Podcasts about minnesota law school

President Donald Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship has reignited debates over the 14th Amendment and the meaning of citizenship in America. Legal experts Gabriel Chin of the University of California, Davis School of Law; Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia School of Law; Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond School of Law; and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School analyze the legal challenges surrounding birthright citizenship, explore the constitutional and historical arguments on all sides of this debate, and discuss its broader implications for immigration. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Resources Trump v. CASA, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (2025) Trump v. Washington, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2025) Trump v. New Jersey, United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (2025) Amanda Frost, You Are Not American: Citizenship Stripping from Dred Scott to the Dreamers (2021) Amanda Frost, “The Coming Assault on Birthright Citizenship,” The Atlantic (Jan. 7, 2025) Ilan Wurman and Randy Barnett, “Trump Might Have a Case on Birthright Citizenship,” The New York Times (Feb. 15, 2025) Ilan Wurman, “Jurisdiction and Citizenship,” Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 25-27 (April 14, 2025) Gabriel “Jack” Chin and Paul Finkelman, “Birthright Citizenship, Slave Trade Legislation, and the Origins of Federal Immigration Regulation,” UC Davis Law Review, Vol. 54 (April 8, 2021) Gabriel J. Chin, “America Has Freaked Out Over Birthright Citizenship For Centuries,” Talking Points Memo (Aug. 2015) Kurt Lash, “Prima Facie Citizenship: Birth, Allegiance and the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause,” SSRN (Feb. 22, 2025) Kurt Lash, The Fourteenth Amendment and the Privileges and Immunities of American Citizenship (2014) Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. ⁠Sign up⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming ⁠live program⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠YouTube⁠. Support our important work. ⁠Donate

On May 15, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case challenging the constitutionality of President Trump's executive order which seeks to end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants. Legal scholars Gabriel Chin of the University of California, Davis School of Law; Amanda Frost of the University of Virginia School of Law; Kurt Lash of the University of Richmond School of Law; and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School join Jeffrey Rosen to debate the scope of the citizenship clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.   Resources Gabriel J. Chin and Paul Finkelman, “Birthright Citizenship, Slave Trade Legislation, and the Origins of Federal Immigration Regulation,” UC Davis Law Review (April 8, 2021)  Ilan Wurman, “Jurisdiction and Citizenship,” Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No.25-27 (April 14, 2025)  Amanda Frost, “The Coming Assault on Birthright Citizenship,” The Atlantic (Jan. 7 2025)  Kurt Lash, “Prima Facie Citizenship: Birth, Allegiance and the Fourteenth Amendment's Citizenship Clause,” SSRN (Feb. 22, 2025)  Amanda Frost, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government, U.S. House of Representatives (Feb. 25, 2025)  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate

This Tax Day marks a shift in policy at the Internal Revenue Service, which is responsible for collecting federal taxes.  Earlier in April, the Trump administration announced an agreement which allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to ask the IRS for personal tax information of undocumented immigrants who are under criminal investigation. Several top IRS officials resigned following the announcement. Caleb Smith joined the show to break down what this means for undocumented Minnesotans. Smith is a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School's Tax Law Clinic.

Hosts Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey and Kari Still explore how courts are grappling with minimum age firearm regulations in the wake of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Alex McCourt, JD, PhD, MPH core faculty member at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, joins the show to share public health research on firearm risks among young adults.  Special guest Professor Megan Walsh, JD, a visiting assistant clinical Professor of Law and the Director of the Gun Violence Prevention Law Clinic at the University of Minnesota Law School unpacks the shifting legal landscape in federal courts.    ###  0:00 - Introduction and legal background 4:25 - Alex McCourt discusses the public health evidence behind age-based firearms laws 15:30 - Professor Megan Walsh, JD, shares the shifting legal landscape in federal courts 43:53 - Uncertainty around the law and what comes next

This panel will explore the Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright as well as its major questions cases. What impact will overturning Chevron deference have on the major questions doctrine? How do the two doctrinal developments relate? How do they connect to the non-delegation doctrine? These and related questions will be examined.Featuring:Prof. Eric Bolinder, Assisant Professor of Law, Liberty University School of LawProf. Tara Leigh Grove, Vinson & Elkins Chair in Law, University of Texas at Austin School of LawProf. Brian Slocum, Stearns Weaver Miller Professor, Florida State University College of LawModerator: Prof. Ilan Wurman, Julius E. Davis Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School

The National Constitution Center and the Federal Judicial Center convene leading historians for conversations on Reconstruction and the Constitution. Pamela Brandwein of the University of Michigan, Sherrilyn Ifill of Howard University School of Law, and Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School explore the 14th Amendment and the history of Reconstruction. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program is presented in partnership with the Federal Judicial Center. Resources Ilan Wurman, The Second Founding: An Introduction to the Fourteenth Amendment (2020) Pamela Brandwein, Rethinking the Judicial Settlement of Reconstruction (2011) Sherrilyn Ifill, “Why are U.S. courts afraid of the 14th Amendment? Because it's radical,” The Washington Post (Nov. 23, 2023) Sherrilyn Ifill, “Yes, this is America: Why I'm Creating the 14th Amendment Center for Law and Democracy,” Substack (July 7, 2023) 14th Amendment Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964 The Civil Rights Bill of 1866 The Reconstruction Amendments Brown v. Board of Education Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at programs@constitutioncenter.org Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate. Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen. Join us for an upcoming live program or watch recordings on YouTube. Support our important work. Donate

China has announced a wide range of measures targeting US businesses minutes after new US tariffs on Chinese goods took effect. To discuss this Former White House press secretary, Sean Spicer and Professor Richard Painter, University of Minnesota Law School and Former Ethics Adviser to President George W. Bush.

Jury selection is underway Monday in the second trial of people charged in an alleged $250 million fraud scheme.President Donald Trump's executive order slapping tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico and China goes into effect Tuesday.  Duties on goods imported from Canada and Mexico will be 25 percent, except for a 10 percent rate on Canadian energy, including oil, natural gas and electricity. And the University of Minnesota Law School is pausing its search for a new assistant dean of diversity, equity and inclusion.This is an MPR News morning update, hosted by Phil Picardi. Music by Gary Meister.Find these headlines and more at mprnews.org.Trial starts for alleged ringleader of massive COVID food fraudU of M Law School holds off on hiring assistant dean of DEIHere are some goods in the crosshairs of Trump's tariffs on Mexico, Canada and ChinaRead the latest edition of the Minnesota Today newsletter.Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube or RSS.

TikTok is set to be banned in the U.S. in just nine days. Today, the company will try to convince the Supreme Court to strike the ban down — or at least put it on ice. And President-elect Donald Trump has requested the Supreme Court punt the ban until after he's taken office and can try to broker some sort of solution. Still, TikTok has some long odds. On POLITICO Tech, host Steven Overly talks with Alan Rozenshtein, a law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and former lawyer in the Justice Department, about what to watch for during today's arguments. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In response to the compromise of telecommunication companies by the Chinese hacker group Salt Typhoon, senior officials from the FBI and CISA recommended that American citizens use encrypted messaging apps to minimize the chances of their communications being intercepted. This marks a departure in law enforcement's position on the use of encrypted communications. Susan Landau, Professor of Cyber Security and Policy in Computer Science at Tufts University, and Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Research Director and Senior Editor at Lawfare, sat down with Lawfare Senior Editor Eugenia Lostri to talk about what the recent FBI recommendation in favor of the use of encrypted messaging apps means for the “Going Dark” debate. To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and Tarun Sharma (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@tksharmalaw⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) go across the board in the sports law universe this week, opening up with Tarun's return and reflect on his journey from being a sports law Twitter aficionado to becoming a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, thanks in part to connections made through the podcast. The duo dives into an analysis of New Mexico State quarterback Diego Pavia's ongoing legal battle seeking an additional year of NCAA eligibility...Pavia's JUCO career and subsequent rise at New Mexico State, and his transfer to Vanderbilt, seeking to extend his playing years due to NCAA restrictions. The University of Florida's basketball coach Todd Golden is under a Title IX investigation and Golden's made a public response through a statement about engaging legal counsel for possible defamation actions. The two also discuss the bizarre mid-flight fight among Auburn basketball players which reportedly resulted in ripped clothing and necessitated an emergency landing. The show is capped off by the team discussing the arrest of former Detroit Lions linebacker Antoine Williams for his alleged participation in the January 6th Capitol riots.... While Dan ends the show with his “Bet of the Year” prediction, Jake Paul v. Mike Tyson? What are your thoughts? *** Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring: Tarun Sharma (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@tksharmalaw⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/condetrimental/support

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and Tarun Sharma (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@tksharmalaw⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) go across the board in the sports law universe this week, opening up with Tarun's return and reflect on his journey from being a sports law Twitter aficionado to becoming a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, thanks in part to connections made through the podcast. The duo dives into an analysis of New Mexico State quarterback Diego Pavia's ongoing legal battle seeking an additional year of NCAA eligibility...Pavia's JUCO career and subsequent rise at New Mexico State, and his transfer to Vanderbilt, seeking to extend his playing years due to NCAA restrictions. The University of Florida's basketball coach Todd Golden is under a Title IX investigation and Golden's made a public response through a statement about engaging legal counsel for possible defamation actions. The two also discuss the bizarre mid-flight fight among Auburn basketball players which reportedly resulted in ripped clothing and necessitated an emergency landing. The show is capped off by the team discussing the arrest of former Detroit Lions linebacker Antoine Williams for his alleged participation in the January 6th Capitol riots.... While Dan ends the show with his “Bet of the Year” prediction, Jake Paul v. Mike Tyson? What are your thoughts? *** Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring: Tarun Sharma (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@tksharmalaw⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/condetrimental/support

Asylum is complex and can take a long time. Episode two of this three-part series does a deeper dive into the process of asylum in the United States. Hear about the different types of asylum, the requirements, and the challenges of legally acquiring status, as well as the avenues of support that are available for families. You'll hear from immigration attorney Sarah Brenes (Binger Center for New Americans, University of Minnesota Law School) about how the complexities of the asylum process can impact asylum-seeking families, the history of and recent changes to these processes, and what this means for child welfare professionals who work with these families.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, sits down with David Kris, founder of Culper Partners and the former Assistant Attorney General for National Security in the Obama administration, to talk about a new paper that David has published as part of Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract series, entitled "A Data Proxy for Clients of Cloud Service Providers.”Kris argues that cloud storage offers significant benefits for security and efficiency, but many organizations may be hesitant to adopt it due to the risk of secret disclosure: the practice by which law enforcement can compel cloud service providers to turn over customer data while legally prohibiting them from notifying the customer. To address this concern, Kris proposes the appointment of a "data proxy," a highly trusted individual (like a retired federal judge) who would be contractually authorized to represent the organization's interests when it cannot represent itself due to a nondisclosure order.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times among other newspaper outlets are facing mounting backlash after both recently declined to endorse a presidential candidate. The decisions have led to the resignations of multiple editorial writers from both publications and the editorial editor from the LA Times. More than two hundred thousand readers have quit their Washington Post subscriptions in protest. They are not the only publications that are changing it up editorially this election season. The Minnesota Star Tribune also announced earlier this year they will no longer endorse specific candidates. Jane Kirtley is professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota Law School. She joined Minnesota Now to discuss the decisions by media to refrain from endorsing a candidate.

In this episode, we dive into the systems, structures, and practices that are working against us. Because my goal isn't just that women (and I do mean all women) get a fair shake, but that we expect it. That we require it. Our guest is June Carbone, the Robina chair of law, science, and technology at the University of Minnesota Law School. Previously she served as the Edward A. Smith/Missouri chair of law, the constitution, and society at the University of Missouri at Kansas City; and as the associate dean for professional development and presidential professor of ethics and the common good at Santa Clara University School of Law. Basically, she's wicked smart and very well-researched. She has just released her new book Fair Shake: Women and the Fight to Build a Just Economy which she co-authored with two other incredible women. My call to action: consider, in addition to what you care most about and what you believe is best, what will move policy and opportunity forward for all women. It's time for us to think beyond just our own best interests. Buy June's Book: Fair Shake  https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Fair-Shake/Naomi-Cahn/9781982115128  Like what you heard? Please rate and review

This week, we talk with a team of innovation leaders from the law firm Faegre Drinker. The guests included Shawn Swearingen, Chief Innovation Officer; David Gross, Design Lab co-founder; and Ruben Gonzalez, Design Lab Director. The discussion centered around the relaunch of Faegre Drinker's Legal Design Lab in Scottsdale, Arizona, exploring its origins, evolution, and impact on legal problem-solving. The Legal Design Lab's inception traces back eight or nine years when an associate at the firm, Helen Chacon, reconnected with her Stanford Law School friend Margaret Hagan, who was pioneering the concept of legal design. Intrigued by the idea of applying design thinking—a user-focused, empathetic approach to problem-solving long used in other industries—to the legal field, the firm embarked on a deep dive into the methodology. This included David (DJ) Gross auditing courses at Stanford's D-School and team members like Kate Rozavi designing courses on visual advocacy at the University of Minnesota Law School. The relaunch and relocation of the Design Lab to Scottsdale were influenced by several factors, notably the firm's merger that expanded its geographic footprint and the practical considerations brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. The move allowed the firm to acquire a significantly larger and more cost-effective space. With input from architects, designers, and Margaret Hagan herself, the new lab was designed to be a flexible, creative environment featuring movable furniture and an industrial aesthetic, fostering collaboration and innovation. Throughout the podcast, the team shared concrete examples of how design thinking has been instrumental in solving complex legal challenges. One such example involved simplifying a profitability tool for lawyers by using a color-coded system akin to credit score reports, making it more accessible and actionable. Another highlighted the use of tennis balls to demystify crystallography during a jury trial, showcasing how visual aids and empathetic explanations can lead to successful outcomes. These instances underscore the lab's focus on user-centric solutions and visual advocacy to enhance understanding and efficiency in legal processes. The guests also discussed the challenges of integrating design thinking within the traditional legal framework, particularly in encouraging open-mindedness and collaborative participation among lawyers and clients. They emphasized the importance of a learning mindset, active listening, and the willingness to embrace creativity and risk-taking. To further disseminate these ideas, the team mentioned an eBook available on their website, aimed at introducing legal professionals to design thinking and visual advocacy concepts. Links: Faegre Drinker Design Lab video Faegre Drinker Picks Arizona for the Next-Gen Design Lab, American Lawyer E-book – Design Thinking and Visual Advocacy for Lawyers Two Point Oh! (FREE) Innovations in Visual Advocacy – Leading the way for design thinking in law, Harvard Law School Center on the Legal Profession.  Advancing Company Goals – Design sprints that unlock Innovation, Corporate Counsel. Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Apple Podcasts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠   Transcript

Our podcast today focuses on negative option consumer contracts, i.e., agreements that allow a seller to assume a customer's silence is an acceptance of an offer. Such contracts are ubiquitous in today's marketplace. Today's guests are Kaitlin Caruso, a professor at the University of Maine Law School, and Prentiss Cox, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. They have written an article entitled, “Silence as Consumer Consent: Global Regulation of Negative Option Contracts.” The article is available on SSRN and will soon be published in the American University Law Review. The Professors first describe what they perceive to be some of the consumer harms resulting from the use of negative option contracts – consumers signing up for “free trial” offers that convert to term contracts requiring consumers to pay periodic fees after the free trial period has expired; credit card “add-on” products which are sold through telemarketing, like credit life and disability insurance; subscription contracts which make it difficult for consumers to cancel; subscription contracts for services, which are not used for lengthy periods of time while the consumer continues to pay periodic fees. The Professors then describe the existing federal and state statutes and FTC regulations and why they are inadequate to protect consumers. They point out that the current FTC negative option rule was promulgated decades before the development of the Internet and obviously does not begin to deal with online sales of goods and services. Instead, the FTC rule is intended to deal with mail order sales like the “Book-of-the-Month” club. While the FTC has proposed a new negative option rule which is a vast improvement over the existing FTC rule, it is unclear when or if a final rule will be promulgated. The Professors also describe the federal Restore Online Shoppers Confidence Act, and the FTC‘s Telemarketing Sales Rule which tangentially pertain to negative option contracts. Finally, the professors discuss a patchwork quilt of state laws (mostly part of state UDAP statutes) which deal with negative option contracts. After surveying the existing federal and state laws, as well as negative option laws enacted in many foreign countries, the Professors describe the core elements of what a negative option law (be it state or federal) should contain in order to protect consumers. The core elements are: 1.  A prohibition against converting a “free trial” offer into a term contract; 2. A prohibition against automatically converting a negative option contract into another term contract with the contract instead becoming a month-to- month contract.  Alternatively, the negative option contract could convert to a term contract, which could then be canceled during the first 90 days after the consumer sees a charge on a credit card statement. 3. If a subscription to services is not used by the consumer for at least one year, then the seller must notify the consumer of the dormancy, and if the service remains dormant for another three months thereafter, then the seller must cease charging the consumer for the service.  Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts today's episode.

This episode, To Speak or Not to Speak: Balancing Corporate Interests and Pressures in External Communications features Minnesota Law alumnus and former Vice President, Chief Counsel, Employment Law at Medtronic, Michelle Miller ‘86. Miller's lecture is on the corporate decision making process regarding public statements in an age of influence by, and expectations of, social media, employees, customers and institutional investors. This event was recorded on September 30, 2024, as part of Minnesota Law's Matheson Lecture in Corporate Governance series. You can watch the event recording on the Minnesota Law YouTube channel. () A transcript of this episode is available here: z.umn.edu/Ep43Transcript Learn more about the University of Minnesota Law School by visiting law.umn.edu

Jane Bambauer, Professor at Levin College of Law; Ramya Krishnan, Senior Staff Attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute and a lecturer in law at Columbia Law School; Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare, join Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor at St. Thomas University College of Law and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to break down the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' hearing in TikTok v. Garland, in which a panel of judges assessed the constitutionality of the TikTok bill.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tomorrow marks the 23rd anniversary of the attack and this year's Law Society human rights lecture will focus on the legacy of September 11th. Giving the lecture is Fionnula Ní Aoláin, Professor of Law, Public Policy and Society at the University of Minnesota Law School and Professor of Law at the Queens University, Belfast.

Tim Pawlenty grew up in a family of South St. Paul Democrats but embraced Republicanism as a teenager. He was a hard worker and excellent student in public schools and at the University of Minnesota and the University of Minnesota Law School. He was hired by a prestigious Minneapolis law firm before getting into politics. At age thirty-two, Pawlenty was a member of the state legislature, where he quickly rose to positions of authority. He served as House majority leader when Jesse Ventura was governor. He then succeeded Ventura as Minnesota governor in a close three-way race in 2002. In office (2003-2011), Pawlenty faced large budget deficits thanks to hard economic times and strong DFL opposition in the legislature. He also made a no-new-taxes pledge that restricted his flexibility. He did succeed in slowing the rate of government growth and presided over some legislation and initiatives that have proved enduring.

Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and Lawfare Senior Editor Alan Rozenshtein sits down with Kevin Frazier, Assistant Professor of Law at St. Thomas University College of Law, Co-Director of the Center for Law and AI Risk, and a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare. They discuss a new paper that Kevin has published as part of Lawfare's ongoing Digital Social Contract paper series titled “Prioritizing International AI Research, Not Regulations.”Frazier sheds light on the current state of AI regulation, noting that it's still in its early stages and is often under-theorized and under-enforced. He underscores the need for more targeted research to better understand the specific risks associated with AI models. Drawing parallels to risk research in the automobile industry, Frazier also explores the potential role of international institutions in consolidating expertise and establishing legitimacy in AI risk research and regulation.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From October 28, 2022: There's been a lot of discussion about whether Donald Trump should be indicted. Lately, that discussion has focused on the documents the FBI seized from Mar-a-lago or the Jan. 6 committee's revelations about his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. But what about his speech on the ellipse on Jan. 6 when he told a crowd of thousands to “fight like hell,” and they went on to attack the Capitol? Isn't that incitement?Lawfare executive editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Alan Rozenshtein, a senior editor at Lawfare and an associate professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, and Jed Shugerman, a professor at Fordham Law School. Alan and Jed explained the complicated First Amendment jurisprudence protecting political speech, even when it leads to violence, and why they believe that given everything we know now, Trump may in fact be criminally liable. They also reference Alan and Jed's law review article in Constitutional Commentary, “January 6, Ambiguously Inciting Speech, and the Overt-Acts Solution.”To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This “Chevron Deference” has been a topic of great debate, with many calling for it to be overturned, while others argue it is a vital part of how Courts address the complexity of law and agency actions. In two cases this term (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce) the Court considered challenges to that precedent. Oral argument was heard in both cases on January 17th, 2024.On June 28, 2024, a 6-3 Court issued its decision overturning Chevron, in a decision that may notably change the nature of the administrative state and the role of judges in reviewing agency actions moving forward.Join us for a courthouse steps program where we will discuss and break down the decision and the potential future impacts of this sea change in administrative law.Featuring:Prof. Ronald M. Levin, William R. Orthwein Distinguished Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis School of LawJohn J. Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance(Moderator) Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School

Episode 59 of the "Everything Except The Law" podcast has arrived! This time we're speaking with Joan Bibelhausen from Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers (LCL) and Robin Wolpert and Tara Antonipillai from the Institute For Well-Being In Law (IWIL).In this episode, Joan, Robin, Tara and host Taryn Winter Brill discuss what the legal community has learned about well-being over the past few years, how working remotely can impact lawyer wellness, creating conditions for lawyers to do their best work and much more!About our guests:Joan Bibelhausen has served as Executive Director of Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers since 2005. She is an attorney and received her JD from the University of Minnesota Law School. Joan is nationally recognized for her work in the lawyer assistance and diversity and inclusion realms and has significant additional training in counseling, mental health and addiction, diversity, employment issues, and management.Learn more about Lawyers Concerned For Lawyers here: https://mnlcl.org/Robin Wolpert is an appellate practitioner, business litigator, and white-collar criminal defense attorney at Sapientia Law Group in Minneapolis. Her 20-year career began in BigLaw, and she went on to serve as a prosecutor and Senior Counsel of Compliance & Business Conduct at 3M. Robin handles a diverse mix of criminal and civil lawsuits and appeals, focusing on constitutional law, defamation, business fraud, money laundering, and cyber-harassment and misinformation campaigns. Tara Antonipillai is a well-being consultant, speaker, teacher, and author. Tara combines her unique expertise as a practicing attorney and a positive psychology practitioner to help professionals, teams, and organizations thrive. Tara also helps law firms and other organizations develop and expand workplace well-being programs in a wide variety of formats.Learn more about IWIL here: https://lawyerwellbeing.net/Explore the ABA's directory of lawyer assistance programs here: https://tinyurl.com/2ycxhxuyCheck out Joan's article describing the work of lawyer's assistance programs here: https://tinyurl.com/wjsf5fedSubscribe to the Answering Legal Channel so you never miss an episode of Everything Except the Law! Check out audio versions of the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and Anchor.Learn more about the show here: http://ow.ly/Eni250LekLgInterested in learning more about Answering Legal? Book an appointment to speak with us here: http://ow.ly/LSUq30sjviNYou can also give us a call at 631-400-8000 or go to www.answeringlegal.comThis podcast is produced and edited by Joe Galotti. You can reach Joe via email at joe@answeringlegal.com.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Matt Perault, the Director of the Center on Technology Policy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, sat down with Alexander Macgillivray, known to all as "amac," who was the former Principle Deputy Chief Technology Officer of the United States in the Biden Administration and General Counsel at Twitter.amac recently wrote a piece for Lawfare about making AI policy in a world of technological uncertainty, and Matt and Alan talked to him about how to do just that.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling, Assistant Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, and Nick Bednar, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, about the Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the decades-long Chevron doctrine that required courts to defer to reasonable interpretations of their statutes.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This “Chevron Deference” has been a topic of great debate, with many calling for it to be overturned, while others argue it is a vital part of how Courts address the complexity of law and agency actions.In two cases this term (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce) the Court considered challenges to that precedent. Oral argument was heard in both cases on January 17th, 2024.On June 28, 2024, a 6-3 Court issued its decision overturning Chevron, in a decision that may notably change the nature of the administrative state and the role of judges in reviewing agency actions moving forward.Join us for a courthouse steps program where we will discuss and break down the decision and the potential future impacts of this sea change in administrative law.Featuring:Prof. Ronald M. Levin, William R. Orthwein Distinguished Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis School of LawJohn J. Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance(Moderator) Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School

Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and a Senior Editor at Lawfare; David Rubenstein, James R. Ahrens Chair in Constitutional Law and Director of the Robert J. Dole Center for Law and Government at Washburn University School of Law; and Dean Ball, Research Fellow at George Mason University's Mercatus Center, join Kevin Frazier, a Tarbell Fellow at Lawfare, to discuss a novel and wide-reaching AI bill, SB 1047, pending before the California State Assembly and AI regulation more generally.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From March 22, 2021: Benjamin Wittes sat down on Lawfare Live with Seamus Hughes, the deputy director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, and Alan Rozenshtein, a Lawfare senior editor and professor at the University of Minnesota Law School, to talk about the group of cases that have been filed in connection with the January 6 riot and insurrection. They talked about the database that Hughes is building and maintaining of cases, defendants and charges filed in connection with January 6; the pattern of charges; what the picture looks like so far; if it is likely to get closer to the president and his inner circle and if it will result in a series of seditious conspiracy charges.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/c/trumptrials.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Student Note Writing Process: Exploring One of the Biggest Parts of Law Review that You Didn't Know Existed (Part I) In part one of this two part series, Lucy Chin (Lead Online Editor, Volume 108) talks with three Minnesota Law Review Editors whose Student Notes were published in this year's volume of Minnesota Law Review. Discussing both the substantive areas of law that each student wrote about and the process that makes up the note writing process, these episodes provides insight and perspectives on one of the biggest parts of the Law Review experience, which you may not have even known existed! The Minnesota Law Review Editor's featured and their articles: Earl Lin - Sidestepping the Escherian Stairwell: Explicit Establishment as a Method for Circumventing Qualified Immunity's Constitutional Stagnation z.umn.edu/MLRLin Ryan Liston - The Press Clause Needs Teeth: The Case for Strengthening Constitutional Press Protections at Protests z.umn.edu/MLRListon Evan Dale - Help Me Sue a Gun Manufacturer: A State Legislator's Guide to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act and the Predicate Exception z.umn.edu/MLRDale Read the latest issue and archives of the Minnesota Law Review -> https://minnesotalawreview.org/ Follow the Minnesota Law Review on Twitter -> twitter.com/MinnesotaLawRev Learn more about the University of Minnesota Law School by visiting https://law.umn.edu

The Student Note Writing Process: Exploring One of the Biggest Parts of Law Review that You Didn't Know Existed (Part II) In the second part of this series, Lucy Chin (Lead Online Editor, Volume 108) talks with three Minnesota Law Review Editors whose Student Notes were published in this year's volume of Minnesota Law Review. Discussing both the substantive areas of law that each student wrote about and the process that makes up the note writing process, these episodes provides insight and perspectives on one of the biggest parts of the Law Review experience, which you may not have even known existed! The Minnesota Law Review Editor's featured and their articles: Lindsay Maher - Americon Dream: Social Pressures and Lackluster Regulation Allow Multi-Level Marketing Companies to Function as De Facto Pyramid Schemes z.umn.edu/MLRMaher Randa Larsen - Banishing Federal Overstep: Why Protecting Tribal Sovereignty Justifies a Narrow Reading of the Indian Civil Rights Act z.umn.edu/MLRLarsen Tyler Blackmon - The Good, the Bad, and the Unconstitutional: State Attempts to Solve the Defendant Class Action Problem z.umn.edu/MLRBlackmon Read the latest issue and archives of the Minnesota Law Review -> https://minnesotalawreview.org/ Follow the Minnesota Law Review on Twitter -> twitter.com/MinnesotaLawRev Learn more about the University of Minnesota Law School by visiting https://law.umn.edu

Welcome to an interview with the authors of Fair Shake: Women and the Fight to Build a Just Economy, Naomi Cahn, June Carbone, and Nancy Levit. This book explains that the system that governs our economy—a winner-take-all economy—is the root cause of these myriad problems. The WTA economy self-selects for aggressive, cutthroat business tactics, which creates a feedback loop that sidelines women. The authors, three legal scholars, call this feedback loop “the triple bind”: if women don't compete on the same terms as men, they lose; if women do compete on the same terms as men, they're punished more harshly for their sharp elbows or actual misdeeds; and when women see that they can't win on the same terms as men, they take themselves out of the game (if they haven't been pushed out already). With odds like these stacked against them, it's no wonder women feel like, no matter how hard they work, they can't get ahead.   Naomi Cahn is the Justice Anthony M. Kennedy Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, as well as the Co-Director of the Family Law Center. Cahn is the author or editor of numerous books written for both academic and trade publishers, including Red Families v. Blue Families and Homeward Bound. In 2017, Cahn received the Harry Krause Lifetime Achievement in Family Law Award from the University of Illinois College of Law and in 2024 she was inducted into the Clayton Alumni Hall of Fame.    June Carbone is the Robina Chair of Law, Science and Technology at the University of Minnesota Law School. Previously she has served as the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri at Kansas City; and as the Associate Dean for Professional Development and Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good at Santa Clara University School of Law. She has written From Partners to Parents and co-written Red Families v. Blue Families; Marriage Markets; and Family Law. She is a co-editor of the International Survey of Family Law.   Nancy Levit is the Associate Dean for Faculty and holds a Curator's Professorship at the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law. Professor Levit has been voted Outstanding Professor of the Year five times by students and was profiled in Dean Michael Hunter Schwartz's book, What the Best Law Teachers Do. She has received the N.T. Veatch Award for Distinguished Research and Creative Activity and the Missouri Governor's Award for Teaching Excellence. She is the author of The Gender Line and co-author of Feminist Legal Theory; The Happy Lawyer; The Good Lawyer; and Jurisprudence—Classical and Contemporary.   Get Fair Shake here: https://rb.gy/r2q7rw   Here are some free gifts for you: Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach   McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf   Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo

The most expensive car ride someone may take in their life is an ambulance ride, which racks up to a whopping average of 1,200 dollars. Most individuals probably cannot or will not pay that bill outright, meaning it will serve as a form of debt to them.So, how is credit debt any different from more “voluntary” types of debt and how does it impact patient credit scores?On today's episode, Host Gabrielle Bejarano speaks with Michelle Dove, Chief Corporate Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer at IC System, to talk about recent and upcoming changes in credit reporting in the healthcare sector and how this will impact patients. Bejarano and Dove also discussed…1. How paid healthcare debt will no longer be credit-reported2. Medical account reporting time frame changes and the impact on patients and the industry3. The pending change in the debt threshold for credit reportingDove elaborated on how the current and upcoming changes will impact patients. “There are positives—the patient gets more time, but I think the negative is it takes away one method of communicating with the patient to help them understand their account,” she stated.Dove is Chief Compliance Officer and General Counsel at IC Systems and ensures documentation complies with federal, state, and local laws. She has previous experience as an attorney at Bassford Remele, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, and Rider Bennet, LLP. Dove has a B.A. in Political Science and Psychology from the University of Michigan and earned her J.D. from the University of Minnesota Law School.IC System has over 85 years of experience in medical and dental debt collection, rent recovery and other business collections. For more information, visit https://www.icsystem.com/.

Welcome to Strategy Skills episode 453, featuring an interview with the authors of Fair Shake: Women and the Fight to Build a Just Economy, Naomi Cahn, June Carbone, and Nancy Levit. This book explains that the system that governs our economy—a winner-take-all economy—is the root cause of these myriad problems. The WTA economy self-selects for aggressive, cutthroat business tactics, which creates a feedback loop that sidelines women. The authors, three legal scholars, call this feedback loop “the triple bind”: if women don't compete on the same terms as men, they lose; if women do compete on the same terms as men, they're punished more harshly for their sharp elbows or actual misdeeds; and when women see that they can't win on the same terms as men, they take themselves out of the game (if they haven't been pushed out already). With odds like these stacked against them, it's no wonder women feel like, no matter how hard they work, they can't get ahead.   Naomi Cahn is the Justice Anthony M. Kennedy Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, as well as the Co-Director of the Family Law Center. Cahn is the author or editor of numerous books written for both academic and trade publishers, including Red Families v. Blue Families and Homeward Bound. In 2017, Cahn received the Harry Krause Lifetime Achievement in Family Law Award from the University of Illinois College of Law and in 2024 she was inducted into the Clayton Alumni Hall of Fame.    June Carbone is the Robina Chair of Law, Science and Technology at the University of Minnesota Law School. Previously she has served as the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri at Kansas City; and as the Associate Dean for Professional Development and Presidential Professor of Ethics and the Common Good at Santa Clara University School of Law. She has written From Partners to Parents and co-written Red Families v. Blue Families; Marriage Markets; and Family Law. She is a co-editor of the International Survey of Family Law.   Nancy Levit is the Associate Dean for Faculty and holds a Curator's Professorship at the University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law. Professor Levit has been voted Outstanding Professor of the Year five times by students and was profiled in Dean Michael Hunter Schwartz's book, What the Best Law Teachers Do. She has received the N.T. Veatch Award for Distinguished Research and Creative Activity and the Missouri Governor's Award for Teaching Excellence. She is the author of The Gender Line and co-author of Feminist Legal Theory; The Happy Lawyer; The Good Lawyer; and Jurisprudence—Classical and Contemporary.   Get Fair Shake here: https://rb.gy/r2q7rw   Here are some free gifts for you: Overall Approach Used in Well-Managed Strategy Studies free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/OverallApproach   McKinsey & BCG winning resume free download: www.firmsconsulting.com/resumepdf   Enjoying this episode? Get access to sample advanced training episodes here: www.firmsconsulting.com/promo

Contrary to popular belief, the gender wage gap is widening, not narrowing. Naomi Cahn and June Carbone, authors of FAIR SHAKE: WOMEN AND THE FIGHT TO BUILD A JUST ECONOMY, discuss why working women still lag behind men both in wage equity and in positions of power. Naomi Cahn is the Justice Anthony M. Kennedy distinguished professor of law at the University of Virginia School of Law. June Carbone is the Robina chair of law, science, and technology at the University of Minnesota Law School. Naomi, June, and Amy discuss: How the "winner takes all" economy rewards men and not women The "triple bind" that sidelines women in the workplace How things get even more complicated for working parents What solutions for this problem look like at a societal, organizational, and personal level Here's where you can find more of June and Naomi: June Carbone: https://law.umn.edu/profiles/june-carbone Naomi Cahn: https://www.law.virginia.edu/faculty/profile/nrc8g/2915359 @carbonej and @NaomiCahn on X Buy FAIR SHAKE: https://bookshop.org/a/12099/9781982115128 We love the sponsors that make this show possible! You can always find all the special deals and codes for all our current sponsors on our website: https://www.whatfreshhellpodcast.com/p/promo-codes/ mom friends, funny moms, parenting advice, parenting experts, parenting tips, mothers, families, parenting skills, parenting strategies, parenting styles, busy moms, self-help for moms, manage kid's behavior, teenager, tween, child development, family activities, family fun, parent child relationship, decluttering, kid-friendly, invisible workload, default parent, feminism, feminist economy, feminist economics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode, What's in the Works? Developments from the Frontlines of American Labor Law, features Professors Charlotte Garden and Matthew Bodie as they discuss the growth of the US labor movement in the last few years and what that means for American workers, unions, and employers. This event was recorded on April 15, 2024, as part of Minnesota Law's 2024 Spring Alumni Week. You can watch this episode on the Minnesota Law YouTube channel. (https://youtu.be/YavEmbXCkbo) A transcript of this episode is available here: z.umn.edu/Ep42Transcript Learn more about the University of Minnesota Law School by visiting law.umn.edu

In early February, the European Union approved a major overhaul of its immigration laws. If approved by EU member states, the pact will drastically curtail the rights of migrants and asylum seekers entering the European Union. It's part of a trend we're seeing all over the world, including here in the U.S. Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett sat down with Steve Meili, Professor of International Human Rights Law at University of Minnesota Law School. They discussed the EU Pact's new provisions, why critics are calling them a violation of human rights law, and how asylum and migration law is evolving globally. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Back in the 1990s, Minnesota was gaining population from other places in the U.S. But in recent years, that trend reversed, and now more people leave Minnesota for other states each year than move here.The net loss is a concern to state officials who want to fill jobs. So, this month, the state's tourism office Explore Minnesota launched a first-ever advertising campaign encouraging people in other parts of the country to resettle in Minnesota.  Coming up at 9 a.m. on Monday, MPR News host Angela Davis talks about what's drawing people to Minnesota — from job seekers to climate refugees to people attracted to the state's more liberal laws and policies — and what life is like for them once they get here.Guests:  Lauren Bennett McGinty is the executive director of Explore Minnesota, the state tourism agency. Earlier this month, the agency launched a new national advertising campaign to encourage people to move to Minnesota. Sapna Kumar is a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. She moved to Minnesota last summer from Texas after spending 15 years as a professor at the University of Houston Law Center in Texas. Her work focuses on intellectual property rights and patent law.  

Among the many horrific stories emerging out of the conflicts in Ukraine and Israel/Gaza are instances of sexual and gender-based violence. It's an issue that is pervasive in many armed conflicts, and yet, even now, it's often treated as an afterthought. There are a lot of reasons for that, but one of the lesser-appreciated ones is the limitation of existing law. Lawfare Executive Editor Natalie Orpett spoke with Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, a professor at University of Minnesota Law School and a former UN Special Rapporteur. They talked about the legal framework around sexual and gender-based violence, the challenges of prosecuting these acts of violence as international crimes, and where the law fails.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A powerful rebroadcast from 2022, Noelle (CEO of Lumia) and Lumia instructor Khary Hornsby discuss his background, anti-bias work and why the work we do as coaches is important. Khary Hornsby has a passion for empowering people to skillfully connect across real and perceived cultural differences through cultivating cultural intelligence, emotional intelligence and mindfulness skill-sets. He has over 14 years of experience in international relations leadership positions and has conducted workshops and presentations in over 40 countries. He is a certified trainer in: EQ-i 2.0 (Emotional Intelligence); EQ 360; Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI); and CQ Level 2 (Cultural Intelligence). Khary is a certified Budokon yoga instructor and is an avid social dancer. He earned a bachelor of science degree in cellular and molecular biology from the University of Michigan - Ann Arbor, and is a graduate of the University of Minnesota Law School. Everything Life Coaching is brought to you by Lumia-- at Lumia, we train and certify impact-driven coaches, making sure they've got all they need to build a business they love and transform lives, on their terms. Become a life coach, and make a bigger impact on the world around you! Schedule a call with us today to discuss your future as a coach. Music in this episode is by Cody Martin, used under a creative commons license. The Everything Life Coaching Podcast is Produced and Audio Engineered by Amanda Meyncke.

Richard W. Painter joined Robert to discuss the U.S. Supreme Court's new code of conduct, which outlines how the justices "should" conduct themselves.Richard served as chief ethics lawyer to President George W. Bush and as Associate Counsel in the White House Counsel's Office during the Bush administration. He has testified many times before Congress on issues related to ethics in government. His forthcoming article SCOTUS House: Can a Supreme Court Ethics Lawyer and Inspector General Help Get this Fraternity under Control examines recent ethics scandals at the high court and outlines how a supreme court inspector general and congress can assure the justices uphold their duty to be faithful to the law. Richard teaches at the University of Minnesota Law School.Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.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.

In the past few weeks, there have been several notable developments in lawsuits seeking to disqualify Donald Trump from the 2024 election under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The Minnesota Supreme Court dismissed a case against Trump but invited the petitioners to refile once Trump won the GOP nomination. A court in Michigan rejected a challenge to Trump's eligibility on the grounds that Congress, not the courts, should ultimately decide. And, most recently, a Colorado trial court held that, although Trump did engage in insurrection before and during Jan. 6, Section 3 does not apply to presidents.As these and other cases make their way through the courts, and with the potential that the Supreme Court will at some point weight in, we're bringing you another portion of a conference held last month at the University of Minnesota Law School (for a previous excerpt, see the November 1 edition of the Lawfare Podcast). This panel, focusing on the interplay between the Section 3 challenges and election law, was moderated by University of Minnesota Law School Professor Nick Bednar, and featured Professor Ned Foley of the Ohio State College of Law, Professor Derek Muller of Notre Dame Law School, and Professor Andrea Katz of Washington University School of Law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This podcast hit paid subscribers' inboxes on Nov. 14. It dropped for free subscribers on Nov. 21. To receive future pods as soon as they're live, and to support independent ski journalism, please consider an upgrade to a paid subscription. You can also subscribe to the free tier below:WhoJim Vick, General Manager of Lutsen Mountains, MinnesotaRecorded onOctober 30, 2023About Lutsen MountainsClick here for a mountain stats overviewOwned by: Midwest Family Ski ResortsLocated in: Lutsen, MinnesotaYear founded: 1948Pass affiliations:* Legendary Gold Pass – unlimited access, no blackouts* Legendary Silver Pass – unlimited with 12 holiday and peak Saturday blackouts* Legendary Bronze Pass – unlimited weekdays with three Christmas week blackouts* Indy Pass – 2 days with 24 holiday and Saturday blackouts* Indy Plus Pass – 2 days with no blackoutsClosest neighboring ski areas: Chester Bowl (1:44), Loch Lomond (1:48), Spirit Mountain (1:54), Giants Ridge (1:57), Mt. Baldy (2:11)Base elevation: 800 feetSummit elevation: 1,688 feetVertical drop: 1,088 feet (825 feet lift-served)Skiable Acres: 1,000Average annual snowfall: 120 inchesTrail count: 95 (10% expert, 25% most difficult, 47% more difficult, 18% easiest)Lift count: 7 (1 eight-passenger gondola, 2 high-speed six-packs, 3 double chairs, 1 carpet)View historic Lutsen Mountains trailmaps on skimap.org.Why I interviewed himI often claim that Vail and Alterra have failed to appreciate Midwest skiing. I realize that this can be confusing. Vail Resorts owns 10 ski areas from Missouri to Ohio. Alterra's Ikon Pass includes a small but meaningful presence in Northern Michigan. What the hell am I talking about here?Lutsen, while a regional standout and outlier, illuminates each company's blind spots. In 2018, the newly formed Alterra Mountain Company looted the motley M.A.X. Pass roster for its best specimens, adding them to its Ikon Pass. Formed partly from the ashes of Intrawest, Alterra kept all of their own mountains and cherry-picked the best of Boyne and Powdr, leaving off Boyne's Michigan mountains, Brighton, Summit at Snoqualmie, and Cypress (which Ikon later added); and Powdr's Boreal, Lee Canyon, Pico, and Bachelor (Pico and Bachelor eventually made the team). Alterra also added Solitude and Crystal after purchasing them later in 2018, and, over time, Windham and Alyeska. Vail bought Triple Peaks (Crested Butte, Okemo, Sunapee), later that year, and added Resorts of the Canadian Rockies to its Epic Pass. But that left quite a few orphans, including Lutsen and sister mountain Granite Peak, which eventually joined the Indy Pass (which didn't debut until 2019).All of which is technocratic background to set up this question: what the hell was Alterra thinking? In Lutsen and Granite Peak, Alterra had, ready to snatch, two of the largest, most well-cared-for, most built-up resorts between Vermont and Colorado. Midwest Family Ski Resorts CEO Charles Skinner is one of the most aggressive and capable ski area operators anywhere. These mountains, with their 700-plus-foot vertical drops, high-speed lifts, endless glade networks, and varied terrain deliver a big-mountain experience that has more in common with a mid-sized New England ski area than anything within several hundred miles in any direction. It's like someone in a Colorado boardroom and a stack of spreadsheets didn't bother looking past the ZIP Codes when deciding what to keep and what to discard.This is one of the great miscalculations in the story of skiing's shift to multimountain pass hegemony. By overlooking Lutsen Mountains and Granite Peak in its earliest days, Alterra missed an opportunity to snatch enormous volumes of Ikon Pass sales across the Upper Midwest. Any Twin Cities skier (and there are a lot of them), would easily be able to calculate the value of an Ikon Pass that could deliver 10 or 14 days between Skinner's two resorts, and additional days on that mid-winter western run. By dismissing the region, Alterra also enabled the rise of the Indy Pass, now the only viable national multi-mountain pass product for the Midwestern skier outside of Michigan's Lower Peninsula. These sorts of regional destinations, while not as “iconic” as, say, Revelstoke, move passes; the sort of resort-hopping skier who is attracted to a multi-mountain pass is going to want to ski near home as much as they want to fly across the country.Which is a formula Vail Resorts, to its credit, figured out a long time ago. Which brings us back to those 10 Midwestern ski areas hanging off the Epic Pass attendance sheet. Vail has, indeed, grasped the utility of the Midwestern, city-adjacent day-ski area, and all 10 of its resorts fit neatly into that template: 75 chairlifts on 75 vertical feet with four trees seated within 10 miles of a city center. But here's what they missed: outside of school groups; Park Brahs who like to Park Out, Brah; and little kids, these ski areas hold little appeal even to Midwesterners. That they are busy beyond comprehension at all times underscores, rather than refutes, that point – something simulating a big-mountain experience, rather than a street riot, is what the frequent Midwest skier seeks.For that, you have to flee the cities. Go north, find something in the 400- to 600-foot vertical range, something with glades and nooks and natural snow. Places like Caberfae, Crystal Mountain, Nub's Nob, and Shanty Creek in Michigan; Cascade, Devil's Head, and Whitecap, Wisconsin; Giants Ridge and Spirit Mountain, Minnesota. Lutsen is the best of all of these, a sprawler with every kind of terrain flung across its hundreds of acres. A major ski area. A true resort. A Midwestern dream.Vick and I discuss the Ikon snub in the podcast. It's weird. And while Alterra, five years later, is clearly doing just fine, its early decision to deliberately exclude itself from one of the world's great ski regions is as mystifying a strategic choice as I've seen any ski company make. Vail, perhaps, understands the Midwest resort's true potential, but never found one it could close on – there aren't that many of them, and they aren't often for sale. Perhaps they dropped a blank check on Skinner's desk, and he promptly deposited it into the nearest trashcan.All of which is a long way of saying this: Lutsen is the best conventional ski area in the Midwest (monster ungroomed Mount Bohemia is going to hold more appeal for a certain sort of expert skier), and one of the most consistently excellent ski operations in America. Its existence ought to legitimize the region to national operators too bent on dismissing it. Someday, they will understand that. And after listening to this podcast, I hope that you will, too.What we talked aboutWhy Lutsen never makes snow in October; Minnesota as early-season operator; the new Raptor Express six-pack; why the Bridge double is intact but retiring from winter operations; why Lutsen removed the 10th Mountain triple; why so many Riblet chairs are still operating; why Moose Return trail will be closed indefinitely; potential new lower-mountain trails on Eagle Mountain; an updated season-opening plan; how lake-effect snow impacts the west side of Lake Superior; how the Raptor lift may impact potential May operations; fire destroys Papa Charlie's; how it could have been worse; rebuilding the restaurant; Lutsen's long evolution from backwater to regional leader and legit western alternative; the Skinner family's aggressive operating philosophy; the history of Lutsen's gondola, the only such machine in Midwest skiing; Lutsen's ambitious but stalled masterplan; potential Ullr and Mystery mountain chairlift upgrades; “the list of what skiers want is long”; why Lutsen switched to a multi-mountain season pass with Granite Peak and Snowriver; and “if we would have been invited into the Ikon at the start, we would have jumped on that.”Why I thought that now was a good time for this interviewFor all my gushing above, Lutsen isn't perfect. While Granite Peak has planted three high-speed lifts on the bump in the past 20 years, Lutsen has still largely been reliant on a fleet of antique Riblets, plus a sixer that landed a decade ago and the Midwest's only gondola, a glimmering eight-passenger Doppelmayr machine installed in 2015. While a fixed-grip foundation isn't particularly abnormal for the Midwest, which is home to probably the largest collection of antique chairlifts on the planet, it's off-brand for burnished Midwest Family Ski Resorts.Enter, this year, Lutsen's second six-pack, Raptor Express, which replaces both the 10th Mountain triple (removed), and the Bridge double (demoted to summer-only use). This new lift, running approximately 600 vertical feet parallel to Bridge, will (sort of; more below), smooth out the janky connection from Moose back to Eagle. And while the loss of 10th Mountain will mean 300 vertical feet of rambling below the steep upper-mountain shots, Raptor is a welcome upgrade that will help Lutsen keep up with the Boynes.However, even as this summer moved the mountain ahead with the Raptor installation, a storm demolished a skier bridge over the river on Moose Return, carving a several-hundred-foot-wide, unbridgeable (at least in the short term), gap across the trail. Which means that skiers will have to connect back to Eagle via gondola, somewhat dampening Raptor's expected impact. That's too bad, and Vick and I talk extensively about what that means for skiers this coming winter.The final big timely piece of this interview is the abrupt cancellation of Lutsen's massive proposed terrain expansion, which would have more than doubled the ski area's size with new terrain on Moose and Eagle mountains. Here's what they were hoping to do with Moose:And Eagle:Over the summer, Lutsen withdrew the plan, and Superior National Forest Supervisor Thomas Hall recommended a “no action” alternative, citing “irreversible damage” to mature white cedar and sugar maple stands, displacement of backcountry skiers, negative impacts to the 300-mile-long Superior hiking trail, objections from Native American communities, and water-quality concerns. Lutsen had until Oct. 10 to file an objection to the decision, and they did. What happens now? we discuss that.Questions I wish I'd askedIt may have been worth getting into the difference between Lutsen's stated lift-served vertical (825 feet), and overall vertical (1,088 feet). But it wasn't really necessary, as I asked the same question of Midwest Family Ski Resorts CEO Charles Skinner two years ago. He explains the disparity at the 25:39 mark:What I got wrongI said that Boyne Mountain runs the Hemlock double chair instead of the Mountain Express six-pack for summer operations. That is not entirely true, as Mountain Express sometimes runs, as does the new Disciples 8 chair on the far side of the mountain's Sky Bridge.I referred to Midwest Family Ski Resorts CEO Charles Skinner as “Charles Skinner Jr.” He is in fact Charles Skinner IV.Why you should ski Lutsen MountainsOne of the most unexpected recurring messages I receive from Storm readers floats out of the West. Dedicated skiers of the big-mountain, big-snow kingdoms of the Rockies, they'd never thought much about skiing east of the Continental Divide. But now they're curious. All these profiles of New England girth and history, Midwest backwater bumps, and Great Lakes snowtrains have them angling for a quirky adventure, for novelty and, perhaps, a less-stressful version of skiing. These folks are a minority. Most Western skiers wear their big-mountain chauvinism as a badge of stupid pride. Which I understand. But they are missing a version of skiing that is heartier, grittier, and more human than the version that swarms from the western skies.So, to those few who peek east over the fortress walls and consider the great rolling beyond, I tell you this: go to Lutsen. If you're only going to ski the Midwest once, and only in a limited way, this is one of the few must-experience stops. Lutsen and Bohemia. Mix and match the rest. But these two are truly singular.To the rest of you, well: Midwest Family's stated goal is to beef up its resorts so that they're an acceptable substitute for a western vacation. Lutsen's website even hosts a page comparing the cost of a five-day trip there and to Breckenridge:Sure, that's slightly exaggerated, and yes, Breck crushes Lutsen in every on-mountain statistical category, from skiable acreage to vertical drop to average annual snowfall. But 800 vertical feet is about what an average skier can manage in one go anyway. And Lutsen really does give you a bigger-mountain feel than anything for a thousand miles in either direction (except, as always, the Bohemia exception). And when you board that gondy and swing up the cliffs toward Moose Mountain, you're going to wonder where, exactly, you've been transported to. Because it sure as hell doesn't look like Minnesota.Podcast NotesOn Midwest Family Ski ResortsMidwest Family Ski Resorts now owns four ski areas (Snowriver, Michigan is one resort with two side-by-side ski areas). Here's an overview:On the loss of Moose ReturnA small but significant change will disrupt skiing at Lutsen Mountains this winter: the destruction of the skier bridge at the bottom of the Moose Return trail that crosses the Poplar River, providing direct ski access from Moose to Eagle mountains. Vick details why this presents an unfixable obstacle in the podcast, but you can see that Lutsen removed the trail from its updated 2023-24 map:On the Stowe gondola I referencedI briefly referenced Stowe's gondola as a potential model for traversing the newly re-gapped Moose Return run. The resort is home to two gondolas – the 2,100-vertical-foot, 7,664-foot-long, eight-passenger Mansfield Gondola; and the 1,454-foot-long, six-passenger Over Easy Gondola, which moves between the Mansfield and Spruce bases. It is the latter that I'm referring to in the podcast: On Mt. FrontenacVick mentions that his first job was at Mt. Frontenac, a now-lost 420-vertical-foot ski area in Minnesota. Here was a circa 2000 trailmap:Apparently a local group purchased the ski area and converted it into a golf course. Boo.On the evolution of LutsenThe Skinners have been involved with Lutsen since the early 1980s. Here's a circa 1982 trailmap, which underscores the mountain's massive evolution over the decades:On the evolution of Granite PeakWhen Charles Skinner purchased Granite Peak, then known as Rib Mountain, it was a nubby little backwater, with neglected infrastructure and a miniscule footprint:And here it is today, a mile-wide broadside running three high-speed chairlifts:An absolutely stunning transformation.On Charles Skinner IIISkinner's 2021 Star Tribune obituary summarized his contributions to Lutsen and to skiing:Charles Mather Skinner III passed away on June 17th at the age of 87 in his new home in Red Wing, MN. …Charles was born in St. Louis, MO on August 30, 1933, to Eleanor Whiting Skinner and Charles Mather Skinner II. He grew up near Lake Harriet in Minneapolis where he loved racing sailboats during the summer and snow sliding adventures in the winter.At the age of 17, he joined the United States Navy and fought in the Korean War as a navigator aboard dive bombers. After his service, he returned home to Minnesota where he graduated from the University of Minnesota Law School, served on the law review, and began practicing law in Grand Rapids, MN.In 1962, he led the formation of Sugar Hills Ski and purchased Sugar Lake (Otis) Resort in Grand Rapids, MN. For 20 years, Charles pioneer-ed snowmaking inventions, collaborated with other Midwest ski area owners to build a golden age for Midwest ski areas, and advised ski areas across the U.S. including Aspen on snowmaking.In the 1970s, Scott Paper Company recruited Charles to manage recreational lands across New England, and later promoted him to become President of Sugarloaf Mountain ski area in Maine. In 1980, he bought, and significantly expanded, Lutsen Mountains in Lutsen, MN, which is now owned and operated by his children.He and his wife spent many happy years on North Captiva Island, Florida, where they owned and operated Barnacle Phil's Restaurant. An entrepreneur and risk-taker at heart, he never wanted to retire and was always looking for new business ventures.His work at Sugar Hills, Lutsen Mountains and North Captive Island helped local economics expand and thrive.He was a much-respected leader and inspiration to thousands of people over the years. Charles was incredibly intellectually curious and an avid reader, with a tremendous memory for facts and history.Unstoppable and unforgettable, he had a wonderful sense of humor and gave wise counsel to many. …On the number of ski areas on Forest Service landA huge number of U.S. ski areas operate on Forest Service land, with the majority seated in the West. A handful also sit in the Midwest and New England (Lutsen once sat partially on Forest Service land, but currently does not):On additional Midwest podcastsAs a native Midwesterner, I've made it a point to regularly feature the leaders of Midwest ski areas on the podcast. Dig into the archive:MICHIGANWISCONSINOHIOINDIANASOUTH DAKOTAThe Storm explores the world of lift-served skiing year-round. Join us.The Storm publishes year-round, and guarantees 100 articles per year. This is article 98/100 in 2023, and number 484 since launching on Oct. 13, 2019. Want to send feedback? Reply to this email and I will answer (unless you sound insane, or, more likely, I just get busy). You can also email skiing@substack.com. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.stormskiing.com/subscribe

In this episode, Steve Fretzin and Joe Tamburino discuss:Why lawyers struggle to build a book of business and a law practice. Honing your skills and learning from others. Communication, expectations, and building a great team. Building media relationships.  Key Takeaways:You have to have confidence in yourself, no matter what venture you go into in life. Having a record of success will give you confidence and will really let you know what your job truly is. You (or someone on your team) have to be available when business comes your way. Everybody has an email - if you are looking to contact someone in the media, see who is in your area and reporting on your area of law, then reach out to them.  "Things happen to make your business successful outside of work all the time." —  Joe Tamburino Get a free copy of Steve's book “Sales-Free Selling” here: www.fretzin.com/sales-free-selling Thank you to our Sponsors!Get Staffed Up: https://getstaffedup.com/bethatlawyer/Overture: https://overture.law/Get Visible: https://www.getvisible.com/ Episode References: The Law Entrepreneur - https://thelawentrepreneur.com/About Joe Tamburino: Joe Tamburino is one of the most effective criminal defense attorneys in the Twin Cities and has been named a Minnesota “Super Lawyer” for the last two decades straight. His passion for excellence in criminal defense has led to an exclusive rating as a Minnesota State Bar Association Board Certified Legal Specialist in Criminal Law, a certification achieved by fewer than 3% of all attorneys. He has defended his clients effectively against a wide range of charges – from DWI and white collar crimes to child pornography, assault and homicide – and has personally tried over 100 jury trials. Joe has over 30 years of criminal experience. A graduate of New York University and the University of Minnesota Law School, Tamburino began his career as a public defender in the Anoka County Attorney's Office. In 1997, he joined what would become Caplan & Tamburino Law Firm and has become a prominent and visible member of the Minnesota legal community. In 1998 he was named a Rising Star in Minnesota by Minnesota Law & Politics (Rising Stars are attorneys who have practiced for less than 10 years and are the age of 40 or younger). Since 2000, he has been named a Super Lawyer by Minnesota Law & Politics for twenty straight years. Joe Tamburino was nominated for an Emmy Award for his legal analysis on WCCO CBS TV throughout the trial of Derek Chauvin. He is a frequent legal analyst for CBS News, Court TV and Law and Crime Network. Tamburino has shared his expert legal analysis on high-profile cases and is a regular resource for media looking for a conversational understanding of current events with legal complexities. He also presents regularly to law schools and legal professional groups on a wide variety of criminal topics including: drinking & driving, alcohol-related accidents, homicides and criminal sexual conduct, campaign finance, international matters and first amendment (free speech) cases.Tamburino is licensed in Minnesota and Wisconsin and the Federal Courts in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and North Dakota.Connect with Joe Tamburino:  Website: https://www.caplantamburino.com/Email: jtamburino@caplanlaw.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/joe-tamburino-78aa5b10/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/caplan-&-tamburino-law-firm-p-a-/ Connect with Steve Fretzin:LinkedIn: Steve FretzinTwitter: @stevefretzinInstagram: @fretzinsteveFacebook: Fretzin, Inc.Website: Fretzin.comEmail: Steve@Fretzin.comBook: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more!YouTube: Steve FretzinCall Steve directly at 847-602-6911 Show notes by Podcastologist Chelsea Taylor-SturkieAudio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

In the wake of Donald Trump's role in the attempt to overturn the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, lawsuits in states around the country are seeking to disqualify him from the 2024 election. Challengers to his eligibility invoke Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides in relevant part that "No person shall . . . hold any office . . . under the United States . . . who, having previously taken an oath . . . as an officer of the United States . . . to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."As of now, there are nearly two dozen states in which litigation is ongoing to bar Trump from the ballot, and that number is only expected to grow. Earlier this week, a Colorado district began a week-long bench trial and, this Thursday, the Minnesota Supreme Court will hear oral argument. And if a state does disqualify Trump, the United States Supreme Court will no doubt immediately hear the case.On Monday October 30, the University of Minnesota Law School held a conference with leading law and political science scholars on "Section 3, Insurrection, and the 2024 Election: Does the Fourteenth Amendment Bar Donald Trump from the Presidency?" Today's Lawfare Podcast is a recording of one of the conference panels, which focused on the political implications of the Section 3 cases.The moderator was Larry Jacobs of the Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, and the panelists were Julia Azari, a Professor of Political Science at Marquette University; Ilya Somin, a Professor of Law at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School; and Eric Segall, a Professor of Law at the Georgia State College of Law.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Gregory D. Luce is a Minnesota-based attorney born and adopted in the District of Columbia. He is the founder of Adoptee Rights Law Center, where he represents US-born and inter-country adoptees on issues involving identity, records, and US citizenship. He is also a co-founder and the executive director of Adoptees United Inc., a national nonprofit adoptee rights organization. A graduate of Boston University and the University of Minnesota Law School, he lives in Minneapolis with his spouse and two children.To find Gregory Luce: Adoptee Rights Law CenterTo go directly to Gregory's interview, you can go to the timestamp: 12:06Also in this episode, Sarah and Louise discuss  The Baby Thief by Barbara Bisantz Raymond.Thank you to our sponsor S12F.Joe Soll & other adoptee resourcesFireside Adoptees Facebook GroupReckoning with the Primal Wound DocumentaryTo learn more about CAAR visit the Facebook PageIf you want to support our show, visit our Patreon Page.Our Patrons:  Laura Christensen, Barbara Frank, Ramona Evans, Linda Pevac, Blonde Records, Daphne Keys, Denise Hewitt, Michelle Styles, Emily Sinagra, Linda David, John Frey, Eric David, Beth Figuls, Ron Schneider, Tony Corsentino, Kristi Reed,  Kristen Steinhilber, Jane Bofenkamp, Kelley Brickfield, Sandra de Quesada, The Harpy, Kristan Higgin, Lisa Thompson,  Michelle Goodwine, Jesper Laursen, Julie Malone, Rivi Shocket , Robert Perrino,  Colleen McCall, Janet MacDonald, Robin Wells, Lynn Grubb, Mikki Jackson-Brown, Sharon Katzmann, Carol Levitt, Elizabeth McDonald, Diane Moore, Darra Robinson, Jen Arave, Thomas Stevenson, Michael Berman, Cindy Turgeon,  Monica Hall, Allison Olson , Lenora Carey,  Sandra de Quesada, Noreen Hartigan, Heidi Binnewies, Kathryn Haddad, April Dury, David Behar, Chris Manby and Jamie Johnson.Support the showTo support the show - Patreon.

Michel René Huff (“Huff”) graduated Cum Laude from the University of Minnesota Law School. After graduating, Huff served as the United States Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable James M. Rosenbaum (Chief Judge, Ret.) in the Federal District Court. Before becoming a lawyer, Huff was a patrol supervisor and police officer in Houston, Harris County, Texas. He gained valuable experience handling critical, high-conflict, and multicultural issues during this time. Huff is passionate about providing exceptional service. When Huff is not working, he enjoys spending time with his family, including a Boa Constrictor, Hum (pronounced “hoom”). He also loves music, travel, and weight training. Leduc Entertainment is a video production company with offices in New Orleans, Atlanta, and Los Angeles. We help business owners and creatives scale their businesses through video marketing. Using YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, and Twitter, we are able to communicate your message, brand, and product in an engaging way. Your business deserves great videos!

The term “spyware” refers to software that's designed to infiltrate, monitor, and extract sensitive information from a user's device without their knowledge or consent. Perhaps the most infamous example of the harm that spyware can do is the 2018 killing of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi government operatives, who used spyware to track Khashoggi before luring him to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, where he was murdered. But spyware use is not just limited to repressive autocracies. It's frequently both developed and used by liberal democracies, a practice that has generated increasing concern over the past few years.To talk about spyware and its potential regulation under international law, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, a Regents Professor and the Robina Chair in Law, Public Policy, and Society at the University of Minnesota Law School, where she also directs the Human Rights Center. Most importantly for this conversation, she's also the United Nation's Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, a position she's held since 2017. As part of that role, she recently published a report on the Global Regulation of the Counter-Terrorism Spyware Technology Trade. Alan spoke with Fionnuala about her findings and what, if anything, can be done to make spyware compliant with human rights.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.