Just fired you over the phone. Wow. He did not even give you the courtesy of meeting in person. And also I think you mentioned in one of the pieces you wrote that in the lead-up to this, weren't you sending him things like orders and other drafts to look at, and he wouldn't respond to you, he would respond to your co clerk?AS: Yes. Yes.DL: That's crazy. AS: It was pretty bad. I reached out to the D.C. Courts' HR. They said there's nothing they could do because HR doesn't regulate judges, judges and law clerks have a unique relationship, and then they asked me whether I knew that I was an at-will employee. So then I reached out to my law school, Wash U, for support and advice, and I found out the judge had a history of harassing his clerks, which law school officials, including several professors, and the clerkships director, who still works there, knew about at the time I accepted the clerkship. But they decided not to share that with me, I guess, because they wanted another Wash U law student to clerk.DL: Wow. Now this is something we'll return to, but when you were applying for clerkships, did you have access to evaluations or reports about this judge in the Wash U. clerkships office that might have told you about these bad experiences?AS: I did not. Wash U does not conduct a post-clerkship survey. At the time, I did not even know whether they had a list of former clerks who clerked for this judge or others, so they are far behind others in the T20 [top 20 law schools] in this regard.DL: I remember, when I was at Yale, there were these lists of clerks, former clerks, to different judges. You could look them up, and there were evaluations. And we'll return to this—the evaluations were almost uniformly positive because anyone could walk in and look at them, and if you wrote a scathing report, that probably would not be a great thing. But they were there. And I remember sometimes you could read between the lines, and maybe detect something less effusive, but they were mostly positive.AS: Yep. Your alma mater might push back on that, but you are correct. Most of the reports are positive. Yes. DL: Fair enough. Let's go back to where you've been left in this process, and HR says they can't help you, and your law school can't help you. What did you do next?AS: I reached out to some other D.C. judges who connected me with the commission where I ultimately filed my judicial complaint. I wrote it, but I wanted to wait to find a new job because I was worried the judge would retaliate against me. It took me about a year to get back on my feet. I secured my dream job in the D.C. U.S. Attorney's office and moved back to D.C. in the summer of 2021, intending to launch my career as a prosecutor and, I hoped, put all this behind me. I had not been in touch with the judge, and I was hoping to move forward.DL: And I think he had said at some point to you that he would give you a neutral reference if asked?AS: Yes. That's correct.DL: You're at the U.S. Attorney's Office. This is your dream job. This is what you had wanted to do in law school. This is why you clerked for the D.C. Superior Court, to get this job. It seems like everything is going great, right?AS: For a couple weeks. Security clearance seemed to be taking a little bit longer than it should have, which was a red flag. But I was two weeks into training, I'd already started working there, they'd given me all the materials—and I received some pretty devastating news that altered the course of my life. I was told that the judge had made negative statements about me during my background investigation, I wouldn't be able to obtain a security clearance, and my job offer was being revoked.DL: Wow…. And then what did you do next? Did you have any ability to push back or explain or say, look, this was a really biased and unfair review or assessment?AS: I called HR, I called management at the D.C. U.S.A.O. and they said there was nothing they could do, that the decision was final. I absolutely tried to explain. I cried on the phone. I ultimately filed a FOIA request, which was denied in full, even though it was a reference about me that led to the denial of my security clearance. I actually was offered the opportunity a couple days later to interview for another job with that office, and then they revoked that too, based on the judge's same negative reference. At this point, I was two years into my legal career, and this judge just seemed to have enormous power to ruin my reputation and destroy my career.So I filed a judicial complaint with the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure. That is a regulatory body for D.C. judges. I hired attorneys and in the summer, in fall of 2021, participated in the investigation into the now-former judge, and we were partway through that when I found out separately that the judge was on administrative leave pending an investigation into other misconduct. At the time he had filed this negative reference, but the U.S.A.O. really was not alerted to the circumstances surrounding that negative reference until January 2022, when pursuant to the terms of our private settlement agreement, separate from anything the judiciary can or would do for a law clerk, the former judge issued a clarifying statement addressing some but not all of his outrageous claims. But by then, the damage had been done. It had been way too long, and I was pretty much blackballed from what I thought was my dream job.DL: Wow. Now, I think you wrote at some point that you did see some of the content of the negative reference—how did you get that? You mentioned your FOIA request was denied.AS: I have a copy of the negative reference, through private settlement negotiations between my attorneys and the then-judge's. I am enormously grateful for everything my attorneys did for me. Were it not for them, I would never have seen this outrageous negative reference, and most law clerks in my position are not fortunate enough to be able to hire attorneys to pursue this type of a claim.DL: I'm curious, this is maybe a bit of a digression, but whom did you hire? It's not like “clerkship abuse” is a practice area. Were these employment lawyers, did they have experience with the judiciary, how did you even know where to turn?AS: Great question. I found my attorneys through a high-profile person in the movement to prevent harassment in the judiciary. She let me use her name. Gave me a list. I started calling through it. It was a large employment litigation shop that does this type of work—not this type of work specifically, but they were fantastic. I'm really grateful for them.DL: So you reached an agreement with the judge. Were you then able to move on with your life professionally? What happened after that?AS: Sort of. I agreed not to identify the judge by name. That is why I refer to him as “the former judge.” He agreed to issue a clarifying statement to the U.S.A.O. addressing some of the claims in the reference. I reapplied to the U.S.A.O., but they definitely did not want anything to do with me. So I found a new job as a family law attorney and thought I would pursue that work.But during the summer when I was going through the judicial misconduct investigation, I became aware of the Judiciary Accountability Act, or “JAA,” which is legislation that would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks. Currently, folks like me cannot sue our harassers and seek damages for harms done to our lives. So I reached out to a bunch of House and Senate offices involved with that bill to share my story, advocate for the legislation, advocate for an amendment to cover the D.C. courts, which are Article I courts and are currently not covered under the bill. And then a House Judiciary hearing occurred in March of 2022, and I was invited to submit written testimony advocating for the bill, sharing my story. And then I got involved in the weeks and months following that [with] further advocacy work around these issues. Eventually I launched the non-profit in June.DL: I would recommend to people that they check out your testimony. I put it in the show notes. It's very powerful, very detailed. It identifies the problem and talks about possible solutions. In a nutshell—you talked a little bit about it just now—what would the Judiciary Accountability Act do?AS: The JAA, H.R. 4827 and S. 2553, is such important legislation. It would extend Title VII protections to judiciary employees, including law clerks and federal public defenders, but it would do a lot of other important things too. It would clarify that Title 28 of the U.S. Code, which defines judicial misconduct, includes discrimination, harassment, retaliation—currently it doesn't even say that. It would specify that judges who retire, resign, or die amid a misconduct investigation—those [inquiries] won't cease. Currently they do. Some of the most notorious harassers, like former Judge [Alex] Kozinski, step down amid a misconduct investigation, and the judiciary loses jurisdiction over them.It would also standardize employee dispute resolution or EDR plans in the federal courthouses. Courts are theoretically required to follow the EDR plan, but they each implement it a little bit differently. And then it would also impose some really important data collection requirements on the federal judiciary, requiring them to collect and publicly report the results of a workplace culture assessment. They have been just notoriously unwilling to do that until very recently. It would require more transparency around the judicial misconduct complaints. When a judge is adjudicated to have committed misconduct, currently, if you go on the U.S. Courts website, their names are redacted. They are not searchable. It would increase transparency in that. It would also require the judiciary to report data on the lack of diversity in law clerk and federal public defender hiring. The real dearth of data in these spaces has allowed judges to get away with misconduct for decades.DL: This legislation seems like a very important part of the solution. Was your suggestion that it be amended to include D.C. Superior Court and similar courts accepted? Is that now part of the proposed legislation?AS: It's not yet—a Senate hearing would help to revisit this and other issues. It's definitely under consideration. I was told that it was more an oversight than anything else. So, I'm hopeful.DL: What is the status of the JAA right now? Are you optimistic about its chances of passage?AS: It's kind of stalled in Congress. It has 26 co-sponsors in the House, one Republican, six co-sponsors in the Senate, no Republicans yet, but I think that really does not—I know that does not represent the broad swath of folks interested in this legislation. It just needs some sustained attention and a Senate hearing. I always caution that we can't only talk about these issues when there's a flashy hearing. At the same time, I've been told that [a hearing] would garner additional co-sponsors, so it's really important.It's a bipartisan issue. Both Democratic and Republican judicial appointees harass their clerks, both liberal and conservative clerks face mistreatment. The federal judiciary leadership is a weirdly powerful lobby, and they are vociferously opposed to this bill. They have been since 1995, when Title VII was extended to the other two branches. It just needs some sustained attention. Congress has a lot going on every year, but I'm going to keep poking at them about this bill, about a Senate hearing. It's so important. Law clerks absolutely cannot wait another year for these urgently needed reforms. It's outrageous that law clerks are uniquely exempt from Title VII.DL: Why is it that it has so much less support on the Republican side of the aisle? I agree with you that it doesn't seem like it should be a partisan issue.AS: It just doesn't have enough folks lobbying Republicans on the House and Senate Judiciary Committees right now, which was part of the point of my article with the Harvard Journal on Legislation, The Conservative Case for the JAA. I have been reaching out to Republican offices to talk about the bill, and they are receptive and interested. House Republicans during the March 2022 hearing seemed receptive as well, at least to the Title VII protections. I'm a little worried they might want to sever the bill and deal with the Title VII protections now and handle other things later, which I don't think they should do. It just has a lack of support generally, and if we got more Dems we might get more Republicans too. It's a question of putting someone's personal face and story on abstract issues and giving this bill sustained attention.DL: Absolutely. And your testimony did that. And several other women came forward as well and offered testimony. There has been media coverage, so it is starting to get traction. But I guess we'll see what happens in January or in the new session.AS: The lack of people willing to come out and speak publicly on this issue makes it more challenging because judiciary leadership likes to claim these issues are not pervasive in the courts. And I think House and Senate Republicans, probably some House and Senate Democrats too, think similarly, because there's just a dearth of folks willing to share their stories publicly. My story is definitely not rare, but it is certainly rarely shared. And there is just a real culture of fear and silence, one of deifying judges and disbelieving law clerks. I think we're in a better position now than we were in 2018 or 2020, when two previous hearings occurred on these issues. But we still have a long way to go.DL: Let me play devil's advocate. What do you say to arguments that the judge-clerk relationship is a unique relationship and there are duties of clerk confidentiality? There were certainly clerks who, for example, wanted to report allegations against Judge Kozinski, but they were worried about violating the duty of confidentiality. What do you say to people who say this is going to undermine that, that special relationship that makes a clerkship such a great mentorship experience for so many?AS: The judiciary has taken some steps to clarify that the duty of confidentiality does not deal with workplace issues, and anybody who is mistreated can and should report that. Perhaps it is a unique relationship, but I think a clerkship should be considered a job like any other, and the judges should be considered employers running a small workplace. What makes it a unique job is that judges have outsized influence over their former clerks' lives, careers, and reputations, and that this first legal job for many folks has outsized influence over their future career success, which makes it particularly important that we address these issues and particularly important that the next generation of young attorneys are protected from mistreatment.DL: Another point you've made in your writings is at least for the Article III judges, there's life tenure, so in some ways they have even more protection than members of Congress or the president. They're not responsible to the voters. And also they're in some ways more low-profile. Even if there's a kind of hero worship or celebrity worship of judges, at the end of the day, they're not as famous as, say, U.S. senators—so they can probably get away with a lot more, I would guess.AS: Absolutely, they can and they do. Continuing to exempt judges from Title VII and conferring upon them life tenure really sends the message that they're untouchable, that they're above the laws they enforce. They shouldn't be. And definitely life tenure contributes to these problematic behaviors.There's a lack of accountability in the judiciary. Judges are never disciplined. Complaints are rarely filed to begin with. It is a broken system, and I think the JAA and the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, which is the federal complaint process whereby a clerk can complain about a judge, are really the floor and not the ceiling for judicial accountability legislation. And I would just underscore for anybody who thinks my story is rare or particularly outrageous, it is definitely not, and judges are empowered to get away with outrageous misconduct. And what keeps law clerks silent, what keeps them from filing any sort of complaint, is that they fear that what happened to me will happen to them. That is how judges, some judges, the misbehaving ones, lord their power over their clerks, which is really troubling. It's definitely not all judges. There are lots of wonderful judges who reach out to me to extend their support for what I'm doing and thank me. But these issues are unaddressed in both the state and federal courts, and I'm really hoping that judiciary leadership takes it seriously.DL: What about the argument that the judiciary can police itself and that things like the JAA are threats to judicial independence and the separation of powers?AS: Internal self-policing leads to a lack of policing, and any attempts at internal self-discipline really lead to a lack of discipline. I remain enormously troubled that all judicial accountability mechanisms are run by other judges in the courthouse or the circuit where the complainant law clerk and the misbehaving judge work. Judges are notoriously unwilling to discipline their colleagues. Even when they see misconduct occurring, they're notoriously unwilling to even pull a judge aside and say something.The judicial independence argument is kind of nonsense. We are not talking about suing judges for their rulings, something I would not support. We are saying that judges are employers running a workplace like any other, like the other two branches of government, those are employers. When employees are mistreated, they can sue and seek damages. We're just talking about treating judges like other employers.DL: Have we seen any disasters result from the fact that other governmental entities are subject to suit for workplace violations?AS: Not at all. And part of it is just it sends the right message to say that you are an employer, you are subject to Title VII, you are an employee, you are protected by it. We have not seen any downstream negative consequences from extending Title VII to the other two branches of government.DL: Your testimony was in March 2022, this year, and then in June you started the Legal Accountability Project. Can you tell us what that is about?AS: Sure. So the Legal Accountability Project basically seeks to ensure that law clerks have a positive clerkship experience and then extends support and resources to the ones who don't. I think of the nonprofit as the resource I wish existed as a Wash U law student applying for a clerkship, a law clerk facing harassment and unsure where to go for help, and a former clerk engaging in the formal judicial complaint process. And we're working on a couple of major initiatives in collaboration with law schools beginning this year, and I think that law schools have historically received a free pass in the conversation about judicial accountability and that they should be the first to step forward and make some changes to protect the next generation of folks.DL: You have a couple of projects or initiatives you're working at the Project—can you talk about some of them that you're rolling out this fall?AS: Absolutely. So the Legal Accountability Project is basically premised on gaps that I see in the clerkship application process, a lack of standardization, a lack of transparency, as well as larger issues related to a lack of accountability in our judiciary. So I speak to a lot of law students and I'll say, “So you want to clerk? Great. How would you avoid judges who harass their clerks?” Some might say, “I'd ask someone,” but who are you going to ask? Clerkship directors and deans tell students to “do their research,” but what research are they going to do when so little information about judges is available on an equitable basis?The major initiative we're working on this year is a centralized clerkships reporting database, which is going to democratize information about judges so students considering a clerkship have as much info about as many judges as possible before they make what is clearly a really important decision about their careers. It's basically a better version of the post-clerkship survey that a handful of schools do already internally. As you and I talked about earlier, the schools that do them recognize they're mostly positive reports in there. What I try to tell schools is no school has a monopoly on information about judges. Every school has a ceiling on the number of judges they can keep track of, and it totally depends on who their alumni have clerked for in the past.We are going to have law clerk alumni from participating schools create an account with us and write a report about their judge and their clerkship—good, bad, medium, we want to hear everything—and our questions elucidate lots of information you might want to know before clerking. Certainly mistreatment is something we seek to capture in a way that law schools are not doing right now, but it's also how does the judge provide feedback, do I get writing and courtroom experience, can I take vacation? All kinds of stuff you might want to know about your boss and your job, most of which is just not available to students right now.Law clerk alumni report into the database. It's a subscription model, so law schools pay us $5 per student per year based on their total J.D. enrollment, and then in exchange, law students get access to reading the reports. But why it's better than anything law schools do right now [is that applicants] don't just get to read their [own school's] alumni reports. They read the reports of all the alumni from all the schools participating in database. I am confident this is the best way to infuse transparency into the opaque clerkship application process and protect the next generation of attorneys against harassment.DL: It sounds really useful. It's a resource I would've wanted to have when I was applying for clerkships. Are you going to require clerks to put their names in? Because obviously, as we know from your case, retaliation can be a problem. But if the clerks are[] anonymous, is there a fear of false reports? And what about if students want to get in touch with somebody for further discussion? Can people be anonymous?AS: Yes, law clerks can report anonymously. There is an option on the last page: would you like to provide your name to students considering this clerkship? We anticipate that the law clerks who face mistreatment will report anonymously, and that is one of many reasons why a lot of law-clerk alumni like this. They also feel an increased sense of anonymity because there are just more people reporting in from more schools in a way. I talk to students and alums from schools that do a post-clerkship survey and they say, I would not fill out my school's, I don't feel sufficiently anonymous, I would fill out yours.Your question about false reports—we do not have a culture of false allegations against judges. We have a culture of fear and gross underreporting. I'm not at all concerned about false allegations. We do obviously have a privacy policy, and law clerks are signing off that they will report truthfully. I am confident they will. I think students and alumni understand this is a desperately needed resource, and if there were false reports or folks misusing the database, it could no longer exist.What you talked about with the clerk-to-student information sharing is often referred to as the “clerkships whisper network.” This is inefficient at best and ineffective at worst, and that the folks who have the information, it often does not get shared with the folks who need. We are not saying you should not reach out to former clerks. What we are saying is that it is an inefficient system, and for law clerks who face mistreatment, they typically do a couple things. They either don't report that back to their law schools, or they take themselves off the list of alumni to be contacted for clerkships, or they do respond to requests, but they are re-traumatized every time somebody reaches out, or they just don't share the full information. Those are all issues we're seeking to combat. Instead of those things, the mistreated clerk can take 10 minutes, fill out our post-clerkship survey once, and then never have to be contacted again. So we think it's better.DL: Again, I think it's a great resource and a great idea. Are you worried about—again, I think this would be unlikely because it's sort of like the Streisand Effect, it would just draw more attention—but are you worried about a judge, say, finding out about this and then suing the Project to try and either unmask this person or get a retraction or, I don't know what….AS: A couple things. This is not a public-access website. The only people who will have access to reading the reports are students from participating law schools and young alums from those law schools. Law clerk alumni get write-only access. They write a report, they can't read them. Part of the privacy policy is that you cannot screenshot this, you cannot share this with folks who do not have access. We are not worried about defamation because we will have Section 230 immunity. We are just posting what people want to write. They can write seven paragraphs, they can write my judge was nice, we're just posting what they write.Judges actually support this. They reach out to me a lot to convey their private support. We're hoping to turn that into public support very soon. Judges understand that positive reviews in the database will bolster not only their reputations, but also their clerkship applicant pools, because what I see is it's historically marginalized groups, women, non-white folks, LGBTQ folks, who face the brunt of mistreatment during these clerkships, and either decide not to apply or they apply less broadly because they just don't have the info they need. I receive a lot of outreach from LGBTQ students asking who are the friendly judges to apply to, who are the not-so-friendly ones to avoid? I have to say we don't have that info yet, but we will. Judges like this. I know it's a disproportionate sample of folks who reach out to say, I support you and I'm a judge, and probably the ones who hate this are going to be quiet. It should be a red flag if any judges are out there publicly opposing this because there must be reasons why they do. And look, the thing is, we are doing what a handful of schools, including your alma mater, already do internally. Judges know which schools have a database. They bring them up and they don't make us think about that because they know that most other employers, in most other professions, are reviewed. Why should they be uniquely not subject to any reviews?DL: What is the status of the database—when will it go live, when will people start to be able to access these reports?AS: The database is a working prototype right now, and our engineers are building the final product. Law clerk alumni will begin reporting into it this winter, and it will go live in spring 2023 for students from participating schools considering clerkships. And for folks who think this is a good idea, if you are a law student or an attorney, reach out to your law school and encourage them to partner with us. Most administrations are considering this right now, and we think student and alumni support is going to make a difference everywhere.DL: I think people should, if they're interested in this resource, let their school know that the school should sign up for it if it hasn't already. Before we go, I was wondering if you could also talk about what the Project is working on in terms of the culture assessment?AS: Yes, we are doing a workplace culture assessment of the federal and state judiciaries. It's a climate survey that's finally going to answer the question, “How pervasive is harassment in the judiciary?” The federal judiciary has just been notoriously unwilling to do this until very recently. [After] five years of advocates poking at them, they finally agreed to do one, but they've specifically not committed to reporting the results publicly, which I think is an enormous red flag.We are surveying both state and federal clerks from a variety of institutions. In addition to standard climate-survey-type questions, we're also asking a section of questions that is particularly important, and it's about law clerk concerns about reporting formally to the judiciary, informally to their law schools. The federal judiciary likes to claim that these issues are not pervasive, yet they have conducted no type of workplace assessment that would show that.Unfortunately, a handful of law school clerkship directors and deans say things to me like, “We're blessed to work with only good judges in this circuit! All our alumni have a positive experience!” That is nonsense. But the dearth of folks reporting back to their law schools right now means that they can kind of disclaim responsibility, so we're seeking to quantify that as well for some challenging clerkship directors and some challenging judiciary officials.DL: When do you expect the assessment to be available?AS: We're not going to send it out until summer of 2023, so a little while. We're trying to focus on the database. We overshot our timelines a bit for getting schools on board, so our full effort goes toward that right now. But I've been heartened by the very positive response from the vast majority of law schools who are very willing to engage, and I appreciate that.It's the right time. Advocates over the past couple years have really laid the groundwork, and now it's time to make changes to protect the next generation of young attorneys. Law schools are working in good faith with me and I appreciate that, but no school is doing an adequate job of protecting their students and alumni against mistreatment right now. We are offering them concrete solutions for radically under-addressed issues, and I hope everybody considers partnering with us this year.We're definitely facing a first-mover problem. Everybody's looking around and seeing who's partnering with us. That's the first question we get from every dean, who else is doing this? Somebody's got to be first. There are a couple of really brave deans and clerkship directors who I'm optimistic will be leaders.DL: I think, just based on having observed the legal profession for so long, that they're like lemmings. Once you get one or two or three, especially if they're big-name schools, you'll get many. You just need—it's like what just happened with these U.S. News rankings and Yale and Harvard—you just need somebody to do it. So you're working on a first mover, but you don't have one just yet?AS: We're very optimistic about a couple. We're not ready to announce them, but we feel very good.DL: Well, in closing, Aliza, I'm so thankful for your time and insight. For people who want to reach out to you to help out with the Project or to tap into resources, what's the best way for them to either contact you or get in touch with the Project?AS: Our website is legalaccountabilityproject dot org, and my email is Aliza dot Shatzman at legalaccountabilityproject dot org. I receive a lot of outreach from current and former clerks. I always appreciate that. Please reach out, learn more, support us. We're recording this the day before Giving Tuesday, so it's a good time to support us.DL: You are a 501(c)(3)?AS: We are working on it. We will be in a few weeks.DL: Excellent. Well, anyway, thank you so much for your time, your insight, and all of the work you're doing on these very important issues. A lot of us really appreciate what you're doing.AS: Thank you.DL: Thanks again to Aliza, who is doing very important work. Reasonable minds can disagree on the details of specific reform proposals, but everyone who cares about the judiciary should care about the workplace treatment of law clerks.As always, thanks to Tommy Harron, my sound engineer here at Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to you, my listeners and readers, for tuning in. If you'd like to connect with me, you can email me at davidlat@substack.com, and you can find me on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, at davidlat, and on Instagram at davidbenjaminlat.If you enjoyed today's episode, please rate, review, and subscribe to Original Jurisdiction. Since this podcast is new, please spread the word by telling your friends about it. Please subscribe to the Original Jurisdiction newsletter if you don't already, over at davidlat.substack.com. This podcast is free, as is most of the newsletter content, but it is made possible by your paid subscriptions to the newsletter.The next episode of the Original Jurisdiction podcast should appear two weeks from now, on or about Wednesday, December 14. Until then, may your thinking be original and your jurisdiction free of defects.Thanks for reading Original Jurisdiction, and thanks to my paid subscribers for making this publication possible. Subscribers get (1) access to Judicial Notice, my time-saving weekly roundup of the most notable news in the legal world; (2) additional stories reserved for paid subscribers; and (3) the ability to comment on posts. You can email me at davidlat@substack.com with questions or comments, and you can share this post or subscribe using the buttons below. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit davidlat.substack.com/subscribe
In this episode, we continue the taboo discussion about law clerks. Only this time, we get even more controversial. Did you know that Federal Judges empowered to judge discrimination and harassment cases are exempt from the same anti-discrimination laws that apply to other government branches and private employers? Yup, Judges are above the law. And some Judges abuse their staff with impunity. In this episode, we speak with Aliza Shatzman, co-founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Find us on Twitter - @courtpod. Drop an email at mayitdispleasethecourt@gmail.com. We would also love to rate and review the show. It helps others find the program. Sources: https://ballsandstrikes.org/ethics-accountability/judicial-accountability-act-2021/ Former 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Alex Kozinski https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/judge-who-quit-over-harassment-allegations-reemerges-dismaying-those-who-accused-him/2018/07/23/750a02f2-89db-11e8-a345-a1bf7847b375_story.html Article on Willie Simmons: https://www.essence.com/news/willie-simmons-life-prison-alabama-habitual-offender/
How do you turn negative experiences around to positive ones? In the moment, when something really bad happens it can be extraordinarily difficult to see the light at the end of a very dark tunnel. Sometimes it can seem downright impossible. This week's guest on the Defense Never Rests, Aliza Shatzman shares her personal experience clerking out of law school. And that it was nothing close to what she expected. In fact, it was quite the opposite. It was by every definition of the word a hostile work environment. Something no one at her law school had prepared her for. This experience demolished her dreams – ones she had worked extremely hard to reach. But it was her next steps that really stand out. Rather than dwelling on the turn her legal career had taken, she channeled her energy into launching the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit with the goal of ensuring law clerks have positive clerkship experiences. But also pushing law schools to be transparent about its student's clerkship experiences. Something she would have benefited from in her own experiences. Tune in to hear Aliza's story of taking a bag of lemons and making a batch of lemonade. For more information visit https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/
In my 35 years of practicing law I have never felt uncomfortable during the course of my work. Now, have I screwed up big time – yes.Have I been weighed down by guilt and shame – yes.And have I been judged for the mistakes I've made – yes. But I sincerely can't recall a time where I felt uncomfortable just for being myself.Unfortunately, the power disparities inherent to the legal profession are not always a well-spring of mentorship. In the worst of instances, they can become outright traumatic. And nowhere is this disparity more apparent – and more dangerous – than in the relationship between a clerk and their supervising judge. Now, let me be very clear. There are PLENTY of fantastic judges; we've even had some on this show. But the problem with bad judges is that you run into a “who's watching the watchmen” scenario pretty quickly. And sadly, the tools to hold judges accountable, especially by those who work beneath them, can be sub-par at best and non-existent at worst. My guest today is someone who has lived this nightmare.But instead of doing what too many clerks do - keeping silent and just ‘power through' – she decided to fight back. Aliza Shatzman is an attorney and advocate based in Washington, DC who writes and speaks on the subject of judicial accountability. In 2019, her clerkship for a federal judge went from rocky, to confrontational, to purely malicious. Not only did she face blatant sexual discrimination, but when she decided to report her superior, she was retaliated against by the very system she swore to uphold. Aliza is now the co-founder of The Legal Accountability Project whose goal is to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. She has submitted written testimony to the House Judiciary Committee, and published articles about her experience in Slate, Ms. Magazine, and multiple legal publications.And I'm thankful she took the time this week to join me for a conversation about all of this and more. It's not the most comfortable conversation – but it's not supposed to be. Enjoy the show
Aliza Shatzman graduated from Washington University School of Law. Following law school, She moved to Washington, D.C. to clerk in the D.C. Superior Court, with the goal of launching her career as a homicide prosecutor But she never had a chance to pursue her dream . The judge she clerked for harassed her, ignored her, and excluded her from the office's day to day legal business, He then abruptly ended her clerkship and behind the scenes, maligned her character. His actions ended her legal career before it could even start. Aliza's solution would send her career on a different path. A path that is already making a difference for others. Join the conversation. #BumpInTheRoad #Law
Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. After law school, Aliza clerked in DC Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former DC judge. Aliza regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, the NYU Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and Balls & Strikes. About Emily: https://www.whistlerpartners.com/team/emily-witt Edited and Produced by Mark McDonald. Launch your podcast at https://yourbusinesspodcast.net
Judicial clerkships have traditionally served an important role in helping attorneys transition into practice and learn from experienced judges and practitioners. But the power imbalance between judge and clerk and the cloak of confidentiality surrounding judicial proceedings sometimes puts clerks in bad situations. Further, employment laws like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 do not apply to the judicial branch. Aliza Shatzman, Co-Founder and President of The Legal Accountability Project, talks to Jody Sanders and Todd Smith about how she's working to change that. Aliza advocates throughout the United States for passage of the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA), which would extend Title VII to federal judicial employees. She also is working through the Legal Accountability Project to collect and provide clerk-based reporting of clerkship experiences in a database available to law students. Join us for a discussion with Aliza about how changes to the clerkship process and judiciary can improve the clerking experience.Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review, and share!Here's How »A special thanks to our sponsors:Court Surety Bond AgencyThomson ReutersProudly presented by Butler Snow LLPJoin the Texas Appellate Law Podcast Community today:texapplawpod.comTwitterYouTube
Welcome back to America's leading higher education law podcast, EdUp Legal - part of the EdUp Experience Podcast Network! In today's episode, we welcome Aliza Shatzman, the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a non-profit aimed at ensuring law clerks have positive clerkship experiences and helping support and extend resources to those who don't. Aliza shares with us her experiences with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation while clerking in D.C., the revocation of her dream job, and the exemption that judges and clerks have from Title VII that led her to co-found the Legal Accountability project on June 1, 2022, with Matt Goodman. She shares with us the reception she is getting for her non-profit from the various stakeholders, such as judges, former clerks, current clerks, student leaders, and law schools. She tells us the two initiatives the Legal Accountability Project is working on in collaboration with law schools beginning in the fall. The first is a centralized reporting database that provides anonymous information on clerkships, and the second is a workplace assessment of the federal and state judiciaries. Finally, she shares her thoughts on the evolution of legal education and her predictions for the coming decade. She hopes that this year, 10 law schools will partner with the Legal Accountability Project on the database and that more will partner with them on the workplace assessment, 5-10 years down the road. On a broader scale, she hopes legal education is more responsive to student needs. 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 today's episode, we welcome Aliza Shatzman, the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a non-profit aimed at ensuring law clerks have positive clerkship experiences and helping support and extend resources to those who don't. Aliza shares with us her experiences with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation while clerking in D.C., the revocation of her dream job, and the exemption that judges and clerks have from Title VII that led her to co-found the Legal Accountability project on June 1, 2022, with Matt Goodman. She shares with us the reception she is getting for her non-profit from the various stakeholders, such as judges, former clerks, current clerks, student leaders, and law schools. She tells us the two initiatives the Legal Accountability Project is working on in collaboration with law schools beginning in the fall. The first is a centralized reporting database that provides anonymous information on clerkships, and the second is a workplace assessment of the federal and state judiciaries. Finally, she shares her thoughts on the evolution of legal education and her predictions for the coming decade. She hopes that this year, 10 law schools will partner with the Legal Accountability Project on the database and that more will partner with them on the workplace assessment, 5-10 years down the road. On a broader scale, she hopes legal education is more responsive to student needs. 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!
Aliza Shatzman stops by Supreme Myths to tell us her personal story and why she started the Legal Accountability Project to shine light on how often judges harass their clerks. We also discuss why Title VII needs to be amended to include the judiciary.
In this episode of Legally Blissed Conversations, we are joined by Aliza Shatzman, President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law. During law school, Aliza interned with 4 different components of the U.S. Department of Justice. After law school, Aliza clerked in DC Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted a Statement for the Record for a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing about workplace protections for judiciary employees, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former DC judge. Read https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU03/20220317/114503/HHRG-117-JU03-20220317-SD005.pdf (Aliza's House Judiciary Statement for the Record). Aliza regularly writes and speaks about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, the NYU Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and Balls & Strikes. Learn more about https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ (The Legal Accountability Project). Read https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4128014 (The Judiciary Accountability Act: Dismantling the Myth of the Untouchable Judge), published in the New York University Journal of Legislation and Public Policy (2022) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4128014 (here). Read https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4096245 (Untouchable Judges? What I've Learned about Harassment in the Judiciary, and What We Can Do to Stop It), published in the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law (2022) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4096245 (here).
Join me for a candid yet also inspirational discussion with Aliza Shatzman about judicial discrimination & the changes needed within our judiciary. Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences. In today's interview, Aliza shares her gut-wrenching personal story of having to deal with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former DC judge. And how that closed the door to her big legal dreams. But it doesn't end there. Today's story is also about courage and resilience. Here's what we cover: --> Life lessons around how to be courageous in the face of daunting odds and bounce back after thinking you've lost out on your dreams. --> How victims of judicial discrimination are treated (and why so few file complaints). --> Why we're ALL impacted (and our profession is tarnished) by judicial discrimination. --> The truth about how women in law treat other women when it comes to discrimination (that must be addressed honestly). --> How you can make a difference to increase judicial accountability. *** FOR SHOW NOTES & LINKS: https://www.lifeandlawpodcast.com/podcast/judicial-discrimination/ *** ENJOYING THE PODCAST? Please consider giving me a review and rating. This will help me support more people – like you – move toward the life and practice they desire. All you have to do is scroll to the bottom, tap to rate with five stars, and select “Write a Review.” Then be sure to let me know what you loved most about the episode (or podcast in general)! And be sure to FOLLOW the podcast so you never miss out.
Lesley recently found herself in a conversation that provided her a whole new level of awareness of workplace abuse that untold women, and some men, are experiencing daily. In this episode Aliza Shatzman courageously shares her story of abuse at the hands of a DC Superior Court Judge for whom she was clerking, right out of law school. Aliza shares the devastating results of this experience for which she had no recourse due to judicial immunity from accountability. Courageously, she ultimately picked herself up and is now the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project. Her passion and mission is to change the rules of the game that sees women disproportionately facing harassment and retaliation during clerkships. Undeserved punishments that they either suffer in silence or find driving them from the legal profession. Aliza's organization is providing a voice for the mistreated clerks--particularly, but not exclusively, women--who reach out every day to thank her for speaking out. They openly confess that they could never find the courage to speak publicly, all the while encouraging Aliza to keep going. Tune in for a powerfully illuminative view of women's challenges and battles from within the center of our legal/judicial system. WATCH VIDEO VERSION HERE: https://youtu.be/SOhvJ7M6SJ4 Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at ensuring that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza earned her BA from Williams College and her JD from Washington University School of Law in St. Louis. After law school, Aliza clerked in DC Superior Court during the 2019-2020 term. In March 2022, Aliza submitted written testimony for a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing about the lack of workplace protections in the federal judiciary, detailing her personal experience with gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by a former DC judge. Aliza now writes and speaks regularly about judicial accountability. She has been published in numerous forums, including the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, the NYU Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, Above the Law, Law360, Slate, Ms. Magazine, and Balls & Strikes. Website: https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Preferred contact information: Aliza.Shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/ Twitter: @AlizaShatzman
This week, we talk about the experiences that law students and recent law grads have during their internships, summer associate positions, and their judicial clerkships. While most of us work very hard to make sure that these (traditionally young) associates and clerks enjoy and learn from their experiences, today's guests understands firsthand that not all of these experiences are positive. Aliza Shatzman, the co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project, talks with us about her judicial clerkship, which essentially derailed her legal career before it even gets started. While Shatzman's dream of becoming a Homicide Prosecutor was taken from her, she took this negative experience and used it as motivation to start the Legal Accountability Project with her WashU classmate, Matt Goodman. The Project's purpose is to “ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not.” The Legal Accountability Project is partnering with multiple law schools to create a post-clerkship survey that allows them to share their experiences (both positive and negative) through a database which will be shared with future clerks so they are better informed on what to expect from the clerkships. The idea is to use the data collected to quantify any issues and to craft effective solutions. AALL Crystal Ball Question: Emily Janoski-Haehlen Our Crystal Ball answer this week comes from the Dean of Akron Law School, Emily Janoski-Haehlen. Dean Janoski-Haehlen stresses the need for more legal skills training to better prepare students for legal practice. As a tie-in for the main interview, she also covers what questions her school asks returning summer associates and clerks and how they use those to help identify what is working and what needs improving. Links Mentioned in this Episode: Statement for the Record (Shatzman's congressional testimony) Clerkship Reporting Database — The Legal Accountability Project Data Collection and Analysis — The Legal Accountability Project Pioneers and Pathfinders: Marlene Gebauer | Seyfarth Shaw LLP Contact Us: Twitter: @gebauerm or @glambert Voicemail: 713-487-7270 Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com Music: Jerry David DeCicca Transcript available on 3 Geeks and a Law Blog
This week, Daniella is joined by Aliza Shatzman, president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit organization focused on ensuring law clerks have positive, rewarding experiences as they start their legal careers. Aliza shares her experience facing retaliation and harassment from a powerful judge in Washington, D.C., and describes why her story drove her to help prevent others from facing similar situations. Daniella also breaks down why former Vice President Mike Pence is no hero in the story of January 6 and explains why the U.S. economy isn't on the brink of a recession.
In this episode, you'll learn about Aliza Shatzman, a former lawyer turned co-founder of a non-profit called Accountability Project. Aliza shares the circumstances that led her to decide to leave the legal system and start The Legal Accountability Project. The Legal Accountability Project seeks to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have a positive clerkship experience while extending support and resources to those who do not. Sarah and Aliza also discuss some popular topics on the podcast, like the dysfunction in the legal system and what needs to change. This is an extremely important conversation that everyone in the profession should be having, so stay tuned! See show notes at formerlawyer.com/147
Aliza Shatzman didn't realize that federal judicial employees are not protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That is until the judge she worked for in 2020 ended her clerkship early—for reasons that she thinks were due to gender discrimination.
Aliza Shatzman didn't realize that federal judicial employees are not protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That is until the judge she worked for in 2020 ended her clerkship early—for reasons that she thinks were due to gender discrimination.
Aliza Shatzman didn't realize that federal judicial employees are not protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. That is until the judge she worked for in 2020 ended her clerkship early—for reasons that she thinks were due to gender discrimination.
In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, speaks with Corrine Propas Parver from Women Lawyers on Guard about judicial accountability. They discuss Aliza's personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former DC judge; the scope of the problem; solutions, including the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA) (H.R. 4827/S. 2553) and DC Courts-specific reforms; and Aliza's new nonprofit, The Legal Accountability Project, which aims to ensure that law clerks have positive clerkship experiences, while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza Shatzman is the President and Co-Founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a nonprofit aimed at protecting law clerks from workplace mistreatment and holding judges accountable for misconduct. You can follow Aliza on Twitter @AlizaShatzman or on LinkedIn, or you can reach out to her via email at aliza.shatzman@legalaccountabilityproject.org. You can read her Statement for the Record here. Her law journal article with Volume 29 of the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, “Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it,” details her personal experience with harassment and retaliation by a former DC judge, and argues that the DC Courts should be covered under the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA) (H.R. 4827/S. 2553). To learn more about The Legal Accountability Project, visit their website. Corrine Propas Parver is the Vice President of Women Lawyers on Guard, an organization that harnesses the power of lawyers and the law to preserve, protect and defend the democratic values of equality, justice and opportunity for all. Read Women Lawyers on Guard's research report about sexual harassment in the legal profession, entitled “Still Broken.” Please note, the positions and opinions expressed by the speakers are strictly their own, and do not necessarily represent the views of their employers, nor those of the D.C. Bar, its Board of Governors or co-sponsoring Communities and organizations. Thank You to Our Sponsor! LawPay was developed specifically to help law firms streamline billings and collections, providing a simple, secure solution for legal clients to pay their bills. LawPay is the industry leader in legal payments, providing a cost-effective solution for more than 50,000 law firms across the country.
Law clerks form an largely unseen network of support for the Judiciary branch of government. My next guest says clerks lack protection from, and the means to redress, harassment and discrimination. Sometimes it's judges that do the harassing and discriminating. For more, the president and co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project, Aliza Shatzman.
Being a victim of discrimination and harassment at the hands of an employer is hard enough, but what happens when your employer is a judge? On episode 39 of the California Appellate Law Podcast, Aliza Shatzman discusses her personal experience and why it was not only personally horrifying, but damaging to her career.Aliza also shares how the experience motivated her to create the first-of-its-kind Legal Accountability Project, a resource for aspiring law clerks and other judicial employees.We also cover with Aliza:Why the Judicial Conduct & Disability Act (28 USC § 358) is not working;Why judges tend to be unwilling to police the misconduct of their colleagues;Courts seem different from normal workplaces, and clerkships seem different from normal jobs. Should they be treated differently?In the U.S. Supreme Court's investigation of a recent draft opinion leak, clerks are being asked to turn over the cell phones and call data. Is this over the line?Aliza Shatzman's biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed @AlizaShatzman.Appellate Specialist Jeff Lewis' biography, LinkedIn profile, and Twitter feed.Appellate Specialist Tim Kowal's biography, LinkedIn profile, Twitter feed, and YouTube page.Sign up for Tim Kowal's Weekly Legal Update, or view his blog of recent cases.Use this link to get a 25% lifetime discount on Casetext.Other items discussed in the episode:Aliza Shatzman's Statement for the Record.The Legal Accountability Project's website.Aliza Shatman's article with the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law, entitled "Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it."Former SCOTUS clerks command signing bonuses in the stratosphere of $400,000 or more.Over 80 former staffers in Senate maj. leader Chuck Schumer's office are now working in Big Tech.Neal Katyal's $2,465 an hour billable rate.
The Law School Toolbox Podcast: Tools for Law Students from 1L to the Bar Exam, and Beyond
Welcome back to the Law School Toolbox podcast! Today, we're talking with guest Aliza Shatzman from The Legal Accountability Project about some of the things that can go wrong with judicial clerkships, and what clerks can do to protect themselves when that happens. In this episode we discuss: Aliza's story that led to The Legal Accountability Project The power disparity between judges and law clerks: Are judges really untouchable? The current status of the Judiciary Accountability Act What needs to happen to make a difference for judicial employees facing harassment or discrimination? The role law schools play in protecting their students and alumni Where to look for information on individual judges, and how to share your experience so other people know what they're signing up for Resources: The Legal Accountability Project (https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/) Statement for the Record of Aliza Shatzman, Former DC Superior Court Law Clerk (https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU03/20220317/114503/HHRG-117-JU03-20220317-SD005.pdf) LinkedIn – Aliza Shatzman (https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/) Twitter – Aliza Shatzman (https://twitter.com/AlizaShatzman) Untouchable Judges? What I've Learned about Harassment in the Judiciary, and What We Can Do to Stop It – article by Aliza Shatzman (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4096245) Model Employment Dispute Resolution Plan (https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/guide-vol12-ch02-appx2a_oji-2019-09-17-post-model-edr-plan.pdf) Podcast Episode 44: How to Get a Judicial Clerkship (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-44-how-to-get-a-judicial-clerkship/) Podcast Episode 176: Talking About Judicial Clerkships with Kelsey Russell (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-176-talking-about-judicial-clerkships-with-kelsey-russell/) Podcast Episode 258: Law Clerks for Diversity (w/Guest Danielle Barondess) (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/podcast-episode-258-law-clerks-for-diversity-w-guest-danielle-barondess/) The Benefits of Doing Both a Federal District Court and a Circuit Court Clerkship (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/the-benefits-of-doing-both-a-federal-district-court-and-a-circuit-court-clerkship/) Why You Should Consider a Judicial Internship (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/why-you-should-consider-a-judicial-internship/) What Is It Really Like To Be a Judicial Clerk? (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/what-is-it-really-like-to-be-a-judicial-clerk/) Download the Transcript (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/episode-346-judicial-accountability-in-the-workplace-w-aliza-shatzman/) If you enjoy the podcast, we'd love a nice review and/or rating on Apple Podcasts (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/law-school-toolbox-podcast/id1027603976) or your favorite listening app. And feel free to reach out to us directly. You can always reach us via the contact form on the Law School Toolbox website (http://lawschooltoolbox.com/contact). If you're concerned about the bar exam, check out our sister site, the Bar Exam Toolbox (http://barexamtoolbox.com/). You can also sign up for our weekly podcast newsletter (https://lawschooltoolbox.com/get-law-school-podcast-updates/) to make sure you never miss an episode! Thanks for listening! Alison & Lee
We discuss a couple legal immunities, one listeners will be familiar with and one that's pretty unknown. The second is being addressed by our special guest, Aliza Shatzman. She is the co-founder of The Legal Accountability Project, a new nonprofit whose mission is to ensure that as many law clerks as possible have positive clerkship experiences while extending support and resources to those who do not. Aliza had a harrowing experience as a law clerk and found that the laws that apply to other government employees often don't extend to those in the judicial branch. She also presents a recent case from the Fourth Circuit about a judicial branch employee who brought a number of claims to try and get around sovereign immunity—and actually succeeded on a few of them. Then Kirby Thomas West of IJ discusses a Fifth Circuit case with terrible facts, but a good outcome on the qualified immunity front. Strickland v. U.S., https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/211346.P.pdf Sims v. Griffin, https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-40457-CV0.pdf Aliza on Ipse Dixit, https://shows.acast.com/ipse-dixit/episodes/aliza-shatzman-on-holding-judges-accountable Untouchable Judges? What I've Learned About Harassment in the Judiciary, and What We Can do to Stop It, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4096245 Aliza's Statement for the Record to Congress, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU03/20220317/114503/HHRG-117-JU03-20220317-SD005.pdf Aliza Shatzman and the Legal Accountability Project, https://www.legalaccountabilityproject.org/ Kirby Thomas West, https://ij.org/staff/kirby-thomas-west/ Anthony Sanders, https://ij.org/staff/asanders/
Judges are a critical part of a system designed to provide accountability and justice. But what happens when a judge needs to be held accountable? What happens when harassment or discrimination takes place inside the judicial system? These are important questions that in some cases don't really have satisfying answers, but there is legislation proposed that would help hold federal judges accountable and provide workplace protections for employees within the judiciary. Aliza Shatzman is an attorney and an advocate for the proposed Judicial Accountability Act. We asked Shatzman about the legislation and about her own very personal story of harassment and discrimination as a law clerk. Read the statement Shatzman submitted here: https://judiciary.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=4883 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In this episode, Aliza Shatzman, an attorney and advocate based in Washington, DC, discusses her article "Untouchable Judges? What I've learned about harassment in the judiciary, and what we can do to stop it," which will be published in the UCLA Journal of Gender & Law. Here is the abstract:Drawing from the author's own experience of gender discrimination, harassment, and retaliation during her clerkship and in the years following it by a former DC Superior Court judge, this Article analyzes the deficits in current federal and DC judicial reporting systems to demonstrate the urgent need for reform. I argue that harassment in the judiciary is pervasive, due to both enormous power disparities between judges and law clerks, and various institutional barriers that perpetuate misconduct and discourage reporting. I survey existing methods of judicial discipline in both the federal and DC Courts and argue that these provide insufficient redress for workplace misconduct. I then discuss the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA) (HR 4827/S 2553), which would finally protect judiciary employees, including law clerks and federal public defenders, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, enabling employees to sue their harassers and seek damages for harm done to their careers, reputations, and future earning potential. Furthermore, I argue that the DC Courts should be included in the JAA, because they are Article I courts created and regulated by Congress, and DC Courts judges are arguably federal judges for Title VII and disciplinary purposes. I also offer a variety of other proposed reforms, which would both strengthen the JAA and provide additional protections to uniquely vulnerable judiciary employees. I conclude by reflecting on my attempts to report the misconduct I experienced, how the systems failed me when I tried to report, and my efforts to seek justice for myself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.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.
On February 13, 2020, Olivia Warren, staff attorney at the Center for the Death Penalty Litigation and former law clerk of the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, brought national attention to the federal judiciary when she testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In her testimony, she gave a deeply personal testimony of the sexual harassment she faced while serving as a law clerk for the late LA-based, Appellate Judge Stephen Reinhardt. In her testimony, Warren alleged that Judge Reinhardt persistently sexually harassed her and that the system meant to protect people like her did just the opposite. Aliza Shatzman is a family law attorney and former law clerk in Washington D.C. and similarly to Warren's experience, she claims she too was a victim of gender discrimination and retaliation while clerking for a judge in D.C. Superior Court from 2019 to 2020. In a written Statement for the Record submitted to the House Committee on the Judiciary, she recalled her painful experience of harassment at the hands of a D.C. federal judge, including “[her] attempts to report the mistreatment, how the system failed [her] when she tried to report, and [her] efforts to seek justice for herself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.” When she filed her complaint against the judge to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure, she found out that there were very few legal protections from harassment and retaliation for law clerks who reported judges' misbehavior. Currently, judges are excluded from anti-discrimination laws, and in July 2021, Congress proposed a bill that would fix this: the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA). The law would empower judiciary employees who experience abuse, harassment, and retaliation to sue judges under Title VII, along with a number of other measures to that create more accountability for judges. For Shatzman, this is just the base level of change needed. She believes the federal judiciary needs meaningful structural change to occur within a system that does little to protect law clerks and other court employees from harassment. We spoke to her about how pervasive this issue is and the legislative efforts being taken to hold judges more accountable. Editor's note: We reached out to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for comment on this story and have not yet heard back. Any comments made available will be updated and made available ASAP.
On February 13, 2020, Olivia Warren, staff attorney at the Center for the Death Penalty Litigation and former law clerk of the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, brought national attention to the federal judiciary when she testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In her testimony, she gave a deeply personal recount of the sexual harassment she says she faced while serving as a law clerk for the late LA-based, Appellate Judge Stephen Reinhardt. In her testimony, Warren alleged that Judge Reinhardt persistently sexually harassed her and that the system meant to protect people like her did just the opposite. Aliza Shatzman is a family law attorney and former law clerk in Washington D.C. and similarly to Warren's experience, she claims she too was a victim of gender discrimination and retaliation while clerking for a judge in D.C. Superior Court from 2019 to 2020. In a written Statement for the Record submitted to the House Committee on the Judiciary, she recalled her painful experience of harassment at the hands of a D.C. federal judge, including “[her] attempts to report the mistreatment, how the system failed [her] when she tried to report, and [her] efforts to seek justice for herself and accountability for the misbehaving former judge.” When she filed her complaint against the judge to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure, she found out that there were very few legal protections from harassment and retaliation for law clerks who reported judges' misbehavior. Currently, judges are excluded from anti-discrimination laws, and in July 2021, Congress proposed a bill that would fix this: the Judiciary Accountability Act (JAA). The law would empower judiciary employees who experience abuse, harassment, and retaliation to sue judges under Title VII, along with a number of other measures that create more accountability for judges. For Shatzman, this is just the base level of change needed. She believes the federal judiciary needs meaningful structural change to occur within a system that does little to protect law clerks and other court employees from harassment. We spoke to her about how pervasive this issue is and the legislative efforts being taken to hold judges more accountable. Editor's note: We reached out to the D.C. Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure for comment on this story and have not yet heard back. Any comments will be updated and made available ASAP.
In this episode, Kathryn speaks with family law attorney Aliza Shatzman, who recently submitted a Statement for the Record for the House Judiciary Committee hearing about harassment in the judiciary. Aliza discusses her Statement, what happened with the judge, why the system that currently exists is insufficient, and what should be done to change it. Episode Resources Statement for the Record of Aliza Shatzman Connect with Aliza Shatzman: https://twitter.com/alizashatzman?lang=en https://www.linkedin.com/in/aliza-shatzman-58b55223/ Episode Highlights Possessing Strong Sense of Moral Outrage on Women Injustice Handling Red Flags During Judicial Clerkship Why Lack of Workplace Protection for Law Clerks Enables Misconduct to Fester Judiciary Accountability and Conducting Workplace Culture Assessment Subscribe, Share and Review To get the next episode subscribe with your favorite podcast player. Subscribe with Apple Podcasts Follow on Spotify Leave a review on Apple Podcasts
Law360's Pro Say - News & Analysis on Law and the Legal Industry
An increasing number of law clerks are speaking out about how they were harassed by judges they worked for. This week, we're joined by Aliza Shatzman, a former D.C. Superior Court clerk who shares her story and explains what Congress can do to eliminate institutional barriers that hinder clerks from receiving help when they are in a similar situation. Also this week, we discuss Sarah Bloom Raskin who pulled out of the running for the top bank regulatory job at the Federal Reserve; Alec Baldwin explaining why he isn't responsible for the fatal shooting on the set of the movie “Rust”; and celebrity name dropping gone wrong in a deal to buy part of a cannabis company.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
