Podcasts about penn law school

Michael Colucci, a Summerville, South Carolina jeweler, was once again on trial for the death of his wife, seven years after his initial trial ended in a mistrial. Michael Colucci is accused of killing his wife, Sara Lynn Colucci, in May 2015. During his first trial in 2018, prosecutors alleged that Michael strangled Sara. His defense argued that she died by suicide, claiming she hanged herself with a garden hose on a nearby fence while Michael was sitting in their car just 25 feet away. Just moments before Colucci's trial was set to begin, Judge Roger Young ruled in favor of the defense motion to dismiss the case. Seton tucker was there for the shocking decision. We discuss the ruling with her father, Matt Siembieda. Matt Siembieda is an attorney, graduate of Penn Law School and a law professor at Temple Law School. Seton Tucker and Matt Harris began the Impact of Influence podcast shortly after the murders of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. Now they cover true crime past and present from the southeast region of the U.S. Impact of Influence is part of the Evergreen Podcast Company. Look for Impact of Influence on Facebook and Youtube. Please support our sponsors Elevate your closet with Quince. Go to Quince dot com slash impact for free shipping on your order and three hundred and sixty-five -day returns Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Todd Mortensen is a corporate attorney in New York City who advises boards of directors, investment banks, and special committees on sell-side, buy-side, public, and private transactions in a wide range of industries. Todd has represented Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Barclays Capital, Wells Fargo Securities, UBS, and Rothschild & Co. among others. Todd has also worked in a number of investment management roles at Blackstone, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and Wells Fargo. He's a former professional athlete and speaks fluent Spanish  and earned a JD/MBA from Penn Law School and Wharton. In this episode we discuss the following: As a corporate attorney Todd helps CEOs and Boards of Directors 1) act in good faith and 2) be fully informed when buying and selling billion-dollar businesses. If the execs fulfill those two requirements, the court will defer to the “business judgement rule.” Otherwise, the courts will use the more stringent “entire fairness” standard. If you want to be successful at anything, you typically have to work really, really hard at it. This includes embracing the process of improving a little bit each day, week, and year. And if you're consistent and diligent with your work ethic, overtime you'll rise to the top. If you're good to people, doors will open for you. Todd's managing director at Morgan Stanley taught him that the decisions that would most affect Todd's career would likely be made when Todd wasn't in the room. So, Todd needed to make sure that his reputation helped rather than hurt him during those meetings. As Todd learned in Venezuela, “Create fama y echete a la came.” Create fame for yourself, and then go lie down. Our reputation is either helping or hurting us. Follow Todd: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/toddmortensen/ Follow Me: X: https://twitter.com/nate_meikle LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/natemeikle/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nate_meikle/

Natalie Steen is the founder of the ultra stylish fashion newsletter The Nat Note. As a former lawyer with a good creative bug and a bad online shopping habit, she was able to take a passion for fashion and shopping and turn a project into a full-time career. Join us as Nat shares her journey from a Miami, Florida native to attending UVA & Penn Law School to moving to Houston, TX and delivering ready-to-shop style suggestions for women, kids, and home through The Nat Note. Shopping addicts, be sure to sign up for a weekly dose of her fashion expertise at thenatnote.com! Stay Connected: Don't miss out on any updates or exclusive offers. Follow us on our social media channels: Facebook Instagram Pinterest Thank you for visiting The Vintage Contessa & Times Past. Subscribe to our channel for a glimpse into the world of luxury living, insights into the authenticity process, and much more. Embrace the luxury of the past and present with The Vintage Contessa & Times Past.

Show Summary MBA admissions veteran Kara Keenan Sweeney has joined Accepted. Formerly part of the admissions team at Wharton Lauder, INSEAD and Columbia Business School, she's not only an Accepted consultant but she's our guest on the podcast. Kara discusses various aspects of the MBA application process, including choosing the right schools, handling common challenges faced by international applicants, and approaching the essays and resume. She also touches on the qualities that management consulting firms look for in MBA recruits and provides advice for MBA re-applicants. Finally, she discusses the use of AI and ChatGPT in the admissions process and the importance of authenticity in application materials. Show Notes Our guest today is no stranger to Admissions Straight Talk. She's been on several times but wore a different hat. It gives me great pleasure to introduce Kara Keenan Sweeney, Accepted consultant. Kara previously served as the Director of Admissions, Marketing and Financial Aid at Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and Penn Law School. Kara has an extensive background in graduate admissions, starting with her master's in higher education administration from Columbia and including admissions positions at INSEAD, Penn State, and as I mentioned, Wharton's Lauder Institute. Most recently, she was a senior recruiter for McKinsey & Company.  Kara, welcome to Admissions Straight Talk. [1:24] Thanks, Linda. It's great to be with you on this side of the table. Glad to have you back, and this time as a colleague. Let's start with something really easy. How did you get into admissions? [1:32] Yeah, it was a little bit by happenstance, which I think is true for a lot of admissions professionals or higher education folks. I started working at Columbia University at the beginning of my career, and one of my first jobs was in student affairs at the business school, and I was working specifically with Executive MBA students as their... Directing a cohort through the two-year program, so working closely with admissions, actually. And I started to get a little bit of exposure to admissions and help out with interviewing and things like that. And then, a few years into that role, an admissions job opened up on my team, and I was lucky enough to get it. And the rest is history. That was, I think, 17 years ago, which is crazy to think about it. It's been that long. But yeah, I started in student affairs and navigated my way to admissions, and it's been a great experience. You have a wealth of experience in MBA admissions and a lot of it has been focused in the international business space. What do you think is critical for MBAs interested in international business, and specifically those programs that you've worked for? [2:31] It's funny as I'm thinking through the question again. So much of business education now is international. The cohorts and the classes are so international. I think Wharton's 30, 40%; Lauder, of course, is probably 50, 60%. So it's just such a global pool of students. Back maybe 30, 40 years ago, it was mostly Americans at Wharton or whatever. So it's changed a lot. Very global by nature. But for students who are looking at international business, it's looking at it in that global context. It's looking at it from a big vantage point. For Americans who are maybe looking to gain some more hands-on experience, maybe going to INSEAD or London Business School, having a “study abroad” experience can be a great way to really get that on-the-ground cultural immersion, language immersion in some cases. For some international students coming from outside of the US, coming to Wharton Lauder or Columbia Business School or any of the US schools is a great way to get that US or North America focus. Getting that on-the-ground experience is really invaluable. Working at Lauder and at INSEAD, it's funny,

In a precedent-setting and contentious decision last Tuesday, Colorado's top court, comprised solely of Justicial nominees backed by Democrats, rendered a decision that has sparked considerable debate nationwide. By a narrow margin of 4-3, the justices ruled to exclude former President Donald Trump from the Republican primary election in Colorado for the year 2024. Accordingly, the verdict has emerged as a source of controversy, primarily because it utilizes the 14th Amendment's Section 3, the constitutional clause prohibiting people who have been involved in an insurrection from contesting for federal office. This verdict is perceived by a subgroup as being politically driven and laying a perilous foundation for the future of U.S. politics. Justice Richard L. Gabriel, a Yale alumnus and Penn Law School graduate, assisted in forging this verdict. Gabriel, whose term on Colorado's apex court took flight in June 2015, has frequently found himself in the midst of debate. His decisions have pulled attraction from critics and supporters, who interpret them following their own perception. The December 2017 appointment of Justice Melissa Hart, who holds her alma mater's reputation high as a Harvard Law School graduate, also contributed to this landmark ruling. Hart transitioned into this role having previously held a professorship at the law school in her home state of Colorado. However, her tenure hasn't been entirely devoid of controversy. As documented by The Daily Mail, Hart was tangentially implicated in a workplace discrimination case against a black job applicant - a case from the Supreme Court that was ultimately dropped. However, this instance does in no way diminish her contributions to diverse legal debates during her tenure.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

With John Yoo still away somewhere in the jungles of South America, Steve and Lucretia are delighted to be joined by a very special guest, Prof. Amy Wax of Penn Law School. Followers of the campus scene may be familiar with Penn Law’s crusade to fire Prof. Wax for the sin of offending against campus […]

With John Yoo still away somewhere in the jungles of South America, Steve and Lucretia are delighted to be joined by a very special guest, Prof. Amy Wax of Penn Law School. Followers of the campus scene may be familiar with Penn Law's crusade to fire Prof. Wax for the sin of offending against campus orthodoxies on race and immigration, at the same time Penn so conspicuously tolerates anti-Semitism.Prof. Wax isn't at liberty to discuss the details of her ongoing ordeal, but we do get into the thick of several pertinent questions, such as:—Does the current crisis of tolerance for anti-Semitism on campus represent a possible inflection point to turn back “wokery” at last, or will this episode prove that higher education has passed the point of no return?—Is there any evidence that the high-profile donor revolt at Penn and elsewhere is having an effect?—On a wider note, many conservative law professors are leaving their posts because of the increasing ideological hostility. This seems another bad omen for academia.

In today's episode I interview Professor Amy Wax from Penn Law School. If you don't know Amy Wax, buckle up, you're in for a real treat.Amy is truly one of a kind and you'll know what I mean after you listen to the episode.I named this episode “Fight the Good Fight” because Amy Wax reminds me of the crucial importance of fighting for what you believe in. And not just fighting against what you don't.Here are some links to help you get more out of this episode:• Here's a LINK to Amy's 2009 book "Race, Wrongs and Remedies"• Macarthur Park Restaurant in Palo Alto• Amy's  Philadelphia Inquirer Op Ed which caused so much controversy: LINK• Amy Wax's syllabus for her course on "Conservative Political Thought": LINK• The Thomas Sowell Reader mentioned in the episode: LINK• Podcast statistics HERETHERE ARE 3 WAYS TO SUPPORT THE SHOW:1) Support the show financially by subscribing with a monthly contribution on Patreon:   www.Patreon.com/SowellGeniusThe money raised through Patreon supports our efforts to popularize the books and ideas of Thomas Sowell. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2) Rate and review the podcast on Apple Podcasts. This helps a lot by nudging the show to the top of Google searches. I really appreciate the many positive reviews, especially this one by Jonsby: "This is one of the few podcasts that I actually slow down so I can savor it!"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3) Purchase our Thomas Sowell Post It Note pads:  You can find all 100 digital images of the post it notes HERE, feel free to download them and use them however you like.To purchase pads of printed post it notes, please visit our shop at: GeniusSowell.etsy.com We have two editions of the quotes available:Edition #2: Quotes 1 - 50.Edition #3: Quotes 51 - 100--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------You can  email Alan at: WolanAlan@gmail.comThere are only so many hours in the day and that fact that you spend some of your precious time listening to my podcast is something I will never take for granted and will always appreciate.THANK YOU!

With Yale and Harvard law schools withdrawing from U.S. News & World Report's annual law school rankings, others have followed suit. With the rating system for all colleges taking criticism, being “gamed,” and beset by scandal, is this the beginning of the end of the influential college-ranking system? Guest: Colin Diver, the Charles A. Heimbold, Jr., Professor of Law and Economics Emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, former Dean of Penn Law School and president of Reed College, 2002 through 2012.  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Amicus—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With Yale and Harvard law schools withdrawing from U.S. News & World Report's annual law school rankings, others have followed suit. With the rating system for all colleges taking criticism, being “gamed,” and beset by scandal, is this the beginning of the end of the influential college-ranking system? Guest: Colin Diver, the Charles A. Heimbold, Jr., Professor of Law and Economics Emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, former Dean of Penn Law School and president of Reed College, 2002 through 2012.  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Amicus—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With Yale and Harvard law schools withdrawing from U.S. News & World Report's annual law school rankings, others have followed suit. With the rating system for all colleges taking criticism, being “gamed,” and beset by scandal, is this the beginning of the end of the influential college-ranking system? Guest: Colin Diver, the Charles A. Heimbold, Jr., Professor of Law and Economics Emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, former Dean of Penn Law School and president of Reed College, 2002 through 2012.  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Amicus—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join the WA Group with this temporary link: https://chat.whatsapp.com/LcHQQDGFxvA7y8EALUkaLU This Episode is a personal story about the struggle with addiction, finding Judaism and creating a new fulfilling life. Volunteer to share your personal story on the Franciska Show - email: franciskakay@gmail.com        About Our Guest: Chaim Saiman is a scholar of Jewish law, insurance law and private law and Chair in Jewish law Villanova University's Law School. He is also a fellow at the Katz Center for Advanced Judaic Studies at U. Penn. Chaim has been the Gruss Visiting Professor of Talmudic Law at both Harvard Law School and the U. Penn Law School's, a visiting fellow at Princeton University. Chaim serves as dayyan on the Beth Din of America, and as an expert witness in insurance law and Jewish law in federal court and has recently published Halakhah: The Rabbinic Idea of Law with Princeton University Press. Chaim learned for several years at Yeshivat Har-Etzion (Gush) and Kerem B'Yavneh. Prior to joining the faculty at Villanova, he was a law clerk on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and an associate with the firm Cleary Gottlieb in New York.   Buy the Book: Halackha - The Rabbinic idea of Law - https://www.amazon.in/Halakhah-Rabbinic-Library-Jewish-Ideas/dp/069115211X/ref=sr_1_1?qid=1667230985&refinements=p_27%3AChaim+N.+Saiman&s=books&sr=1-1 The Podcast DIY Launch Course: https://www.franciskakosman.com/courselaunch If you'd like to book a consult session with Franciska, click here:  https://checkout.square.site/merchant/5BECR8D49NYV3/checkout/FVSNPB7HVW36LOYAR3L7SJMU If you'd like to sponsor an episode, click here: https://checkout.square.site/merchant/5BECR8D49NYV3/checkout/6KYMG7OGFR4Y63C43RREZ5MV

Amy's recent conflict with the Penn Law School administration ... Amy responds to her dean's charges of racism, sexism, and xenophobia ... Should we take students' feelings into account when discussing race and admissions? ... Glenn: If Amy is fired, it will be an outrage beyond belief ... Why Amy invited Jared Taylor to speak with her students ... Amy's defense of race realism's legitimacy ... Glenn and Amy's first encounter ... Amy: Sometimes reality is upsetting and offensive ... How to help Amy ...

Amy's recent conflict with the Penn Law School administration … Amy responds to her dean's charges of racism, sexism, and xenophobia … Should we take students' feelings into account when discussing race and admissions? … Glenn: If Amy is fired, it will be an outrage beyond belief … Why Amy invited Jared Taylor to speak […]

Amy's recent conflict with the Penn Law School administration ... Amy responds to her dean's charges of racism, sexism, and xenophobia ... Should we take students' feelings into account when discussing race and admissions? ... Glenn: If Amy is fired, it will be an outrage beyond belief ... Why Amy invited Jared Taylor to speak with her students ... Amy's defense of race realism's legitimacy ... Glenn and Amy's first encounter ... Amy: Sometimes reality is upsetting and offensive ... How to help Amy ...

In a letter dated June 23, 2022, the Dean of the University of Pennsylvania, Carey Law School, Theodore Ruger, suggested imposing sanctions on Professor Amy Wax for showing “a callous and flagrant disregard for our University community.” Dean Ruger is seeking to ‘cancel' her based on her opinions and views and how the University has reacted to them. Professor Amy Wax is currently the Robert Mundheim Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School where she joined the faculty with tenure on July 1, 2001. Donate to her legal defense fund here: https://gofund.me/96d43ec6See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Why is healing White men critical within racial equity work? What can prevention and harm reduction look like in US culture? Loran sits down with Ben Jealous (President, https://www.pfaw.org/ (People for the American Way) and former President and CEO of the https://naacp.org/ (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) [NAACP]), Pablo Cerdera (Founding Associate Director, https://hub.provost.upenn.edu/org/restorative-practices-penn-rpp (Restorative Practices at Penn)), and Fred Jealous (Founder, https://breakthroughformen.org/ (Breakthrough for Men)) for a conversation hosted by https://www.sp2.upenn.edu/ (The University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy and Practice) (SP2) and co-sponsored by People for the American Way. Ben Jealous has spent his professional life at the nexus of social change, media, and emerging technologies. He is a former Democratic Nominee for Governor of Maryland, former National President & CEO of the https://naacp.org/ (NAACP), former Executive Director of the https://nnpa.org/ (National Newspaper Publishers Association) (NNPA), and for more than half a decade has been investing in social impact startups. While at the NAACP, Jealous led a series of wholesale changes in how the organization used social media and related technologies to enhance its organizing, He is a Professor of Practice at the https://www.asc.upenn.edu/ (Annenberg School for Communication), https://www.law.upenn.edu/ (Penn Law School), and the https://www.sp2.upenn.edu/ (School of Social Policy & Practice). His efforts started with proving the efficacy of online viral voter registration drives in the 2008 Presidential Election. The NAACP's numbers of online activists really took off when Jealous began using their platforms to organize support for individuals fighting injustices in the criminal justice system. The last such campaign he led for the NAACP signed up more than 600,000 new activists on email and approximately 400,000 via text in less than two weeks. These efforts have also been credited by a major polling firm with shifting public opinion and paving the way for landmark civil rights state legislative victories. Pablo Cerdera is a Restorative Justice (RJ) Practitioner and Educator and has been the Associate Director of https://hub.provost.upenn.edu/org/restorative-practices-penn-rpp (Restorative Practices @ Penn) since February 2020. He began his professional work at thehttps://www.legalrightscenter.org/ ( Legal Rights Center) in Minneapolis and has volunteered or worked as an RJ practitioner with https://www.rjca-inc.org/ (Restorative Justice Community Action), the http://crcminnesota.org/ (Conflict Resolution Center), the https://www.coraservices.org/good-shepherd-mediation/ (Good Shepherd Mediation Program), and https://www.letscircleup.org/ (Let's Circle Up). He is committed to sharing the restorative approach and firmly believes in the power to transform harm, promote meaningful accountability, and develop strong and healthy communities through this approach. Fred Jealous, created https://breakthroughformen.org/ (Breakthrough), a non-profit organization in 1987. As a teacher of nonviolent communication, this organization aims to provide men with skills to free themselves from non-productive, painful, or abusive aspects of their lives. Jealous, also a leader in his community, has empowered hundreds of men to begin to create the lives they have always wanted through education and support in a supportive group-learning setting in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Prior to Breakthrough, he spent many years as a teacher at all levels from preschool to graduate school. Locally, he taught Social Science courses and developed programs for veterans in transition, at https://www.mpc.edu/ (Monterey Peninsula College). He created...

0:00 Intro.1:37 Start of interview2:19 Joel's "origin story". He grew up in Stamford, Connecticut ("it was a land of many corporate headquarters"). He went to Wharton undergrad and U. Penn Law School. Later, he clerked at the Court of Chancery in Delaware and worked at Skadden's Wilmington office in Delaware "[the office] had been built around the hostile takeover litigation in the 1980s." In 1995, he joined a new litigation boutique with Stephen Lamb (later Vice-Chancellor of the DE Court of Chancery). Andre Bouchard (later Chancellor of the DE Court of Chancery) joined in 1996.5:35 The difference between plaintiff and corporate/defense firms, starting at law schools and law student recruitment.7:04 On the historical evolution of stockholder litigation. Joel teaches a course on stockholder litigation at Penn Law School and Michigan Law School. On how the hostile deals in the 1980s changed the stockholder litigation landscape: "Many of the largest and most sophisticated law firms were suing each other, and that's where most of the law was created."10:50 On the evolution of class action and derivative actions in stockholder litigation.13:01 On the concept of Fraud on the Board. "Commission of fraud on the board is an omnipresent temptation for self-interested controllers, activist stockholders, officers, financial advisors, and their legal counsel. Fraud can be used to put a company in play, steer a sale process toward a favored bidder, suppress the sale price to a controller, or make a favored bid look more attractive."15:56 "Not long ago, over 90% of deals over $100m were sued on, and in most of those cases the stockholders got nothing (prevalence of disclosure settlements)." He advocated for the elimination of disclosure settlements. "In about 2015, the litigation landscape changed." 23:40 On the evolution of Section 220 books and records stockholder demands.26:37 How director oversight duties have evolved ("Caremark claims"). The impact of the Delaware Supreme Court case of Marchand (2019) focused on food safety. 30:12 How Boeing's stockholders obtained approval from the Delaware Court of Chancery for a landmark US$237.5 million settlement of derivative claims targeting the company's board for safety failures that led to catastrophic crashes of two 737 MAX jetliners in 2018 and 2019. *The company disclosed that the two crashes caused US$20 billion in non-litigation costs and more than US$2.5 billion in litigation costs.35:16 On private venture-backed company deal-making and litigation, particularly in Silicon Valley. The Good Technology case, where director defendants and their affiliated VC funds settled for $17m and the financial advisor JP Morgan settled for $35 million for claims against  arising out of challenge to dual-track sale/IPO process that resulted in sale of company to BlackBerry Limited.40:24 "It's hard to find plaintiffs [in Silicon Valley], there are different obstacles and roadblocks to litigation."42:38 "In [private venture-backed companies] sometimes you don't have directors who have experience in certain situations, like selling a public company (sophistication of M&A in public settings)."43:48 "What is ubiquitous is financial advisor conflicts of interest, in Silicon Valley or in any other public company scenario." The example of the Good Technology case.45:35 On conflicts of legal counsel in deal-making (criticism of law firm behavior). Example: $690 million damages award based on controller's reliance on outside counsel's legal opinion.47:44 The 1-3 books that have greatly influenced his life (that he's re-read the most):The Great Gatsby,  by F. Scott Fitzgerald (1925)The Trial, by Franz Kafka (1925)Books by Professor Philip Reiff (sociologist from the U. of Pennsylvania), such as Fellow Teachers, the Triumph of the Therapeutic, Freud: the Mind of a Moralist.49:08 - Who were your mentors, and what did you learn from them? Philip Reiff, at U. of Pennsylvania.Chancellor William T. Allen.Stuart Shapiro (in litigation).53:04 - Are there any quotes you think of often? In a NYT review of the autobiography of Sammy the Bull Gravano he read a quote that said "At some point you've got to ask yourself, are you going to continue being a punk, or are you going to become a racketeer?"52:40- An unusual habit or an absurd thing that he loves: Twitter. 53:27 - The living person he most admires: Volodymyr Zelensky.Joel Friedlander is a partner at Friedlander & Gorris. He has over 25 years of experience litigating breach of fiduciary duty actions and contract disputes relating to the control of Delaware entities.__ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

While the Chinese government's actions in Xinjiang and Hong Kong lately have been the subject of particular scrutiny from U.S. policymakers, systematic attention to China's human rights practices, more broadly, has been a consistent feature of U.S. policy towards China in recent decades, through successive Democratic and Republican administrations. In this episode, Neysun Mahboubi discusses with Amy Gadsden, a leading expert on human rights in China, the background to why human rights came to be such a major factor in U.S.-China relations, and how this portfolio of issues does (and should) relate to other policy considerations. The episode was recorded on August 16, 2019. Amy Gadsden is Associate Vice Provost for Global Initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania, in which capacity she works with Penn's schools and centers to develop and implement strategies to increase Penn's global engagement both on campus and overseas, including by advancing Penn's activities with respect to China. Previously, she served as Associate Dean for International and Strategic Initiatives at Penn Law School, where she built a comprehensive program aimed at expanding the Law School's global curriculum. As an adjunct faculty member, Dr. Gadsden has taught seminars in international human rights and the rule of law. Before coming to Penn, she served as Special Advisor for China at the U.S. Department of State, and before that she served as China Director for the International Republican Institute. She has published widely on democracy and human rights in China, documenting legal and civil society reform, and was one of the first American scholars to observe and write about grassroots elections in China in the mid-1990s. Dr. Gadsden holds a Ph.D in Qing legal history from the University of Pennsylvania.  Sound engineering: Kaiser Kuo and Neysun Mahboubi Music credit: "Salt" by Poppy Ackroyd, follow her at http://poppyackroyd.com

Discover what opportunities the Wharton Lauder MBA program offers [Show Summary] Kara Keenan Sweeney, Director of Admissions Marketing and Financial Aid at the Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and Penn Law School shares how the program continues to offer global opportunities during a COVID influenced world. [Show Notes] Welcome to the 465th episode of Admissions Straight Talk. Thanks for joining me today and whenever you're able to tune in. The featured resource for today's show is Fitting in and Standing Out: The Paradox at the Heart of Admissions. Your application needs to show that you're going to do both, and that's the difficult paradox at the heart of admissions. Master that paradox, and you are well on your way to acceptance. Download the free guide. It gives me great pleasure to introduce Kara Keenan Sweeney, Director of Admissions Marketing and Financial Aid at the Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and Penn Law School. Kara has an extensive background in graduate admissions, starting with her master's in higher administration at Columbia, and then moving onto admissions positions at INSEAD, the University of Pennsylvania, Penn State, and now the Lauder Institute.  Can you give us an overview of the Wharton Lauder program for those listeners who aren't that familiar with it? [1:45] The Lauder program was founded in the mid-1980s by the Lauder family to work with Wharton to help educate and generate a new, globally-minded group of business leaders. When students come to the Lauder Institute, they're earning a Master of Arts in International Studies at the same time, they're getting their MBA from Wharton. Basically, it's an MA/MBA joint degree fully integrated into the MBA program.  When students come to Lauder, they focus on one of our six programs of concentration. Five of those programs are regionally focused. We have a program on Africa, East and Southeast Asia, Europe, Latin America, and then what we call the SAMENA region or South Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. That's our fifth regional program. We also have a global program for our students who have already had fairly significant global experience. In our regional program students are almost in every case also focused on a language. We have 10 languages of instruction at Lauder. When they come to Lauder they're already speaking a language at an advanced level, and then they'll continue to work on that language until they get to the superior or the fluent level over the two years as part of their studies at Lauder. It's a fully integrated joint degree. We have a small program with about 70 to 80 students a year. It's a really international community and just an amazing group to be a part of. Are you also a joint program with the law school? [3:22] That's right. Thanks for highlighting that. We do have a joint agreement with the law school as well. Each year we have a handful of students that do it. It's not really by design; it's a little bit by default. The law school has just less than 200 students a year over at Penn Law. Wharton is up to about 900. There are just a lot more MBA students. The Wharton program was founded to really work and fit in specifically with the Wharton school way back when it was founded. Our law school partnership is a little bit more recent, but in the class that's starting this summer, we actually have three incoming JD students. We're really happy to have them in the program. We love to have them, but we just tend to have fewer of them. Does the Lauder Institute only work with applicants interested in dual degrees? [4:13] Exactly. Lauder only offers a joint degree. Students take about two classes a semester at Lauder. They take their normal Wharton course load or their normal course load over at Penn Law. At Lauder, we borrow the credits from the other degree so that they can graduate with both because some of the L...

Mentorcam - Book your mentor session with promo code CODE for 20% off! Topic: How VC's see your startupMax Samuel is a venture capitalist and lawyer. He formerly worked at Thiel Capital, Wilson Sonsini and Credit Suisse. A graduate of Yale, Penn Law School and Wharton, Max is passionate about mentoring both startup founders and people looking to break into the VC industry.Questions:What is different about early stage VC vs. just VC?How do venture capital firms evaluate startups?What's important at the early stage? What should a pitch deck include?How do you start a career in venture capital?If you were just starting again, what would you do different?Book a call with Max by accessing the link below:https://mentor.cam/maxsamuel - Use Promo Code CODESupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/code-story/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

CHRIS NEWBOLD: Hello, well-being friends and welcome to the Path to Well-Being in Law podcast, an initiative of the Institute for Well-Being in Law. I'm your cohost CHRIS:, Executive Vice President of ALPS Malpractice Insurance. And again, most of, I think, our listeners know what our goal is but let me reiterate that we love bringing on to the podcast thought leaders in the well-being space doing meaningful work to advance the profession and to in the process build and nurture a national network of well-being advocates intent on creating a culture shift within the profession. CHRIS: Let me introduce my cohost Bree Buchanan. Bree, how are you doing? And how has your summer been? BREE BUCHANAN: Hey Chris, it has been wonderful. I get to be here in Eugene, Oregon so it's just beautiful and getting to do a lot of fun things. I'm really blessed with that. And I just wanted to say, Chris, you're talking about thought leaders and as regards to our guest today, Jen really is, she's not only a thought leader in this space but she's also a teacher of future thought leaders. So we're really glad that we got Jen with us today. CHRIS: Yeah. We got a great guest today. And we are in the midst right now of spending a three-part miniseries within the podcast of really looking in terms of what's going on in the law schools. We know that they are training the next generation in our profession and we know that these issues are becoming much more acutely aware in the environment. We started off our law school series with Linda Sugin from Fordham Law School and we will be followed in our next podcast by Janet Stearns who comes to us from the Miami School of Law. CHRIS: But today's about Penn Law and introducing our, we're really excited to have Jennifer Leonard join us on the podcast. Bree, will you do the honors of introducing Jen. BREE: I'd be delighted. So Jen Leonard is Penn Law's, get this title, I love this, Chief Innovation Officer and Executive Director of the Future of the Profession Initiative. Jen's work at Penn Law focuses on developing a deep understanding of what legal professionals need to be successful in the face of constant transformation. Isn't that true? Working with a collaborative group of colleagues across the law school in the profession, Jen designs ways to educate new law students about changes in the profession and the skills they need to thrive in the future. BREE: Before assuming her current role, she served as Associate Dean for Professional Engagement and Director of the Center of Professionalism at Penn Law. And prior to that, she was Chief of Staff to the City Solicitor of Philadelphia and a Litigation Associate with a Center City law firm, and a Judicial Law Clerk. And then Jen went home when she went to work at Penn Law because she's a graduate from there in 2004 from the law school and Penn State University with high honors. Jen's also a frequent writer and speaker on the issues that include lawyer and law student well-being. So Jen, thank you for being here today and welcome. JENNIFER LEONARD: Wow. Thank you so much, Chris and Bree. I'm so excited to be here. And thank you for that lovely introduction. BREE: You bet. So Jen, one of the things we always ask our guests because it provides such interesting information and background and insight into the people that we have with us, tell us what brought you into the lawyer/law student well-being movement. The people that work in this space and really care about it, they have a passion for the work. And typically, there's something that's driving that. So tell us a little bit about that, what that means for you. JENNIFER: Yeah. First of all, I'm so excited that there is an actual movement now around attorney well-being and law student well-being. BREE: Right. JENNIFER: That's an exciting development and a recent development, which I think many law students don't fully understand because they have arrived at law school at a time when the movement is accelerating and is growing which is fantastic. JENNIFER: I have first-hand experience being a law student who really struggled with well-being issues including depression and anxiety and also some of the really common things that law students experience, imposter syndrome, not fully understanding that I wasn't expected to know how to be a skilled attorney on day one. Most attorneys, hopefully, if they've had a really great practice will retire still growing and still learning new things. And I did not understand as a very confused and disoriented OneL that I was just at the beginning of a journey and I felt very isolated and very sort of inept in the environment and that was stunning to me because I had spent my whole life just absolutely loving school from being four years old and pretending to be a teacher in my basement with my friends all the way through graduating from college, it was just the place I felt most alive and most comfortable. JENNIFER: And law school was a completely different experience. I felt very uncomfortable from day one. My involvement in the well-being movement, I would say, is sort of an accident that followed from that experience which followed me into practice and I certainly experienced many of the challenges that the research shows around depression and anxiety in private practice. When I moved over to government work, because of the constraints of resources, you're just sort of thrown into the fire and forced to grow on your own. And that was actually really helpful for me for building confidence and learning that I actually had the capacity to do amazing things if I really gave myself the time to develop and the opportunity to develop. JENNIFER: So when I came to the law school in 2013 and started counseling law students, it was sort of a revelation to me as I sat across from younger versions of myself that they were saying to me the exact same things that I was saying in my own head as a OneL. And that was the first time even 10 years after law school that it occurred to me that I was not the only person who had this experience. And I really wanted to prevent future generations of law students from making the mistake and thinking they weren't capable and not allowing themselves to live up to their potential and contribute to society in the profession. JENNIFER: So I started building some programming, co curricular programming at first, and then programming that eventually became woven into our formal curriculum after the National Task Force report came out. And so I was just thrilled to see the movement grow over time and now to have part in leading some of those initiatives at the law school. CHRIS: Jen, today we're going to talk about the work of you and your colleagues at Penn Law. Let's set the stage a little bit. Tell us about Penn Law, your location, size, focus, types of students, and give us a flavor for the type of law school that you work within. JENNIFER: Well, I have the great pleasure of working at a phenomenal law school. The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School which is located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We draw students from all over the world, approximately 250 incoming first-year JDs every year from all over the country and 115 LLM students from around the world who contribute just such a diversity and complexity of perspectives to our experience that we really are a global leader in legal education. And I'm excited to work at Penn as a broader university because its founder Benjamin Franklin really focused on two elements of education that I think are critical to our success. JENNIFER: One is a real focus on interdisciplinarity and learning across different disciplines about how to solve problems and that is a lot of what my work entails, building connections with our colleagues in innovation spaces across Penn's campus. And the second element is really bringing a blend of high-minded intellectual research and academic efforts in translating that work into things that can really have impact in the real world. And so it's the perfect place to be developing innovative projects including some of our work in the well-being space and seeing how that work translates in our profession. BREE: So speaking of innovation, I just think that you have the coolest job title I've ever seen. Chief Innovation Officer and Executive Director of the Future of the Profession Initiative. Tell us about that. How did all that come about? And tell us about that initiative. JENNIFER: Oh, thank you. I love my job. I do get to have the coolest title. And I think if I were to make a long story short, I think it's that I chirped enough about all the changes I'd love to see in legal education and in the profession that somebody finally gave me the opportunity to focus just on that. And the longer story is that our dean was really interested in thinking about all the changes happening in the legal profession and how a leading law school really has both an obligation and an opportunity to respond to that change so that our students are entering the profession prepared with the skills they need to thrive and to also lead the profession into the next phase of its existence. JENNIFER: So I had the chance to work with colleagues across the law school and then through our advisory board of alumni all across the profession to iterate and refine the vision for what ultimately became the future of the profession initiative, which I now have the great honor and privilege of leading. CHRIS: Tell me about the scope of that initiative. I'm just curious what you're looking at and what you're hoping to poke and prod around into. JENNIFER: Sure. We have three different buckets of projects that we work on. And I'm part of a day-to-day team of three people, two of my colleagues Jim Sandman who is President Emeritus of Legal Services Corporation and now's our senior consultant and Miguel Willis who is the Executive Director of Access to Justice Tech Fellows which is now formally affiliated with FPI. And Jim, Miguel, and I and our colleagues work on developing new curricular and co curricular offerings that are responsive to the changing conditions in the legal profession. So Jim teaches courses on leadership in law, Miguel and our advisory board member Claudia Johnson teaches courses on law, technology, and access to justice, I teach courses on user center design for the better delivery of legal services. JENNIFER: And so we focus on teaching students about the skills that they need to respond to future conditions. We also focus on leading conversations across the profession of leaders who are doing really interesting things in legal. And those conversations take the form of a podcast, the Law 2030 podcast, a monthly newsletter where we bring in voices not only from the legal profession but from across Penn's campus, across other fields to help us navigate change, to teach us what they're doing in their respective environments that we can draw lessons from. And then finally, we're building out projects for impact, things that we can do from the unique position of being a research university that can have real-world impact. So Jim is working on a variety of projects related to regulatory reform, finding new ways to connect people with legal systems. Jim's focused also on court simplification and form simplification so that it's easier for individuals and small businesses to access the legal profession. JENNIFER: So we teach, we lead conversations and we do it all within the goal of transforming the way we deliver legal services to our clients. CHRIS: That sounds like pretty cool work. JENNIFER: It's so much fun- BREE: I know. JENNIFER: And really, really engaging and worthwhile and so lucky to do it. BREE: I just think you must be so excited to go to work every day. JENNIFER: Totally. CHRIS: Anyone who gets to put the word future in their job description, I think that's pretty fun to be able to look out at. JENNIFER: Oh, it's so fun. CHRIS: So Jen, you've been back now at Penn Law I think in a professional capacity for about eight years. Let's talk a little bit about what you're seeing in the law school environment. Share with our listeners some of the well-being issues you've seen coming out of the student body, issues that students are facing. And how have those issues affected their law school and, in many cases, their post law school experience? JENNIFER: Yeah. So I think, again, to draw from my own experience both as a law student who struggled with these issues and also as somebody who had the chance to counsel students in a career counseling capacity early on in my time at the law school, I would say the biggest thing that I saw and see among students is the idea of imposter syndrome. When you are in an environment where you're surrounded by really talented people who come from all different backgrounds, all different educational degrees, you look around and you think, "How can I be here with all of these smart people around me?" And then you have the opportunity to engage in Socratic dialogue with learned professors and legal scholars at the top of their fields. JENNIFER: And I found it to be, and in my experience talking with first-year law students, some of them also find it to be very overwhelming. And I think that helping them adopt a mindset, a learner's mindset, that you are here because you deserve to be here is a rigorous process for admission. And our admission's office doesn't make mistakes. You should be here. And you are here at the very beginning of what will be a very long journey where you will grow a significant amount over the course of your life. So expecting yourself to understand the complexities of law in the first couple months, I think, is unrealistic. And so helping students understand that all lawyers have been in their shoes, that the people around them who seem the most confident are frequently the ones who are struggling the most and sometimes that manifests as overconfidence or projection of overconfidence which can feed into that imposter syndrome. JENNIFER: And I think just helping students adopt a growth mindset that will allow them to, I don't like to use the word fail, I like to use the word learn, learn from missteps, learn from early misunderstandings of the law, learn even in their Socratic dialogue which was particularly challenging for me. I'm introverted by nature. And I viewed everything as a judgment on me and if I wasn't doing it perfectly, that meant I wasn't capable of doing it. And so supporting students in understanding that they are in a developmental process that is rigorous and at the end will benefit them tremendously if they can adopt that learner's mindset. BREE: I just love how you framed that and that must be so incredibly helpful for the students that you talk to. I definitely dealt with imposter syndrome. I know that a lot of people have but I didn't have the language for it. Do you talk to the students about, do you name it? Do you tell them what imposter syndrome is? JENNIFER: Yeah. I would say most students now coming in are familiar with it from their undergrad work or other graduate work, which is fantastic. As you know, Bree, there was no language when we were in law school for imposter syndrome. It didn't even exist. So we're already starting at a more advanced point. And also the concept of growth mindset is something that people are learning about at a younger and younger age. My kids are in daycare and kindergarten and are already learning about growth mindset. So in 20 years, we'll be admitting people to law school who either they don't need to learn learner's mindset and they don't need to learn the importance of growth mindset. We will be much more ahead of the game. JENNIFER: Now, I think we're in this exciting chapter where we're finally opening up the conversation and naming the issues as you're saying. And students are much more comfortable, I think, than our generation was at being open about the challenges, which is really, really not only helpful for advancing the conversation but helpful for your own mental health to be engaged with other people who are experiencing the same thing. CHRIS: Talk to us about some of the well-being initiatives that make you most proud. You've obviously put a lot of time and attention into creating a culture where people's issues are respected and there's vulnerability and empathy. Talk to us about what are some of the things that you are most proud of in terms of what it does and some of the things that you've been doing. JENNIFER: It's funny, Chris, because I will talk about the thing that we've done that I'm most proud of and on behalf of my colleagues because these are really collaborative efforts across the law school, not just from FPI. But also, what I'm most excited about for the future, but I would say that I'm most proud of our leadership at our school led by our dean really embracing the recommendations of the National Task Force report and developing the opportunity to come into all of our upper level professional responsibility courses which are the only courses that are required after the first year of law school. So it's the only course where we will reach every student before they graduate outside of what is a very challenging and jampacked first year curriculum and talk to the students about these issues and talk to them about what the task force revealed, the current state of the research, some of the potential causes for the challenges we see in the legal profession, why those challenges relate to the provision of legal services. JENNIFER: One thing that I've learned in doing this programming over the years to the great credit of the students is sometimes they don't want to focus as much on these issues just for their own benefit. And even though there are great benefits to doing that, what they really want to know is what does this have to do with being a lawyer? How does this impact my lawyering and my clients? And our solution to that was really to talk to them about exactly that. How does this impact the provision of service to your clients? How can you give the best legal counsel you're capable of if you're not well? How are the ways that we can elevate our well-being? And bringing in experts, I am not a mental health expert, I have the experience of being somebody who was challenged with these issues, but we bring in voices from the mental health community who are trained professionals to talk with the students about some of the challenges that professionals face. JENNIFER: And so I have been the most proud to work with my colleague John Hollway as well to deliver those lessons and guide those discussions in our professional responsibility courses. I'll also say that I was most excited, our dean offered the opportunity to all of the faculty who teach professional responsibility in the upper levels, this is not a mandate by any stretch of the imagination, it was just a chance for them to do it if they wanted. Every single professional responsibility faculty member welcomed us in, has repeatedly welcomed us to come back, and they were really excited to see the law school doing this. So that is what I would say I'm most proud of to date, and again, with my colleagues developing this. JENNIFER: What I'm most proud of in the future is moving into the next phase of that conversation and having a more unified discussion between law schools and legal employers and law firms so that we're not having one conversation at the law school level and helping students develop responsive coping behaviors to respond to stress that work in a law school environment but maybe don't work in practice to thinking about the environments and the systems within which we practice and seeing how we can transform those environments so that it's a shared responsibility between schools and employers and individual students and lawyers to really lift all boats and be sure that we can practice at the highest level. So that is the next phase of our work and we're actively thinking about how we can do that in the best possible way. CHRIS: Yeah. There's no doubt that the work that you are doing and, again, lots of folks in law schools are doing, if we prepare them for a profession that ultimately is very different than what we just did to create those senses of what practicing law's going to be like and if it's very different there's going to be a disconnect, as you mentioned. JENNIFER: Exactly. And we want to teach them skills that they're able to deploy over their entire career, not just skills that will work for the next year or two. How can we bring in more collaborative partners from practice so that we're bridging that gap, bridging that divide more? And how are we thinking about redeveloping systems so that people can have more balance in their life and really be healthier, happier lawyers who are better serving their clients? CHRIS: Yeah. JENNIFER: It's a huge task but one that- CHRIS: It is a huge task and maybe we can come back and touch on this coming back from the break. It feels like to be able to do that, you're going to have to bring those thought leaders in the legal environments into the law school though, almost have them go through their own reflection points about how they think about culture and how they value the attorneys within the firm from a well-being perspective. JENNIFER: And I think that's where we have the real ability to do that is our convening ability and we can do that and we can also bring in our colleagues from Penn Medicine and Penn Engineering. And what are their students and professionals experiencing? And then some of our psychology partners across campus to come in and talk about the complex interplay among professional satisfaction, finance, and some of these mental health conditions that elite professionals experience and how can we work together to come up with some new solutions to the problems. And I think that a law school is the perfect place to do that. CHRIS: Yeah. JENNIFER: And I would love to involve the students because I think that they would be really interested in having the conversation as well and having some agency and some involvement in driving that change. BREE: No doubt. CHRIS: Yeah. So let's take a quick break here because, again, I think we're getting into the meat and potatoes, so to speak, of what you're working to do and why it's going to be, I think, so important in terms of the future of our professionals. Let's take a short break. JENNIFER: Sounds great.   — Advertisement: Meet Vera, your firm's virtual ethics risk assessment guide developed by ALPS. Vera's purpose is to help you uncover risk management blind spots from client intake to calendaring to cyber security and more. Vera: I require only your honest input to my short series of questions. I will offer you a summary of recommendations to provide course corrections if needed and to keep your firm on the right path.   Generous and discreet, Vera is a free and anonymous risk management guide from ALPS to help firms like yours be their best. Visit Vera at https://www.alpsinsurance.com/vera. — BREE: So welcome back, everybody. And we have with us today Jen Leonard who is one of the, I'll say, one of the leading thought leaders around well-being for law students. She is joining us today from Penn Law. And continue in the conversation, Jenn, I think what I'd really like for us to talk about now is focus in on what advice you can give to our listeners out there who are with a law school who are thinking about how to implement some programs, maybe something you've mentioned, something that they have decided they want to pursue on their own. And one of the biggest things within a large school is to get buy in from leadership and I heard you say earlier on that you do have buy in from your top leadership. How did that happen with the administration? And how did you get buy in from the faculty? JENNIFER: So amazing question. Yes. I would say the biggest driver of our success is really the leadership of our dean who is very interested in these topics and interested in supporting our students in developing into the best attorneys they can be. And I can't overstate how much that matters. Our faculty, I would say, are similarly supportive and the culture at our school is, we joke that people talk about it as a collegial culture all the time, but it really is this Quaker-based culture of collegiality and collaboration. So I feel very, very fortunate and maybe uniquely situated as compared with some of your listeners who might be trying to build these programs at other schools. JENNIFER: But what I would say is even if you don't have those conditions, I would not be discouraged. What I would do is I would be strategic. If you want to start well-being initiatives at your own law school, I would say start small and find the people who will be the cheerleaders for you who have voices that people will listen to. One group of voices that are really compelling to faculty and administrators alike are students. So if you have students coming to you who are interested in these topics, and as I said, I think students coming into law school now are so much more well-versed in these issues from their undergrad and other experiences that the movement is growing even among students. So being able to channel those voices and respond to them as an administration is really important. If you can find a faculty member who is really interested or who has had experience with students in their classes who have been challenged around some of these issues and would like to help you build a program, that's fantastic. JENNIFER: But you can build co curricular offerings, I would say that's the best way to start is to offer programs, maybe a brown bag lunch from students at lunchtime, bring in some alumni who are interested in this. I find in my experience that alumni who are practicing law and who are experiencing the stresses of practicing law are really, really interested in reaching back and supporting new law students and they're also really well-respected among the student body. And it also doesn't cost a lot of money usually to bring in an alum to have lunch with students and especially now that we do so many things on Zoom, have some of your alumni Zoom in and talk about things they wish they'd known when they were law students and how they've grown over time. As I said, it doesn't have to be expensive. But if you start small and you're willing to learn and you're willing to get feedback from students on how to improve and iterate the programming over time, then you can start building from there. CHRIS: Jen, it feels like what you're also inferring, correct me if I'm misstating it, is that you are in your effort to nurture the culture within the law school itself, there certainly is a student centric approach to that and just trying to understand where they're at, why they're there, again, how we can assist them on the journey, not just from a law knowledge perspective but also the mental approach to preparing them to become a lawyer down the road? JENNIFER: That's absolutely right. And I love that you say a student centric approach. In our sort of general innovation programming outside of well-being, we're really focused on human centered design. So if you apply that lens to the law student experience, what are we as administrators providing to our students and what is that provision of education and experience like from their perspective? And the way to do that is to really have conversations with student groups, maybe you have a student group in your building that you don't even know about that is focused on well-being. We have a wellness committee of students who are interested in these topics, so meeting with them and learning about what they would find really helpful and building support from there, I would say. Bringing the student voice in is critical though. CHRIS: Yeah. And I know, again, I graduated from a law school class that had 75 students which is significantly less than your incoming classes. And it certainly feels like the faster that you create communities of students together or feeling that you can find people that you can relate to within the law school environment, the more that you got people that just feel more comfortable, avoid the imposter syndrome, and then hopefully we're preparing them for an opportunity to prosper as they go through the law school journey. JENNIFER: That's right. And I think also one other tip could be maybe if you feel that the environment's not receptive to well-being programming or you're having trouble gaining traction, there are programs that you can create that are not explicitly well-being programs but that have the corollary benefit of creating enhanced well-being in your institution. And those programs can be about team building and collaboration and legal practice skills and how those interpersonal impact skills are really being deployed in practice. And they have the benefit of building community among the students, as my colleague John talks about it. He talks about it like fluoride in the water, that you don't really know that it's there but in the end it has the impact of building a healthier environment around you. BREE: Let's talk about getting to the nitty gritty, which is the cost of some of these programs which could be another barrier for somebody to implement. What is, I guess, the fiscal impact of the programs that you put together? And do you have any suggestions for people about that? JENNIFER: I would say that most of the programming we have done costs virtually nothing to do aside from maybe the cost of providing lunch, if you're providing lunch to your students. Having alumni come in and do a panel discussion about some of these issues, if you're at a law school that's connected with a broader university that has a counseling and psychological services group where you can have trained mental health professionals come in and have a conversation with students will cost nothing. Even the professional responsibility module we built out costs nothing to do, other than the energy investment in building the program and engaging our professors and getting their buy in. It is a lot of sweat equity that you will put into these programs but the actual cost of running them is minimal, I would say. JENNIFER: So I would say no matter what your law school's budget is, not to be deterred around having these conversations of building a community that is supportive of them. CHRIS: Bree knows that one of the, I sit in a management role at an insurance company, so we're always data geeks about trying to figure out how do we measure success. And again, the well-being space is such an interesting one in terms of how do you know that you're, so to speak, advancing the ball? How do you feel like you're making an impact in terms of, again, preparing students for the practice of law? And as you think about your work on a day-to-day basis, are there certain metrics that you look at or is it a little bit more instinctual and you just know that you're making an impact but in small and significant ways? JENNIFER: Yeah. I would say our return on investment are the qualitative reports that we have from students and alumni versus more hard data. We've certainly used research from other places to guide our efforts so some of the research that Sheldon and [Krieger 00:34:20] have done about the shift from intrinsic motivation to extrinsic motivation in the first year we fold into our conversations with students. But in terms of measuring outcomes, I think professional skill development is notoriously difficult to measure impact around but I talk with alumni who are five or six years now who seem to me to be very healthy and happy and thriving and really happy with their law school experience because of the community, and it's not because of the well-being programs in particular, but because of the community that we've been able to cultivate here and the support that we provide to our students. JENNIFER: And we take a tremendous amount of feedback and we have been careful about measuring the feedback from students in the PR modules and finding ways to pivot and iterate and adjust to student feedback. And one of the pieces of feedback that I referenced earlier or the place where we want to move next is thinking about these systems. So students are curious about how our environment's adapting to the research that people in the profession are doing around some of these challenges and how can we be a part of that as well. So it's more qualitative admittedly than quantitative but it's certainly I can feel a shift. I know that it's a different environment from when I was a student there and I can only say from the students to whom I have said, "You are not alone in this," those of us in the building have experienced this that the look of relief and sometimes surprise is really significant feedback to me. BREE: Yeah. Jen, just before we wrap up I just have to acknowledge the time we're in and the context of this podcast which is coming up on a year and a half in the pandemic. So can you talk a little bit about the impact of that on your student body and what you guys at Penn Law have done to address that? JENNIFER: So what I can talk about, Bree, is how we adapted the module that we present to the students and the professional responsibility course. We adapted it pretty significantly over the last year and a half in response to all of the things that happened in 2020, the pandemic, the dislocation, the disconnection in our communities, the social uprising around racial injustice across the globe, the political polarization that we're all experiencing. It's been a lot to process and then to sit and talk with law students about their well-being, the conversation had to be different than the conversation we were having with them in December of 2019. BREE: Absolutely. JENNIFER: Some of the adjustments that we made were bringing in more voices from our counseling and psychological services offices, particularly counselors that are trained on racial identity coming in to talk with students about the experience of being historically under represented person or group in a majority institution at a time when we're going through everything that we're going through. So we brought in that element to our conversations. JENNIFER: We also brought in junior alumni who are in practice to share some of their experiences on the ground, which was a response to student feedback that they really wanted to hear from our recent graduates about specifically some of the things that they're dealing with in practice and how they're responding to them. We talked a lot about toxic positivity. So there have been articles about the idea that telling people they should be adopting positive mindsets in the face of everything that's happening is not helpful and that it's okay right now not to feel okay. And I would say that our approach really was much more student led this year. We really wanted to hear from students how they were responding to the stressful conditions, what had been helpful to them, what were their anxieties and concerns, and then having a trained mental health professional in the room with us to respond to that, and also some people who were dealing with the issues in practice. It was a much more team-oriented approach I think to having these conversations. And I hope it was a more supportive experience for the students and gave them the opportunity to process some of the things they were dealing with. CHRIS: Jen, I want to ask maybe one more question. I have to imagine that as you've visualized where a student starts and where a student walks across the podium and receives that diploma is a journey in the law school. When you look at that journey, are you visualizing what does first year look like, what does second year look like, what does third year look like from a wellness perspective and how you're trying to nurture that as a complement to the curriculum? JENNIFER: Yeah. I think as the programming has evolved, we have definitely adjusted the programming to be more developmentally appropriate depending on the level of experience of the student. So to your point, there are very specific times during the first year of law school that are different in nature than the stressors that our second and third-year students face. So thinking about how stressful it is about a month in advance of your first set of law school exams and how are we helping students feel supported there versus when they're getting close to practice and we're having more contextualized conversations about the rigors of practice itself and some of the stressors that they face in client representation. And that was how we evolved into having a more upper level approach that is also combined with our still ongoing and fantastic professionalism program that is offered in the first year which is co curricular. JENNIFER: So we have been thoughtful about adjusting depending on where the student is. I would say another hallmark of our dean's leadership and our current approach to legal education is really taking a lifelong view of the formation of a lawyer. So you referenced the podium which is a perfect visual, Chris, for thinking about where you are at that point and what is to come and how we as a law school can continue to be your partner. And we've done alumni programming on attorney well-being that is a more advanced version of the PR module that we do and the reception to that is different because, of course, our alumni are actually in practice and have different contexts than our students have. And we have even deeper conversations with them about what it's like to be in practice and what some of the well-being challenges are there. JENNIFER: So we are definitely taking a, no pun intended, a graduated approach to the way that we talk with students about well-being. And I would also say too, I wanted to go back to the question about tips for people developing these programs in their schools. I would say too if the sense is or if you anticipate pushback being that it's too warm and fuzzy or it's diluting the rigor of the program, something to that effect. What I would say is that when I think about the way that we're supporting students, it should be a really intense physical workout. You don't want somebody who's leading a really rigorous exercise session to go easy on you because at the end you're not going to feel like you grew at all. What you do want is a coach to help you work through the really tough parts which is where the transformation happens and I think the analogy works for lawyer formation. JENNIFER: There are really, really tough parts where as a student I didn't feel that supported and I felt very alone. And I think I probably did not push through and grow in the way that I could have had I had a bit more coaching and get more support and that's how I think about the service that we're providing by implementing well-being programming along the way. CHRIS: Yeah. And I think it's interesting that the firms that are likely hiring your students are also now talking a little bit more about the wellness components associated with, in the talent acquisition process. And I'm wondering whether you're doing something similar. You're a highly-respected law school, whether your commitment to this particular issue of well-being and wellness of the student body as part of the experience is also coming into play as you think about the recruitment and the admissions process. JENNIFER: I haven't actively thought about how it would be appealing to applicants to law school. I think as a school, again, our collegial nature is our hallmark and what we think makes us a very strong community where ideally people would want to come and learn. But I think you're right in the sense that increasingly students and aspiring professionals are looking to be in environments where they can grow and learn and be tested and challenged but also supported and develop really strong connections along the way and feel great about what they're doing. And so to the extent that that is a secondary benefit, that's fantastic. I think savvy legal employers are thinking about how to better support their attorneys so that they are not losing that talent. JENNIFER: I think one of the really undesirable outcomes of our failure to pay attention to these issues for so long is the hemorrhaging of enormous amounts of talent from the profession. BREE: Absolutely. JENNIFER: And imagine what we can accomplish together if we just adjusted and had deeper conversations and develop new solutions so that we keep all that brilliant talent working to support the health of society. BREE: Wow. CHRIS: What a great way to end the podcast. I think that's exactly right and indicative, Jen, of again why we see you and your experience at Penn Law as being so much a part of, again, realizing the potential of our profession and how important it is that we focus on these particular areas. Any closing comments, Jen, before we close it out? JENNIFER: Thank you so much for having me on. And again, I really just want to give credit to the entire Penn Law community, alumni, students, colleagues, faculty, staff, administration. This is a team effort and I have the honor of being a spokesperson today but it is far from a solo mission. CHRIS: Well Jen, we certainly are very thankful and grateful for all of your contributions and, again, I think there's a lot of takeaways in your experience at Penn Law that I think can really have ... If our goal ultimately is to engineer a culture shift in the profession, it starts with individuals like you and we thank you so much for your work and your leadership. BREE: We have much to learn. JENNIFER: Thank you so much. BREE: Yeah. JENNIFER: Thank you both so much for what you do to drive this conversation and lead thoughts and conversations like this. So grateful. CHRIS: Yeah. That was Jennifer Leonard of Penn Law School. And again, we'll be back in a couple weeks with Janet Stearns of the Miami School of Law as we continue and close out our law school focus. Thanks for joining us and we'll see you in a couple weeks.

For those who went to law school, do you remember that class we all took on creativity in the legal work environment? No? We don't remember it either. That's why Adam Tsao decided to write The Creativity Playbook for Lawyers: Strategies for the Business of Legal Practice. Adam sits down with us and discusses how he integrated creativity into his own legal education at Penn Law School, as well as his legal work at Skadden and Covington before starting his own business, At Philosophy. He stresses that creativity is a vital process in a person's legal career, and why we each need our own playbook to help us build creative processes into our professional activities. Adam also co-hosts a non-legal podcast on creativity called Double Agent. Information Inspirations Baseball season is upon us. If you are a fan, you most likely have a favorite team. Darren Siegle from Specops Software reminds us that it is okay to root for the home team, just don't use them as your password. While law librarians can take a joke as much as the next profession (maybe even more), a recent American Lawyer article that runs comparisons between lawyer's spouses, kids, and pets to secretaries and law librarians didn't land well with Greg. Legal reporters seem to lack an understanding of what amazing benefits law librarians brought to their firms during COVID. We take the time to educate them. It seems that the law firm librarians aren't the only ones taking a hit from the press. The latest US News Law School rankings admitted to some flaws in its initial numbers for this year in how it measured law library metrics. In a portion of the ranking that only made up .25%, the change in the statistics caused nine schools to have their rankings altered. While officially, Womens' History Month came to a close yesterday, it's always a good time to honor women in the legal industry, and we bring you a couple of good podcasts that do just that. Véronique Goy Veenhuys on EQUAL-SALARY and Gender Equalit‪y‬ Stolen: The Search for Jermain Listen, Subscribe, Comment Please take the time to rate and review us on Apple Podcast. Contact us anytime by tweeting us at @gebauerm or @glambert. Or, you can call The Geek in Review hotline at 713-487-7270 and leave us a message. You can email us at geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com. As always, the great music you hear on the podcast is from Jerry David DeCicca.

In this episode of Partnering Leadership, Mahan Tavakoli speaks with David Rutstein, former general counsel at Giant Food. David shares inspiring stories in his journey, what an ‘Ethical Will’ is, his 10 principles for leadership, and most important of all—how to lead with integrity and have an impact in the community.Some highlights:David Rutstein shares how his grandparents’ community leadership inspires how he leads and mentors younger peopleHow getting rejected at Penn Law School led him to the Greater Washington DC DMV Region David’s 5 impactful objectives in his retirementWhat an ‘Ethical Will’ is and why it’s so importantHow persistence helped David in battling health issuesDavid Rutstein’s 10 principles for leadershipAlso mentioned in this episode:Raymond R. Dickey, former senior partner at Danzansky, Dickey, Tydings, Quint and GordonGeorge Bloom, head of the public utilities commission in PennsylvaniaEdward Friedman, Solicitor GeneralIsrael “Izzy” Cohen, former chairman of Giant Food and Supermarketing PioneerDavid Rubenstein, co-Founder of the Carlyle Group and author of How to LeadConnect with Mahan Tavakoli:MahanTavakoli.comMore information and resources available at the Partnering Leadership Podcast website: PartneringLeadership.com

Jesse's work as AGMA union rep for Colorado Ballet led him to the legal profession when the time was right to transition away from dance. He applied successfully to Penn Law School and returned to Colorado after graduation. He recently began a sought-after clerkship for the Colorado Supreme Court, and he has mentored other dancers through their law school applications. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/count9/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/count9/support

This Episode of Flashback Friday was originally published on March 8, 2012 Whether you’re trying to get a raise at your job, solve a relationship problem, or deal with a stubborn child, negotiating is a daily part of our lives, and every human interaction is affected by emotion and logic or rationalization. Jason Hartman interviews Stuart Diamond, the author of "Getting More: How to Negotiate to Achieve Your Goals in the Real World" on improving negotiating skills and interactions with others in order to “get more.” Stuart stresses the importance of making the human connection and finding the pictures in people’s heads, knowing them better in order to better meet their needs, which gives a person a more competitive edge and adds tremendous wealth to any deal. Emotions play a huge part in all interactions. “Emotions destroy negotiations because they distract people from their goals,” says Stuart. When people get emotional, they stop listening, and it becomes a priority to find out a person’s emotional temperature before proceeding on any deal. Stuart talks about key points in how people should treat one another, stating how people today have a lack of trust in one another and have a tendency to demonize one another rather than using simple solutions to solve conflicts. “Fighting is the last choice; not the first choice,” explains Stuart. Stuart Diamond has taught and advised on negotiation and cultural diversity to corporate and government leaders in more than 40 countries, including in Eastern Europe, former Soviet Republics, China, Latin America, the Middle East, Canada, South Africa and the United States. He holds an M.B.A. with honors from Wharton Business School, ranked #1 globally by The Financial Times where he is currently a professor from practice. For more than 90% of the semesters over the past 15 years his negotiation course has been the most popular in the school based on the course auction, and he has won multiple teaching awards. He has taught negotiation at Harvard Law School, from which he holds a law degree and is a former Associate Director of the Harvard Negotiation Project. He has directed a negotiation consulting firm in Cambridge, MA. Mr. Diamond is president of Global Strategy Group, which advises companies and governments on negotiating foreign investment and devising strategies, structures and marketing to compete effectively on an international scale: essentially the skills of planning and persuasion. He advises senior corporate and government officials on building internal coalitions and harmony to be more effective and competitive in an environment of constant change. He has analyzed competitive and persuasive strategies for organizations as different as Merck, Citibank, General Electric, BASF, Prudential, the Government of Colombia, a $16 billion petrochemical company in China and scientists in Ukraine. He advises U.S. and foreign companies on developing more effective communications and media relations, strategic focus, problem-solving, creative options, and persuading vendors and customers. He is an expert in cross-cultural negotiation and has advised on the subject to executives of some of the world's leading companies. He has consulted extensively for the United Nations. In a prior career Mr. Diamond, who also holds a B.A. in English from Rutgers University, was a journalist. He wrote extensively, including at Newsday and The New York Times, where he won the Pulitzer Prize as a part of a team investigating the crash of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986. He covered many major crises including the Bhopal chemical leak in India, the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in Pennsylvania and the Chernobyl nuclear accident in the former Soviet Union. He has written two books, two documentary films and more than 2,000 published articles, dozens on page one of The New York Times. He has appeared on Today and Good Morning America and lectured widely about the problems and prospects of emerging markets, and international business challenges in an environment of change. His new book on negotiation,Getting More, was published by Random House in December 2010, and became a New York Times Bestseller in January 2011. Mr. Diamond was an executive of a Wall Street energy futures brokerage firm, for which he negotiated a multimillion dollar sale. He has worked at the law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell and the investment bank of Morgan Stanley. He founded or directed entrepreneurial ventures in medical services and wireless technologies. He has advised on environmental regulations, privatization and intellectual property protection in emerging markets from Chile to Kuwait. He advised the President's office in Bolivia, Colombia and Nicaragua. He persuaded 3,000 people in the jungles of Bolivia to stop growing illicit coca and to start growing bananas exported to Argentina. He advises a variety of high technology companies and in 2000 played a lead role in putting together a $300 million merger of two high-tech companies that had been on the verge of litigation. He became the first chairman of the merged companies, Summus, Inc., listed on OTC. In 2004 he represented the borrower in completing the largest foreign-sourced commercial financing in the history of Ukraine, a $107.5 million Eurobond issue to finance commercial space ventures. In June, 2005, he became Chairman and CEO of Four Star Aviation of St. Thomas, in which he is a 50% owner. In 2006 he represented The N.Y Commodities Exchange in the successful negotiation of electronic trading rights with the N.Y. Mercantile Exchange. In 2008, he provided the process that enabled the Writer's Guild to settle their strike with the studios in Hollywood. Diamond has taught negotiation at the business schools of Columbia, NYU, USC, UCal/Berkeley, and at Oxford and Penn Law School, where he is an Adjunct Professor. Participants have included managers and executives from 51 of the Global 100 companies and 124 of the Global 500, including IBM, Microsoft, JP Morgan, Exxon, Honda, Hewlett Packard, Yahoo, G.E., Lucent, Japan Airlines, SAP, Prudential, and leaders from a broad range of disciplines, including medicine, law, high technology, manufacturing, energy, chemicals, politics, information, biotechnology, sales, mergers & acquisitions. He has taught extensively in executive programs at Wharton and elsewhere to very high ratings. LIVESTREAM: Sunday Morning, Coffee Tok (Talk) 11 AM EDT facebook.com/JasonHartman.com Meet The Masters Virtual: July 31 – August 2 JasonHartman.com/Masters  Guests: Ken McElroy, Sharon Lechter, Harry Dent, George Gammon, Sean Carroll Websites:  JasonHartman.com/Asset JasonHartman.com/Webinar www.JasonHartman.com www.JasonHartman.com/properties Jason Hartman Quick Start Jason Hartman PropertyCast (Libsyn) Jason Hartman PropertyCast (iTunes) 1-800-HARTMAN

We're back with another episode of the #SquarePizzaPodcast. Today we're in conversation with Aaron Walker, the Founder, and CEO of Camelback Ventures, an accelerator that develops early-stage, underrepresented entrepreneurs. In this episode we talk:Sneaker culture and styleAaron's path to founding Camelbackand the open letter he penned on racism in philanthropy, Read it hereMore about Aaron:Aaron Walker is Founder and CEO of Camelback Ventures, works to identify, develop and promote early-stage untapped entrepreneurs with an aim to improve education and eventually close the generational wealth gap. Aaron is on a journey to live in the spirit of his baseball hero, Jackie Robinson, who said “a life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.” With this ethos, Aaron taught ninth grade English in West Philadelphia, put together deals for companies large and small as a lawyer, and supported new ideas to improve education as a portfolio director for the NYC Fund for Public Schools. Aaron is humbled to say that he graduated from the University of Virginia and Penn Law School. He also knows that this doesn’t entitle him to anything and is ready to earn his keep.Support the show (http://Scherm.co)

Interview with Kara Keenan Sweeney, Director of Admissions, Marketing, and Financial Aid at the Lauder Institute [Show Summary] Kara Keenan Sweeney, Director of Admissions, Marketing, and Financial Aid at the Lauder Institute, takes us through the Lauder program: what is it, who it is a good fit for and who it’s not, and how to get in. Learn what makes Wharton Lauder unique, and how applicants can distinguish themselves in their applications [Show Notes] It gives me great pleasure to introduce Kara Keenan Sweeney, Director of Admissions, Marketing and Financial Aid at the Lauder Institute at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and Penn Law School. Kara has an extensive background in graduate admissions, starting with her masters in higher ed administration at Columbia. And moving on to admissions positions at INSEAD, U Penn, Penn State, and now at The Lauder Institute. Can you give an overview of the Wharton Lauder Program? There may be some listeners who aren’t that familiar with the program. [1:56] Our students earn a Master of Arts in International Studies at the same time they do the Wharton MBA program. It is a two-year, joint, integrated program, and all of the classes are taken at the Lauder Institute. The Institute was founded in 1985 by the family of Estee Lauder, and they have been very involved in the planning and execution of the program. We have six programs of concentration. Five of the concentrations are focused on a region of the world – they are East/Southeast Asia, Latin America, Europe, Africa and the Middle East. We also have a global track for those who already have significant international experience and are looking for a more macro take on global issues. There is no language requirement while in the program because they have to have those skills before being admitted. Students do both programs simultaneously, and we frontload a little bit with students starting in May. There are 70 students in each class, and they take a month of classes in Philadelphia and then do an eight-week summer immersion, so they have three months of class under their belts before the MBA program starts. Wharton Lauder has a new director Dr. Martine Haas. I realize that she just started in July, but any idea of the direction that she’d like to take the program? [5:32] She brings a lot of energy, and it’s great to have someone new as well as the first woman lead the institute. She is from South Africa, studied in the U.K., and has been teaching at Wharton for the last several years so she already knows a lot about our program. She continues to learn more about our program through our students, alumni, and board, and is very happy to help shape the vision for the next five years. What else is new at Wharton Lauder since we last spoke two years ago? [6:22] We changed the curriculum a few years ago from strict language-focused classes to a concentration focus. Those changes have been going very well with the new regional focus. We’ve added Korean as a language to our Asian track, and we also restarted our Anglophone Africa program this year. We’ve hired three new faculty members, one of whom oversees the Africa program right now. Another covers the Global Knowledge Lab. We also in the last month had a new fellow join the program, Professor Mohamed El-Erian, professor of practice at Wharton and Lauder, and it’s an amazing experience for the students to work with him. The students are required to go on two trips as part of Lauder Integral Ventures. We have nine trips available – Botswana, Myanmar and Tahiti, Cuba, Denmark, Estonia, Yugoslavia, Israel, Mongolia. Students spend a week in one of these regions with a faculty member, study a topic, and then write a paper. Can you describe the critical elements of the Wharton MBA and Lauder application? [11:10] They complete the Wharton application as traditional MBA applicant would, and embedded into it is the Lauder application as well.

Hosted by Columbia University School of Professional Studies Dean, Jason Wingard, Talks@Columbia and the Learn For Life podcast presents timely thought leadership on crucial issues facing academia and industry today. Scott Rosner Professor of Professional Practice; Academic Director, M.S. in Sports Management Program, School of Professional Studies As Academic Director of the Master of Science in Sports Management program, Scott Rosner leads all programmatic and curricular development efforts, creates professional development opportunities for students, and manages all strategic planning efforts for the program, including marketing, enrollment, student life, and alumni affairs. Rosner is also a Professor of Professional Practice, teaching graduate-level courses in the discipline of Sports Management. https://sps.columbia.edu/academics/masters/sports-management Prior to joining the faculty at Columbia in January 2018, Rosner was a Practice Professor in the Legal Studies and Business Ethics Department at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and the Faculty Associate Director of the Wharton Sports Business Initiative. He taught courses in Sports Business Management and Negotiation and Dispute Resolution to undergraduate and MBA students, and taught Sports Law at both Wharton and Penn Law School. He was a five-time recipient of the prestigious Whitney Award for excellence in undergraduate teaching (2006, 2009, 2013, 2014, and 2017). He has been the co-host of the Wharton Sports Business Show, a weekly look at the business of sports on SiriusXM’s Business Radio (channel 111), which has been heard on Tuesdays from 4–5 p.m. (Eastern) since its debut in January 2014. Rosner was also the Academic Director of the Wharton Sports Business Academy, a summer program for rising high school juniors and seniors. Prior to being promoted to the rank of Practice Professor in July 2016, he was a Practice Associate Professor from July 2013–June 2016, a Practice Assistant Professor from July 2010–June 2013 and a full-time Lecturer in the same department from July 2002–June 2010. He served as the Faculty Associate Director of the Wharton Sports Business Initiative since its inception in 2004 and served as the Faculty Mentor to the University of Pennsylvania’s men’s basketball team from 2003–2008. Rosner has led consulting projects with a variety of clients both in his role as a faculty member leading student project teams and as the Principal of Hudson Sports Consulting, a sports advisory firm that provides a wide range of services in the business and legal aspects of the sports industry. Clients include: Philadelphia Phillies, PGA Tour, Soccer Without Borders, Adidas, Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment, the National Football League (multiple engagements), Major League Baseball (multiple engagements), Northwestern University, the Philadelphia 76ers (multiple engagements), the Detroit Pistons, the United States Tennis Association, Madison Square Garden Sports, the Philadelphia Eagles (multiple engagements), the New York Jets (multiple engagements), FedEx, AT&T (multiple engagements), New York Road Runners, Philadelphia Sports Congress, Red Bull, the Philadelphia Union (MLS) (multiple engagements), AVP Tour, AOL Sports, NBA Developmental League, Sports Capital Partners (Real Salt Lake), USA Football, Cloud 9 Skiing, San Diego State University, and The Sacks Group.

What happens when religious liberty collides with anti-discrimination laws protecting LGBTQ people or other minorities? Scholars and advocates from all sides of the debate join host Jeffrey Rosen for a civil dialogue to address this question head on. Jeff sits down with advocates who have represented both sides in legal cases about this issue: Matt Sharp of the Alliance Defending Freedom, who represented the baker refusing to create a cake for a same sex wedding in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, and Tobias Wolff of Penn Law School, who has represented gay couples who have been denied similar services. Also on the panel were religion and constitutional law scholars Robin Fretwell Wilson of the Illinois College of Law and Elizabeth Clark of Brigham Young University Law School. Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. 

Jill Fisch, Business Law Professor at the University of Penn Law School, discusses the legality surrounding Elon Musk's tweets regarding a potential buyout. Robert Lawrence, Professor of International Trade and Investment at the Harvard Kennedy School and former economic advisor to Clinton, on the deal that Trump really wants with China. Brendan Ahern, Chief Investment Officer of KraneShares, discusses Tencent earnings and the China tech sector. Jonathan Tyce, Senior Banks Analyst for Bloomberg Intelligence, on Turkish banks, new restrictions on shorting the lira, and which foreign banks have the most exposure.

John Elwood, Leah Litman, and Christopher Yoo, three of Anthony Kennedy’s former clerks, join We The People to discuss the Justice’s Supreme Court legacy. John Elwood is a partner at Vinson & Elkins law firm, teaches at the University of Virginia School of Law’s Supreme Court litigation clinic, and is a contributor to SCOTUSblog. He clerked for Justice Kennedy from 1996–1997. Leah Litman is assistant professor of law at the University of California, Irvine Law School. She is a guest host of the First Mondays Supreme Court podcast and blogs at the Take Care blog. She clerked for Justice Kennedy from 2011-2012. Christopher Yoo is John H. Chestnut Professor of Law, Communication, and Computer & Information Science; director, Center for Technology, Innovation & Competition at Penn Law School. He clerked for Justice Kennedy from 1997-1998. Questions or comments? We would love to hear from you. Contact the We the People team at podcast@constitutioncenter.org The National Constitution Center is offering CLE credits for select America’s Town Hall programs! Get more information at constitutioncenter.org/CLE. 

Part Two: Hosted by the Penn Law School, Cynthia Estland, from New York University Law, discusses the integral relation unions and worker's voice play in the modern corporate terrain. Part Two contains the Q&A session following the speaker and discussant.

Part One: Hosted by the Penn Law School, Cynthia Estland, from New York University Law, discusses the integral relation unions and worker's voice play in the modern corporate terrain.

If you experience any technical difficulties with this video or would like to make an accessibility-related request, please send a message to digicomm@uchicago.edu. The University of Chicago Law School is proud to welcome Professor Sarah Barringer Gordon of Penn Law School for the 2010 Fulton Lecture in Legal History.Professor Gordon's lecture, entitled "The Spirit of the Law: Separation of Church and State from 1945-1990," will touch on the same themes explored in her book The Spirit of the Law, published this year by Harvard University Press.

If you experience any technical difficulties with this video or would like to make an accessibility-related request, please send a message to digicomm@uchicago.edu. The University of Chicago Law School is proud to welcome Professor Sarah Barringer Gordon of Penn Law School for the 2010 Fulton Lecture in Legal History.Professor Gordon's lecture, entitled "The Spirit of the Law: Separation of Church and State from 1945-1990," will touch on the same themes explored in her book The Spirit of the Law, published this year by Harvard University Press.