Podcasts about law schools

NYC dynamic children's author Steph Katzovi talks about latestrelease “Miscommunicamp!” along with her first “Hurricamp!” as part of the CampHillside Series focused on sharing the humor found uniquely tumultuous world oftweens! Steph began her career announcing she was going to be an author in the3rd grade, graduated from Law School and serving as strategic communicationsconsultant at Deloitte, her first book is about Noodle Newman going to camp forthe first time and becomes a disaster while the second is about Noodle at 11 ¾ oldwith friends at Camp Hills and her radio show dreaming to be a sensation!  Check out the amazing Steph Katzovi and herlatest release on all major platforms and www.stephkatzovi.comtoday! #podmatch #stephkatzovi #nycauthor #noodlenewman #miscommunicamp#hurricamp #camphillsideseries #camphillside #deloitte #strategicconsultant#camp #radioshow #tweens #spreaker #spotify #iheartradio #applemusic#bitchute #rumble #youtube #mikewagner #themikewagnershow #mikewagnerstephkatzovi#themikewagnershowstephkatzovi 

NYC dynamic children's author Steph Katzovi talks about latestrelease “Miscommunicamp!” along with her first “Hurricamp!” as part of the CampHillside Series focused on sharing the humor found uniquely tumultuous world oftweens! Steph began her career announcing she was going to be an author in the3rd grade, graduated from Law School and serving as strategic communicationsconsultant at Deloitte, her first book is about Noodle Newman going to camp forthe first time and becomes a disaster while the second is about Noodle at 11 ¾ oldwith friends at Camp Hills and her radio show dreaming to be a sensation!  Check out the amazing Steph Katzovi and herlatest release on all major platforms and www.stephkatzovi.comtoday! #podmatch #stephkatzovi #nycauthor #noodlenewman #miscommunicamp#hurricamp #camphillsideseries #camphillside #deloitte #strategicconsultant#camp #radioshow #tweens #spreaker #spotify #iheartradio #applemusic#bitchute #rumble #youtube #mikewagner #themikewagnershow #mikewagnerstephkatzovi#themikewagnershowstephkatzovi 

Today, we're joined by Jonathan Handel, an entertainment and technology attorney, journalist, and multi-genre writer. Jonathan is also the author of a unique new book titled Who Do You Want to Be? A quick, 15-minute read with 110 illustrations created by AI. As kids decide who they want to be when they grow up, is AI narrowing the choices or creating new opportunities?Jonathan Handel practices transactional entertainment and technology law at Feig/Finkel in Los Angeles and independently, and is also a journalist, media commentator, and writer of poetry, scripts, stories, and nonfiction.Handel has written for Puck and was a contributing editor at The Hollywood Reporter from 2010 to 2020, where he wrote over 1,400 articles. He's appeared in the media as an expert over 1,600 times.A graduate of Harvard College (applied math and computer science) and Harvard Law School, Handel is also a former computer scientist and was involved in local politics for a decade. His writing has also been published in the Los Angeles Times, Variety, and elsewhere. Handel is a member of the Television Academy and an associate member of the Dramatists Guild and the Society of Composers & Lyricists. For several years, he taught a film appreciation and screening class to approximately 400 students for UCLA Extension.More information about Jonathan can be found at jhandel.com and jhandel.newswww.kimlenglingauthor.com#JonathanHandel #EntertainmentLaw #TechnologyLaw #HollywoodReporter #MediaCommentary#EntertainmentIndustry #FilmIndustryInsights#WritersGuild #ScreenwritingCommunity#HarvardAlumni #TechAndMedia #JournalistLife#EntertainmentNews #TVandFilm#CreativeWritingCommunity #LetFearBouncePodcast

Nate and Josh give their thoughts on a list of "tips" for getting into law school.Read more on our website. Email daily@lsatdemon.com with questions or comments. Watch this episode on YouTube!

Being an advocate is important; so, what's the most effective process for becoming one? Patrick Barry, clinical assistant professor at the University of Michigan Law School, takes a trip to find the answer. Patrick Barry is a clinical assistant professor and the director of digital academic initiatives at the University of Michigan Law School, as […]

PREVIEW WARNING AGAINST FRAGMENTED STATE-LEVEL AI REGULATION Colleague Kevin Frazier. Kevin Frazier, a University of Texas Law School fellow, warns against fragmented AI regulation by individual states seeking tax revenue. He advocates for a national framework rather than hasty local laws, arguing that allowing technology to develop through "trial and error" is superior to heavy-handed, immediate restrictions.

Dive into The Other Side of Midnight with Lionel, where the host strips away the "casino" lights of modern news to reveal the gritty legal and constitutional realities facing the nation. Lionel breaks down why bombing boats in sovereign waters is an act of war under international law, navigates the fine line between religious freedom and administrative regulations regarding IDs and noise ordinances, and offers a searing critique of political appointments based on aesthetics over competence.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Stepping away from the "Jurassic Park" of local news and the "casino" lights of cable, Lionel dismantles the "Left/Right Paradox"—the trap where the left controls your speech and the right controls your thoughts. From the gritty legal realities of "Uncle Lenny's Law School" to the "existential threats" of AI and globalist agendas, Lionel challenges listeners to become autodidacts and stop relying on political complacency. Whether deconstructing the "tone-deafness" of modern politics or arguing for the legalization of drugs to destroy cartel profits, Lionel cuts through the "petty talk" to find the authentic truth in the modern "Wild West". Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dive into The Other Side of Midnight with Lionel, where the host strips away the "casino" lights of modern news to reveal the gritty legal and constitutional realities facing the nation. Lionel breaks down why bombing boats in sovereign waters is an act of war under international law, navigates the fine line between religious freedom and administrative regulations regarding IDs and noise ordinances, and offers a searing critique of political appointments based on aesthetics over competence.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Annaka Harris is the New York Times bestselling author of CONSCIOUS: A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind and writer and producer of the audio documentary series, LIGHTS ON. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, Nautilus Magazine, the Journal of Consciousness Studies, and IAI Magazine. She is also an editor and consultant for science writers, specializing in neuroscience and physics. In this episode, Robinson and Annaka discuss panpsychism and the case that consciousness is fundamental. More particularly, they talk about complexity and emergence, the relationship between consciousness and physics, and artificial intelligence.Lights On: https://a.co/d/cy8YTpdConscious: https://a.co/d/3uFZ2JqAnnaka's Website: https://annakaharris.comOUTLINE00:00 Introduction00:52 Annaka's Obsession with Consciousness06:09 How Should We Define Consciousness?13:06 Why the Complexity Might Not Explain Consciousness25:30 Is Consciousness Emergent or Fundamental?29:45 Are Fundamentalia Conscious?45:18 How Can Consciousness Solve Deep Problems of Physics?52:14 Consciousness and Quantum Entanglement01:00:11 Consciousness and the Many Worlds Theory of Quantum Mechanics01:10:50 What Does an Electron Feel?01:13:41 AI and Consciousness01:22:42 Science and the Fundamentality of ConsciousnessRobinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.comRobinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University, where he is also a JD candidate in the Law School.

It's become common now for firms to recruit elite law students even before the end of their first semester of their first year of law school, something that would have been unheard of before the pandemic. That's a far cry from the days when firms waited until the summer before the 2L year to start recruiting students through on campus interviews. It's a trend that hurts everyone involved, according to the guests on today's episode of our podcast, On The Merits: columnist David Lat and Nikia Gray, the head of the National Association for Law Placement. Law schools have lost the control over this process they once had; law firms now have to make recruiting decision with far less information about the candidates; and, worst of all, law students now must make important career decisions in some cases just months after they arrive on campus. "I have not heard from a single student yet that thinks this is a good process," Gray said, "nor a single school that feels that way." "I've talked to the firms," Lat added. "They say 'Look, we don't like this process either. But our rivals are recruiting this early and so we can't sit on the sidelines.'" Do you have feedback on this episode of On The Merits? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

Ben and Nate walk a listener through how to respond to an email from a law school that wants to know how likely she is to attend if admitted.Read more on our website. Email daily@lsatdemon.com with questions or comments. Watch this episode on YouTube!

This Day in Legal History: West Coast HotelOn December 16, 1936, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, a case that would become a cornerstone in constitutional law and mark a significant turning point in the Court's approach to economic regulation. At issue was the constitutionality of Washington State's minimum wage law for women, which had been challenged by the West Coast Hotel Company after Elsie Parrish, a maid, sued for back wages.The case arrived during a period when the Court had consistently struck down New Deal-era economic regulations, relying on a broad interpretation of “freedom of contract” under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Earlier cases like Lochner v. New York had enshrined a judicial skepticism toward government interference in labor and wage arrangements.However, in Parrish, the Court's posture shifted. The eventual decision, handed down in 1937, upheld the minimum wage law, effectively signaling the end of the so-called Lochner era. The majority reasoned that the state had a legitimate interest in protecting the health and well-being of workers, particularly vulnerable low-wage employees.Justice Owen Roberts, who had previously sided with the Court's conservative bloc, voted with the majority—his move later came to be known as “the switch in time that saved nine,” as it followed President Roosevelt's controversial proposal to expand the Court.The decision validated broader governmental authority to regulate the economy, and it cleared the path for many New Deal policies to take root. It also marked a recalibration in the balance between individual economic liberty and the public interest.West Coast Hotel remains a landmark case in US constitutional history, exemplifying how judicial interpretation can evolve in response to changing social and economic realities.The 2025 tax-and-spending law introduced an overtime tax deduction that was billed as relief for overworked, working-class Americans. But the reality shaping up for the 2026 filing season is far more complicated—and far less beneficial—than its political framing suggested. The deduction does not exempt overtime pay from taxation; instead, it offers a narrow, post-withholding deduction that workers must calculate themselves, often without support from their employers or sufficient guidance from the IRS.The structure of the deduction is flawed: it only applies to the “half” portion of time-and-a-half pay and is capped at $12,500. For lower-wage workers to take full advantage, they must clock extraordinary amounts of overtime—something not feasible for many. Meanwhile, employers are actively disincentivized from helping employees understand or claim the benefit. If they report eligibility and make an error, they could face legal penalties, while doing nothing carries no risk. The system thus favors inaction and leaves employees to fend for themselves.Without clear W-2 guidance or safe harbor rules, the deduction becomes accessible primarily to those with tax professionals or payroll tools—functioning as a quiet subsidy for the well-advised. For others, it's a bureaucratic maze with limited reward. To prevent administrative failure, the IRS should at least provide a legal safe harbor for employers and model W-2 language. A more ambitious fix would be a flat-rate standard deduction for eligible workers, reducing complexity. Until then, this “relief” policy punishes transparency, discourages compliance, and places the greatest burden on those with the fewest resources.Trump Overtime Tax Break More a Political Tagline Than Tax ReliefDonald Trump filed a lawsuit in federal court in Miami seeking up to $10 billion in damages from the BBC, alleging defamation and violation of Florida's unfair trade practices law. The suit stems from an edited segment in a BBC Panorama documentary that combined parts of Trump's January 6, 2021 speech—specifically his calls to “march on the Capitol” and to “fight like hell”—while omitting language where he encouraged peaceful protest. Trump claims the edit falsely portrayed him as inciting violence and caused substantial reputational and financial harm.The BBC had previously admitted to an error in editing, apologized publicly, and acknowledged the clip could give a misleading impression. However, the broadcaster argues that there is no legal basis for the lawsuit. UK officials have backed the BBC's position, saying it has taken appropriate steps. Despite this, Trump's legal team claims the broadcaster has shown no real remorse and continues to engage in what they describe as politically motivated misrepresentation.The documentary in question aired before the 2024 U.S. presidential election and triggered significant fallout for the BBC, including the resignations of its top two executives. While the program did not air in the U.S., it was available via BritBox—a BBC-controlled streaming service—and possibly distributed in North America through licensing deals with Canadian firm Blue Ant Media.Legal experts say Trump faces a high bar in U.S. courts under First Amendment standards. He must prove not only that the edited content was false and defamatory, but also that the BBC acted with actual malice or reckless disregard for the truth. The BBC may argue that the content was substantially accurate and did not materially harm Trump's reputation. Other networks, including CBS and ABC, previously settled defamation claims with Trump after his 2024 election victory.Trump seeks up to $10 billion in damages from BBC over editing of January 6 speech | ReutersU.S. law school enrollment surged 8% in 2025, reaching a 13-year high with 42,817 first-year students, according to new data from the American Bar Association. The increase follows an 18% rise in law school applicants and continues a multi-year upward trend, fueled by a mix of economic uncertainty, political intensity, and a growing interest in legal careers. The sluggish job market for college graduates, coupled with the centrality of legal issues during Donald Trump's second presidential term, has contributed to renewed interest in law degrees.A significant number of prospective students also cited personal and social motivations. A survey of 15,000 LSAT takers found rising interest in using law degrees to “help others” and “advocate for social justice,” with both reasons seeing double-digit percentage increases over last year. The pool of LSAT test-takers has grown as well, signaling likely continued enrollment growth in 2026.Some elite law schools, including Harvard, enrolled their largest first-year classes in over a decade. However, the long-term outlook remains uncertain. Legal employment has been strong in recent years, with the class of 2024 posting record job placement, but experts warn that advances in artificial intelligence could reduce demand for new associates—particularly at large firms offering high salaries. Smaller sectors like government and public interest law may struggle to absorb excess graduates if hiring slows.US job market, politics fuel 8% surge in law school enrollment | ReutersDonald Trump's controversial plan to build a $300 million, 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the White House grounds is facing its first legal challenge in federal court. The National Trust for Historic Preservation has sued Trump and several federal agencies, alleging that the demolition of the East Wing to make way for the ballroom violated multiple preservation laws and bypassed required reviews. The group is seeking a temporary restraining order to halt ongoing construction, citing irreversible damage to the historic structure.Since returning to office in January, Trump has made high-profile aesthetic changes to the White House, including installing gold accents in the Oval Office and converting the Rose Garden lawn into a patio modeled after Mar-a-Lago. But the scale and visibility of the ballroom project has drawn particularly intense criticism, especially as heavy machinery was seen dismantling the 120-year-old East Wing.The lawsuit argues that no president, including Trump, has the unilateral authority to alter protected parts of the White House without following procedures involving public input and reviews by agencies like the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts.The administration defended the project as lawful, citing historical precedent and presidential authority to modify the executive residence. It emphasized that above-ground construction was not scheduled to begin until April, rendering emergency relief unnecessary. Still, the National Trust contends that public consultation and proper approvals are not optional and must be upheld regardless of the project's timeline or presidential status.Trump's $300 million White House ballroom makeover faces day in court | ReutersA federal judge has ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) must extend the deadline for states to implement new immigration-related restrictions on food aid benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai in Oregon, came in response to a lawsuit brought by 21 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia. The states argued they were not given adequate time or clarity to comply with the new rules, which were tied to President Donald Trump's domestic policy legislation passed in July.The USDA had initially set a November 1 deadline for states to comply with the restrictions, which limit SNAP benefits to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. However, the guidance issued on October 31 created confusion by implying that some lawful residents—such as those who entered the U.S. as asylees or refugees—were ineligible, contrary to what the law allowed. The USDA later revised the guidance, but still maintained the November 1 deadline.Judge Kasubhai extended the grace period for compliance until April 9, finding the original deadline arbitrary and harmful to state budgets. He noted that the USDA's sudden guidance rollout undermined states' ability to respond and eroded trust in federal-state cooperation. The ruling blocks the USDA from penalizing states that don't meet the earlier deadline while the lawsuit proceeds.USDA must give states more time to implement new food aid restrictions, judge rules | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Nate and Ben tell a non-traditional applicant with a self-proclaimed "atrocious" GPA that, with the right LSAT, he could be admitted with a scholarship as a splitter.Read more on our website. Email daily@lsatdemon.com with questions or comments. Watch this episode on YouTube!

At LSAT Demon, we want to help you win the law school game. In this episode, Nate and Josh dissect a Reddit post from a user that doesn't.Read more on our website. Email daily@lsatdemon.com with questions or comments. Watch this episode on YouTube!

All in all, it's shown that the legal industry, traditionally known as a staid, conservative and risk-averse profession, is undergoing a period of rapid change and transformation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

All in all, it's shown that the legal industry, traditionally known as a staid, conservative and risk-averse profession, is undergoing a period of rapid change and transformation.

All in all, it's shown that the legal industry, traditionally known as a staid, conservative and risk-averse profession, is undergoing a period of rapid change and transformation.

Jacob Barandes is Senior Preceptor in Physics at Harvard University, where he works widely across the philosophy of physics, with focuses on the foundations of quantum mechanics, the philosophy of spacetime, and the metaphysics of laws. In this episode, Robinson and Jacob focus on the foundations of quantum mechanics. They discuss the importance of history and philosophy in the same, its connections to mathematics, many of the biggest puzzles in quantum physics, and Jacob's new approach to the foundations, which he refers to as the “Indivisibility” approach.Jacob's Website: https://www.jacobbarandes.comOUTLINE00:00 Mathematics, Nature, and Physics07:55 The Deep Link Between Math and Physics CLIP15:21 Scrutinizing the History and Philosophy of Physics28:11 A Digression on Achille Varzi36:53 The Etymology of “Matrix”41:17 Learning from the History of Physics52:38 Why Does Quantum Mechanics Need New Foundations?59:04 Does Quantum Gravity Need New Quantum Foundations?01;08:26 What Is a Constructive Physical Theory?01:32:31 Markov Laws and Determinism01:45:30 The Wave Function02:06:53 Inconsistencies in Quantum Mechanics02:12:20 What Is Quantum Decoherence?02:23:10 The Biggest Problems in Quantum Foundations?02:33:49 Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics02:38:57 Quantum Mechanics, Many Worlds, and the Problem of Induction02:50:05 The Indivisibility Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics03:04:42 What Are the Fundamentalia of the Universe?Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.comRobinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University, where he is also a JD candidate in the Law School.

Daria Levina is a lawyer, academic, and business owner whose path spans Russia, the United States, Italy, and now Berlin. With two law degrees, a PhD in law, and a thriving admissions-advising business, Daria brings a global perspective to legal education and career design. In this episode, she shares what makes a PhD different from a JD, how stand-up comedy transformed her thinking, and why she believes education should be accessible to everyone.Lawyer Side HustlesOne of the most distinctive parts of Daria's career is her entrepreneurial project, Harvard State of Mind, an admissions-advising business she built from years of helping friends apply to graduate and professional programs. What began as casual essay review turned into a robust library of courses, guides, and one-on-one services. Motivated by her own experience with education as a tool for social mobility, Daria is committed to making elite institutions feel accessible rather than exclusive.“Education has been not just a means of social mobility but pretty much the only means of upward mobility that was available… and I wanted to make that accessible,” Daria Levina expresses in Episode 221 of You Are a Lawyer.In addition to running her business, Daria performs stand-up comedy in Berlin. It has been a creative outlet that she describes as both therapeutic and unexpectedly practical. Comedy helps her process difficult experiences, develop new perspectives, and appreciate the collaborative nature of creative work. It's proof that lawyers can be analytical and artistic at the same time.This episode is produced by Skip the Boring Stuff, a podcast strategy company for business owners and creatives.

Diagnosed with autism at a young age, Lia discusses her passion for promoting neurodivergence awareness and the need for sensory-friendly spaces. She created 20 fidget bins, filled with calming tools like calming strips, water timers, and Pop-Its, which she distributed to libraries, schools, and after-school programs. Lia highlights her vision of helping others understand the experiences of neurodivergent individuals and the importance of creating inclusive environments. Tune in to learn about her impactful work and the significance of supporting neurodivergent communities. More about Lia: Lia created Sensory Friendly Futures for her Gold Award project to promote neurodivergence awareness, inclusion, and acceptance within her community. She designed and created fidget bins for neurodivergent individuals and placed them in her local libraries, schools and after school programs to create welcoming and calming spaces for self-regulation. In addition, Lia developed educational materials to teach the community about sensory needs, stimming, and the importance of creating supportive environments for all. Her goal was to make public spaces more inclusive and to inspire others to embrace neurodiversity with understanding and compassion. Through Sensory Friendly Futures, Lia hopes to create a world where everyone feels safe, seen, and valued for who they are. Her project can also be found on her Instagram: @sensoryfriendlyfutures and website. After High School, Lia plans to get a B.S in Legal Studies & go to Law School! sites.google.com/view/sensoryfriendlyfutures instagram.com/sensoryfriendlyfutures/

Steve Palmer and law student Troy Henricksen talk about a timely and thought-provoking topic—the delicate balance between following military orders and questioning their legality and morality. With recent political debates swirling around Congress members urging military personnel not to obey unlawful executive orders, the conversation delves into both personal experience and historical context.Drawing from Troy Henricksen's background in the military, the discussion explores how soldiers are trained to respond to commands, when it's acceptable to challenge orders, and the tricky ethical territory that comes with it. Together, Steve Palmer and Troy Henricksen look at famous examples from history and pop culture—from the Nuremberg trials to Hollywood films like “Crimson Tide”—to illuminate the very real dilemmas facing those in uniform today.Whether you're interested in the intersection of law, politics, or ethics, this episode promises a nuanced look at what really happens when the chain of command is put to the test. Key Points:Soldiers Are Taught to Follow Orders—With Limits. Troy Henricksen shares firsthand insight: soldiers must obey commands, but there are clear exceptions for unlawful or unethical orders. The “Nuremberg defense” (“just following orders”) is not absolute.Human Discretion Is Baked Into U.S. Military Law. Unlike some historical regimes, the American system expects soldiers to use judgment about the morality and legality of orders—balancing strict discipline with individual responsibility.The Political Debate Is Complicated and Ongoing. Both Steve Palmer and Troy Henricksen highlight how politicians can weaponize legal nuances, creating dilemmas not just for policy but for individuals tasked with carrying out those orders.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2025 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At Law Mentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

Planning to apply to law school? Host Tasha (formerly at Boston University and USC) chats with IvyWise law school admissions expert Jeb (formerly at Columbia Law School) to reveal what you should be doing in each year of undergrad to maximize your chances of getting into your top-choice law schools.

A listener writes in after a disappointing first round of scholarship offers. Ben and Nathan explain that initial offers are rarely a school's best, they're just the starting point. They reassure the listener that more and better offers are still on the way.Also in this episode:- Whether taking the January LSAT is too late to apply this cycle- Questions about Harvard's Junior Deferral Program- A deeper look at one of the newest members of the T14: WashULinks Mentioned:Derek T. Muller ArticleStudy with our Free Plan⁠⁠Download our iOS app⁠Watch Episode 534 on YouTubeCheck out all of our “What's the Deal With” segmentsGet caught up with our ⁠Word of the Week⁠⁠ library0:00 - Is the January LSAT Too Late?23:45 - Receiving Bad Scholarships 35:24 - When Do I Know When I'm Ready?43:05 - Follow–Up on Cheating45:18 - Harvard's Junior Deferral Program1:07:45 - Demon Team Tracker1:09:19 - What's the Deal with… WashU1:36:54 - Word of the Week — Propinquity