Podcasts about pennsylvania carey law school

Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast "Strict Scrutiny," and a contributing opinion Writer with The New York Times, offers legal analysis of how the Supreme Court is acting as a check on the president so far (or not), including the Court's recent decisions allowing the Trump administration to continue deporting Venezuelan migrants using a centuries-old law, and other related cases.

Today, we'll hear about the Supreme Court's recent decisions about certain Trump administration policies, and what it means for democracy.On Today's Show:Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, and a contributing opinion writer with the New York Times, offers legal analysis of how the Supreme Court is acting as a check on the president so far (or not).

Tamany is a University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Graduate and works as the Founding Partner of California IP Law. Tamany's journey is far from typical, graduating college with a degree in Biology, but after an experience in Washington DC, Tamany would switch course to the Law route, leading to a career full of success! Tamany and I start prior to her introduction to Pennsylvania Carey Law School, where she would delve into her story, going from the doctor route to the Law route. When she finally arrived at Pennsylvania Carey Law School, her first year of law school was as good as it gets, only focusing on school for the first time in her life and getting to experience a completely different experience from what she was used to. Throughout her time at Law School, Tamany would talk about the various experiences she had, landing on Patent and Intellectual Property Law, and her love and immense ability with Civil Procedure, to guide her future career decisions. Following that, Tamany would talk about her journey to the various major positions she has held, as well as speaking on other lawyers she had met throughout her time who didn't come from the top law schools but hustled and had an extreme level of care for what they were doing. Her advice was to be like them and take every day in law as another day to make an impact in the world. Finally, we would discuss what Tamany does today as the founding partner of her firm, California IP Law. Tamany discussed her experience opening her firm and the successes and struggles that came with it. In the end, Tamany's high-level experience in the Law offers insights of extreme value for all my friends out there. You don't want to miss this one! Tamany's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tamanyvinsonbentzCalifornia IP Law: http://www.caiplawyer.com/Tamany's TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tamanyvinsonbentzBe sure to check out the Official Sponsors for the Lawyers in the Making Podcast:Rhetoric - takes user briefs and motions and compares them against the text of opinions written by judges to identify ways to tailor their arguments to better persuade the judges handling their cases. Rhetoric's focus is on persuasion and helps users find new ways to improve their odds of success through more persuasive arguments. Find them here: userhetoric.comThe Law School Operating System™ Recorded Course - This course is for ambitious law students who want a proven, simple system to learn every topic in their classes to excel in class and on exams. Go to www.lisablasser.com, check out the student tab with course offerings, and use code LSOSNATE10 at checkout for 10% off Lisa's recorded course!Start LSAT - Founded by former guest and 21-year-old super-star, Alden Spratt, Start LSAT was built upon breaking down barriers, allowing anyone access to high-quality LSAT Prep. For $110 you get yourself the Start LSAT self-paced course, and using code LITM10 you get 10% off the self-paced course! Check out Alden and Start LSAT at startlsat.com and use code LITM10 for 10% off the self-paced course!Lawyers in the Making Podcast is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Lawyers in the Making Podcast at lawyersinthemaking.substack.com/subscribe

The Author Events Series presents Chris Hayes | The Sirens' Call REGISTER  In Conversation with Kate Shaw We all feel it--the distraction, the loss of focus, the addictive focus on the wrong things for too long. We bump into the zombies on their phones in the street, and sometimes they're us. We stare in pity at the four people at the table in the restaurant, all on their phones, and then we feel the buzz in our pocket. Something has changed utterly: for most of human history, the boundary between public and private has been clear, at least in theory. Now, as Chris Hayes writes, "With the help of a few tech firms, we basically tore it down in about a decade." Hayes argues that we are in the midst of an epoch-defining transition whose only parallel is what happened to labor in the nineteenth century: attention has become a commodified resource extracted from us, and from which we are increasingly alienated. The Sirens' Call is the big-picture vision we urgently need to offer clarity and guidance. Because there is a breaking point. Sirens are designed to compel us, and now they are going off in our bedrooms and kitchens at all hours of the day and night, doing the bidding of vast empires, the most valuable companies in history, built on harvesting human attention. As Hayes writes, "Now our deepest neurological structures, human evolutionary inheritances, and social impulses are in a habitat designed to prey upon, to cultivate, distort, or destroy that which most fundamentally makes us human." The Sirens' Call is the book that snaps everything into a single holistic framework so that we can wrest back control of our lives, our politics, and our future. Chris Hayes is the Emmy Award-winning host of All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC and the New York Times bestselling author of A Colony in a Nation and Twilight of the Elites. He lives in Brooklyn, New York, with his wife and children. Kate Shaw is a Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, where she teaches and writes about the presidency, the law of democracy, the Supreme Court, and reproductive rights and justice. Her scholarly writing has appeared, among other places, in the Harvard Law Review, the Columbia Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, and the Northwestern University Law Review, and her popular writing has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Atlantic. She co-hosts the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny and is a Contributing Opinion Writer with the New York Times. The 2024/25 Author Events Series is presented by Comcast. Because you love Author Events, please make a donation when you register for this event to ensure that this series continues to inspire Philadelphians. Extra copies of the books will be available for purchase at the library on event night. All tickets are non-refundable. (recorded 3/3/2025)

Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, and a contributing opinion Writer with the New York Times, talks about the constitutional issues at stake with some of the actions taken by the White House.

With Trump's White House taking certain steps that have raised some constitutional concerns, we asked a constitutional scholar to explain the law.On Today's Show:Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, and a contributing opinion writer with the New York Times, talks about the constitutional issues at stake with some of the actions taken by the White House.

The White House budget office ordered a pause on federal loans and grants, only to issue a reversal days later. Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny and a contributing opinion writer with The New York Times, offers legal analysis of the move — and the Trump administration's attempts to expand executive power in general.

The White House budget office ordered a pause on federal loans and grants, only to issue a reversal days later.On Today's Show:Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny and a contributing opinion writer with The New York Times, offers legal analysis of the move — and the Trump administration's attempts to expand executive power in general.

On Wednesday, Supreme Court Justices heard arguments in a case about gender-affirming care for minors. Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, a contributor with ABC News and a contributing opinion Writer with the New York Times, explains why the court is considering a challenge to a Tennessee law that bars the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy.

This week, Supreme Court Justices heard arguments in a case about gender-affirming care for minors. On Today's Show:Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, a contributor with ABC News and a contributing opinion writer with the New York Times, explains why the court is considering a challenge to a Tennessee law that bars the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy.

We're delighted to welcome back Bridget Mary McCormack, the former Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court. She is currently president and CEO of the American Arbitration Association-International Centre for Dispute Resolution (AAA-ICDR), a nonprofit that provides arbitration and mediation services to individuals and organizations that wish to resolve conflicts out of court. Former Chief Justice McCormack joined the association just as generative AI was exploding onto the scene. Knowing that the technology would have a deep impact on the legal profession, she worked quickly with AAA-ICDR leadership, as well as futurists and technologists, to determine an innovation strategy for the organization. Additionally, former Chief Justice McCormack is a strategic advisor to the Future of the Profession Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. She also co-hosts the podcast 2030 Vision: AI and the Future of Law with Jen Leonard, a previous guest on Pioneers and Pathfinders. Today, former Chief Justice McCormack discusses why she joined the AAA-ICDR, change management at a venerable organization in response to generative AI, the future of online dispute resolution, and rethinking lawyer formation.

We interview Leo Strine on the purpose of the corporation, differentiating between shareholder primacy and stakeholder theory. We discuss ESG and the power of stockholders and workers. Leo Strine applies his perspective on corporate purpose to corporate acquisitions and lays out his hopes for the future of corporations. Some critical articles to learn more about the shareholder primacy vs stakeholder theory debate:Origins of the argument: - Merrick Dodd, For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees?, 45 HARV. L. REV. 1145 (1932) - Adolph A. Berle, Jr., For Whom Corporate Managers Are Trustees: A Note, 45 HARV.. L. REV. 1365, 1372 (1932)Shareholder primacy ownership argument: - Milton Friedman, A Friedman doctrine– The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits, N.Y. Times, Sept. 13 1970.Critique on shareholder primacy: - Lynn A. Stout, Bad and Not-so-Bad Arguments for Shareholder Primacy, 75 S. CAL. L. REV. 1189 (2002).Example of Application: - Lucian Bebchuk and Roberto Tallarita, The Illusory Promise of Stakeholder Governance. 106 Corn. L. Rev. 91 (2020).Example of Court Case Application: - Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173, 177 (Del. 1986)A bit about Leo Strine:Leo E. Strine, Jr., is Of Counsel in the Corporate Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.  Prior to joining the firm, he was the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court from early 2014 through late 2019.  Before becoming the Chief Justice, he served on the Delaware Court of Chancery as Chancellor since June 22, 2011, and as a Vice Chancellor since November 9, 1998.In his judicial positions, Mr. Strine wrote hundreds of opinions in the areas of corporate law, contract law, trusts and estates, criminal law, administrative law, and constitutional law.  Notably, he authored the lead decision in the Delaware Supreme Court case holding that Delaware's death penalty statute was unconstitutional because it did not require the key findings necessary to impose a death sentence to be made by a unanimous jury.For a generation, Mr. Strine taught various corporate law courses at the Harvard and University of Pennsylvania law schools, and now serves as the Michael L. Wachter Distinguished Fellow in Law and Policy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a Senior Fellow of the Harvard Program on Corporate Governance. From 2006 to 2019, Mr. Strine served as the special judicial consultant to the ABA's Committee on Corporate Laws. He also was the special judicial consultant to the ABA's Committee on Mergers & Acquisitions from 2014 to 2019. He is a member of the American Law Institute.Mr. Strine speaks and writes frequently on the subjects of corporate and public law, and particularly the impact of business on society, and his articles have been published in The University of Chicago Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Cornell Law Review, Duke Law Journal, Harvard Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, and Stanford Law Review, among others.  On several occasions, his articles were selected as among the Best Corporate and Securities Articles of the year, based on the choices of law professors.Before becoming a judge in 1998,  Mr. Strine served as Counsel and Policy Director to Governor Thomas R. Carper, and had also worked as a corporate litigator at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom from 1990 to 1992.  He was law clerk to Judge Walter K. Stapleton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and Chief Judge John F. Gerry of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.  Mr. Strine graduated magna cum laude from the University of Pennsylvania Law Sc

Seret Gonzalez is in human resources with a startup after years of practicing law and legal recruiting. Her legal background has proven helpful in HR, even if it's not required to fulfill her job duties. Seret discusses the challenges and rewards of her current role, including the legal intricacies of managing HR across multiple states, the importance of building trust with employees and leadership alike, and how changing laws keep her on her toes. Seret Gonzalez is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.This episode is hosted by Kyle McEntee.Mentioned in this episode:7Sage Admissions ConsultingLearn more about 7SageLearn more about Vermont LawLearn more about Rutgers LawLearn more about Rutgers LawAccess LawHub today!

Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007) centers on the plot to assassinate Queen Elizabeth I of England, the arrest and execution of Mary, Queen of Scots (Elizabeth's cousin), and King Phillip II of Spain's attempt to topple Elizabeth and install a Catholic monarch on the English throne, which culminates in England's defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588. The film also portrays the complex emotional triangle involving Elizabeth, the English statemen, soldier, and explorer Sir Walter Raleigh, and Elizabeth's lady-in-waiting, Beth Throckmorton, whom Raleigh marries and has a child with. (The film depicts Elizabeth as enamored with Raleigh). Directed by Shekhar Kapur, from a script by William Nicholson and Michael Hirst, the film is a sequel to Kapur's Elizabeth (1998). The cast includes Cate Blanchett (Queen Elizabeth I), Clive Owen (Walter Raleigh), Geoffrey Rush (Elizabeth's spymaster Sir Francis Walsingham), Samantha Morton (Mary, Queen of Scots); Abbie Cornish (Beth Throckmorton); and Jordi Mollà (Phillip II of Spain). In addition to dramatizing this critical and memorable period of English history (albeit with some notable historical inaccuracies), the film provides a window into important and timely legal issues around torture, trial for matters of state, and piracy in Tudor England.  I'm joined by Alka Pradhan, a leading human rights attorney, adjunct professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, and Tudor history buff. (Alka's full bio is here)Timestamps:0:00     Introduction3:38     Queen Elizabeth I and the film's historical context 9:14     The Babington assassination plot 15:38   Mary's letters and the evidence of guilt16:53   Torture and torture warrants during Elizabeth I's reign22:51   Walsingham, the spy master24:08   The trial of Mary Queen of Scots32:38   The Defeat of the Spanish Armada36:18   The law of piracy38:24   Elizabeth, Walter Raleigh, and Beth Throckmorton44:56   More on depicting torture and trials on film 48:44   What the movie and Tudor history can tell us about contemporary society Further reading:Cooper, John, The Queen's Agent: Sir Francis Walsingham in Elizabethan England (2013)Lewis, Jayne E., The Trial of Mary Queen of Scots: A Brief History with Documents (1999)Martin, Colin & Parker, Geoffrey, The Spanish Enterprise and England's Deliverance in 1588 (2023)Read, Andrew, “Pirates and Privateers in Elizabethan England,” in The Laws of Yesterday's Wars (Samuel C. Duckett White ed. 2021)Webb, Simon, A History of Torture in England (2018)Williams, Kate, Rival Queens: The Betrayal of Mary Queen of Scots (2021)Law on Film is created and produced by Jonathan Hafetz. Jonathan is a professor at Seton Hall Law School. He has written many books and articles about the law. He has litigated important cases to protect civil liberties and human rights while working at the ACLU and other organizations. Jonathan is a huge film buff and has been watching, studying, and talking about movies for as long as he can remember. For more information about Jonathan, here's a link to his bio: https://law.shu.edu/faculty/full-time/jonathan-hafetz.cfmYou can contact him at jonathanhafetz@gmail.comYou can follow him on X (Twitter) @jonathanhafetz You can follow the podcast on X (Twitter) @LawOnFilmYou can follow the podcast on Instagram @lawonfilmpodcast

Sitting-in for Thom Hartmann, Guest-Host Jefferson Smith of the Democracy Nerd Podcast brings back "News With My Dad" featuring Joe Smith. Plus Guest Interview: Professor Kermit Roosevelt of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School on his new book "The Nation That Never Was: Reconstructing America's Story."See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Colin Rule (CEO of Mediate.com) speaks with Bridget McCormick, the CEO of the American Arbitration Association/International Centre for Dispute Resolution (AAA/ICDR), about the path that led her from being a public defender in NYC, to a law professor in Michigan, to the Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, and now CEO of AAA/ICDR. They discuss her work in mediation and dispute resolution, how Bridget has updated AAA/ICDR's strategy to embrace mediation and expand access to justice, and the role of technology in the future of the ADR field. Learn More: https://adr.org/ https://www.lawnext.com/2024/05/american-arbitration-association-acquires-odr-com-and-mediate-com-to-expand-online-dispute-resolution.html https://mediate.com/the-mediate-com-aaa-partnership/ About Bridget McCormick: Bridget Mary McCormack is President and CEO of the American Arbitration Association-International Centre for Dispute Resolution. She is also a Strategic Advisor to the Future of the Profession Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Until the end of 2022, McCormack was Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, a position her peers selected her for in January 2019 after she served for six years as a Justice. While on the Court, she championed innovation and the use of technology to improve access to justice. A graduate of New York University Law School, McCormack started her legal career in New York City. In 1996, she joined the Yale Law School faculty. She then joined the University of Michigan Law School faculty in 1998, where she taught criminal law, legal ethics, and numerous clinics. She was Associate Dean for Clinical Affairs from 2002 until 2012. McCormack was elected to The American Law Institute in 2013. The Attorney General of the United States appointed her to the National Commission on Forensic Science in 2014. In 2019, the Governor of Michigan named her Co-Chair of the Michigan Joint Task Force on Jail and Pretrial Incarceration. In 2020, she joined the American Bar Association's Council on Legal Education and Admission to the Bar and currently serves as Vice Chair. In 2021, the Governor of Michigan asked her to co-chair the Michigan Task Force on Forensic Science and to chair the Michigan Jail Reform Advisory Council. She also chaired the Michigan Judicial Council, the strategic planning body for the judicial branch. In 2021, McCormack was also appointed to serve nationally on The Council of State Governments Healthy States National Task Force and the ABA Center for Innovation's Governing Council. She was also named Chair of the ABA Board of Elections. McCormack is an Editor of the ABA's preeminent publication, Litigation Journal. She speaks and writes frequently about access to justice, innovation in the legal profession, and legal education.

Book a Practice Growth Audit Call - https://mccancemethod.com/practice-growth-audit/ Sign up for the FREE training- Level Up to a Thriving Group Practice in 6 Months or Less → https://mccancemethod.com/webinar-free-masterclass-from-solo-to-superteam/ In this episode, founder of Sterling Scale Solutions, Vena Sterling, discusses how to develop leadership skills through team culture. Vena shares her tips for changing your mindset and improving your team's culture, so you can better support your growing team. how to set yourself up for success before creating an online course and her top tips for marketing it! Make sure to bring your paper and pen because this episode is full of actionable tips!Here are some key points in this episode: [3:30] Culture Transformation [7:43] Knowing your saboteur  [9:26] 2 tips to improve leadership skills[12:27] When to do check-ins Links From the Episode:Saboteur Assessment: https://assessment.positiveintelligence.com/saboteur/overview Book: Positive Intelligence by Shirzad Chamine - https://a.co/d/7rFzBJC Book: The 4 Disciplines of Execution by Chris McChesney, Sean Covey and Jim Huling - https://a.co/d/ip2BOTt Loom: https://www.loom.com/ Slack: https://slack.com/ More about Vena: Vena Sterling is an attorney, business broker, and founder of Sterling Scale Solutions, a consulting firm that empowers seven-figure women business owners with the strategy, systems, and SOPs to scale their business while creating time and money freedom.Vena is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School with 20+ years serving business leaders. As a business broker, Vena helps women business owners navigate the complex process of selling a business. Her legal and business expertise, combined with her passion for helping women succeed, makes her an invaluable asset to any woman business owner looking to sell a company.Vena is a wellness advocate and trained meditation teacher who incorporates mindfulness into her work. Her favorite things include hanging out with her twin boys, exploring new destinations, and making the best green smoothies.Websites:  Leadership Research Institute: https://www.lri.com/ Follow me on Instagram, @nicole.mccanncemethod. If this episode provided you with value and inspiration, please leave a review and DM to let me know. Click here: https://www.instagram.com/nicole.mccancemethod Join the FREE private community for therapists: Expand your Psychotherapy Practice → https://www.facebook.com/groups/947689352498639 Sign up for the FREE training- Level Up to a Thriving Group Practice in 6 Months or Less → https://mccancemethod.com/webinar-free-masterclass-from-solo-to-superteam/

Amanda Haverstick is a seasoned attorney turned legal writing coach and career consultant in Philadelphia. With over 25 years of experience in Employment Law litigation at top-tier firms, including Proskauer Rose and Morgan Lewis, Amanda now dedicates herself to empowering the next generation of legal professionals. As a visiting professor at Drexel School of Law and a career consultant at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Amanda's mission is to equip attorneys and law students with the skills needed for success. Through her "Dear 1L" blog, she provides invaluable guidance to aspiring lawyers, aiming to simplify and improve their journey through law school. Amanda's passion for writing, teaching, and advocacy shines through in all she does.

At the Watson Institute, the beginning of summer means commencement festivities, moving trucks, and bittersweet goodbyes. In American politics, the beginning of summer means something very different: the approach of the Supreme Court's summer recess and, with it, the handing down of the Court's final decisions from this term. This year's cases will have profound effects on the 2024 election, gun rights, reproductive rights, and more. While it's nothing new for the Supreme Court to weigh in on contentious issues in society, as our guest on this episode sees it, something profound has shifted within the Court over the last few years. The decisions they hand down are not only increasingly transformative, they're also lining up more and more clearly with our partisan politics. And no matter your politics, that should be a problem. Kate Shaw is a constitutional law scholar and professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a 2001 graduate of Brown University. She is also the co-host of the podcast “Strict Scrutiny,” which explores the Supreme Court — the cases, the people and the culture surrounding it. On this episode, Dan Richards spoke with her about how the Supreme Court fits in our politics today, how that role has changed over time, and what Kate thinks its role in our society today should be.Subscribe to Trending Globally wherever you listen to podcasts. Subscribe to Strict Scrutiny wherever you listen to podcasts.Transcript coming soon to our website.

On April 17, 2024, NYU School of Law hosted a panel of experts to discuss whether a former President enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct that allegedly involved official acts during his tenure in office. The Supreme Court is considering that question in United States v. Trump and will hear oral argument in the case on April 25. The panel consisted of George Conway, a Contributing Writer at The Atlantic and Board President of the Society for the Rule of Law; Trevor Morrison the Eric M. and Laurie B. Roth Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus of NYU School of Law; and Kate Shaw a Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Andrew Weissmann, a Just Security Editor and Faculty Co-Director of the Reiss Center on Law and Security at NYU School of Law, moderated the discussion. Show Notes: George Conway (@gtconway3d)Trevor MorrisonKate Shaw (@kateashaw1)Andrew Weissmann (@AWeissmann_)Just Security's Trump Trials coverageMusic: “Broken” by David Bullard from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/david-bullard/broken (License code: OSC7K3LCPSGXISVI)

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments concerning the law used to charge defendants for their actions on January 6th.On Today's Show:Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, a contributor with ABC News and a contributing opinion writer with The New York Times, offers her legal analysis.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments concerning the law used to charge defendants for their actions on January 6th, and earlier in the week decided in favor of Idaho's ban on gender-affirming health care for transgender children. Kate Shaw, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny, a contributor with ABC News and a contributing opinion writer with The New York Times, offers analysis of both issues and previews what else the court is working on this spring.

In this episode of 92NY Talks, join Kermit Roosevelt, law professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and author of The Nation That Never Was: Reconstructing America's Story, and Michael J. Gerhardt, author of The Law of Presidential Impeachment, for a discussion on the historical roots and constitutional mechanisms of impeachment, gaining insights from Gerhardt's lifetime of research and experience in high profile trials. Gerhardt will guide us through a nonpartisan overview that goes beyond specific cases, offering nuanced perspectives on under-explored issues.   The conversation was streamed live as part of The 92nd Street Y, New York online talks series on January 31, 2024.

Ted is a 2L at Pennsylvania Carey Law School and held past positions as a 1L Summer Associate at Manko, Gold, Katcher, and Fox and as an SEO Law Fellow at Vinson and Elkins. Ted and I engaged in a captivating conversation, delving into his unique journey into the field of law, his reflections on his first-year experience, and invaluable advice on effective networking. Ted's articulate demeanor not only adds depth to the episode but also offers a wealth of practical experiences and insights. As highlighted during the podcast, Ted is eager to support aspiring or current law students along their paths and address any inquiries they may have, so don't hesitate to reach out! https://www.linkedin.com/in/tedluccagomes

Host: Ann Luther, League of Women Voters of Maine The mostly volunteer team at the League of Women Voters – Downeast who plan and coordinate this series includes: Martha Dickinson, Michael Fisher, Claire Fox, Starr Gilmartin, Maggie Harling, Ann Luther, Rick Lyles, Judith Lyles, Wendilee O'Brien, Lane Sturtevant, Leah Taylor, and Linda Washburn. Democracy Forum: Participatory Democracy, encouraging citizens to take an active role in government and politics This month: We will talk about the history of the Electoral College and how it's working in the 21st century. What reforms are needed, and which are possible? What is the NPV compact, and how would it work? Is it right for Maine? Guest/s: Mike Saxl, former Speaker of the Maine House of Representatives and Managing Principal of Maine Street Solutions, the leading proponent of the National Popular Vote in Maine www.verrill-law.com/michael-v-saxl/ Kate Shaw, Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, co-host of the Supreme Court podcast Strict Scrutiny www.law.upenn.edu/faculty/kateshaw To learn more about this topic: Our View: It's time to pick the president by national popular vote | Portland Press Herald, Editorial, January, 2024 www.pressherald.com/2024/01/14/our-view-its-time-to-pick-the-president-by-national-popular-vote-2/ No thanks to national popular vote | Bangor Daily News, Matt Gagnon op-ed, January, 2024, www.bangordailynews.com/2024/01/10/opinion/opinion-contributor/national-popular-vote-problems/ Arguments against national popular vote compact fall short | Bangor Daily News, Amy Fried op-ed, January, 2024, www.bangordailynews.com/2024/01/30/opinion/opinion-contributor/arguments-against-national-popular-vote-compact-fall-short-joam40zk0w/ Yarmouth representative pitches National Popular Vote plan | Spectrum News, January, 2024, spectrumlocalnews.com/me/maine/politics/2024/01/08/yarmouth-representative-pitches-national-popular-vote-plan-for-presidential-elections National Popular Vote | National Conference of State Legislatures, December, 2023, shows state-by-state passage, www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/national-popular-vote Majority of Americans continue to favor moving away from Electoral College | Pew Research, September, 2023, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/25/majority-of-americans-continue-to-favor-moving-away-from-electoral-college/ “A Mystifying and Distorting Factor”: The Electoral College and American Democracy | Michigan Law Review, Katharine Shaw, 2022, repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8442&context=mlr The National Popular Vote, Explained | Brennan Center for Justice, December, 2020, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/national-popular-vote-explained?utm_medium=PANTHEON_STRIPPED&utm_source=PANTHEON_STRIPPED The Electoral College is flawed — so are the alternatives: Experts | ABC News, December, 2020, abcnews.go.com/Politics/electoral-college-flawed-alternatives/story?id=74708394 Why We Need A National Popular Vote | Robert Reich, m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn8rWMVGlfQ About the host: Ann currently serves as Treasurer of the League of Women Voters of Maine and leads the LWVME Advocacy Team. She served as President of LWVME from 2003 to 2007 and as co-president from 2007-2009. In her work for the League, Ann has worked for greater public understanding of public policy issues and for the League's priority issues in Clean Elections & Campaign Finance Reform, Voting Rights, Ethics in Government, Ranked Choice Voting, and Repeal of Term Limits. Representing LWVME at Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, she served that coalition as co-president from 2006 to 2011. She remains on the board of MCCE and serves as Treasurer. She is active in the LWV-Downeast and hosts their monthly radio show, The Democracy Forum, on WERU FM Community Radio -which started out in 2004 as an recurring special, and became a regular monthly program in 2012. She was the 2013 recipient of the Baldwin Award from the ACLU of Maine for her work on voting rights and elections. She joined the League in 1998 when she retired as Senior Vice President at SEI Investments. Ann was a founder of the MDI Restorative Justice Program, 1999 – 2000, and served on its Executive Board. The post Democracy Forum 2/16/24: National Popular Vote: What do we need? How can we get it? first appeared on WERU 89.9 FM Blue Hill, Maine Local News and Public Affairs Archives.

DIANKHA'S BIO Diankha Linear is one of the few women in America, let alone African American Women, to both lead a VC-backed company and raise tens of millions of growth capital for it. But what led her here started in a Seattle community center followed by an incredible career which includes 16 years of United States Army service, part of it, as a Judge Advocate General's (JAG) Corps - Captain (Airborne).  Diankha currently serves as the President & Chief Executive Officer at Community.com, preceded by being the company's COO.  Prior to that she worked as General Counsel & Corporate Secretary at Convoy, Inc. She also serves on the board of, incoming Chairwoman, Swedish Health Services, one of the largest community focused healthcare provider systems in the country. Before her leadership, tech and entrepreneurial journey she served as the Senior Director in the Legal Department at Nordstrom, Director in the Legal Department, at Expeditors, Senior Attorney at the U.S. Department of Education, Senior Associate in General Commercial Litigation at Cairncross & Hempelmann, and as JAG in the US Army Reserve. Diankha's foundational years were spent as a lawyer focused on commercial litigation, employment, and antitrust at Perkins Coie LLP. She holds a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and Military Science from the University of Washington and a JD from the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.  DIANKHA RELATED LINKS From Lawyer To Leader Community (company website) Enterprises Connecting with Consumers (video) Becoming COO  Joining Swedish's Board (soon to be Chair) GENERAL INFO| TOP OF THE GAME: Official website: https://topofthegame-thepod.com/ RSS Feed: https://feed.podbean.com/topofthegame-thepod/feed.xml Hosting service show website: https://topofthegame-thepod.podbean.com/ Javier's LinkTree: https://linktr.ee/javiersaade & Bio: https://tinyurl.com/36ufz6cs  SUPPORT & CONNECT: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/showcase/96934564 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61551086203755 Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOPOFGAMEpod Subscribe on Podbean: https://www.podbean.com/site/podcatcher/index/blog/vLKLE1SKjf6G Email us: info@topofthegame-thepod.com   THANK YOU FOR LISTENING – AVAILABLE ON ALL MAJOR PLATFORMS  

Today I interview Vena Sterling who is a strategic leadership coach and thought leader for 6 figure women business owners.We discuss:How mindset is the start of a 6-7 figure businessHow mission driven businesses make more moneyHow to overcome the financial limits we put on ourselvesWhere our money mindset comes from and how to overcome limiting beliefs in this area.What systems can you put in place to save time and give your client and exceptional experienceVena Sterling is a strategic leadership coach and innovative thought leader whose mission is to support 6-figure women business owners with the strategy, systems, and SOPs they need for a predictable path to 7 figures. Vena is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School with over 20 years of experience as a real estate attorney, HR executive, and ICF-certified coach. She is a wellness advocate and trained meditation teacher. Her favorite things include sunrise at the beach with her twin boys, playing golf, and making the best green smoothies. FB, IG @thevenasterling, website www.lri.comMasterclass:  http://www.scaleblueprintlive.com/Connect with Jennifer, Your Business Therapist, to get more Clarity & Confidence in your Biz!Website: www.jenniferjakobsenlifecoaching.comInstagram: @jjakobsenlifecoachSchedule a Free Clarity Session to see if Jennifer can help you:  https://bit.ly/JJfree30Join my weekly Coffee Chat every Thursday at 12pm PST by signing up for free HERE.

Pilar S. Ramos is the General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of TelevisaUnivision Inc., the world's leading Spanish-language content and media company. She joined the company in a historic $4.8 billion merger of two Spanish language media giants – Univision Communication Inc. & Televisa.In her role, Ramos restructured the legal department to create one global team and build synergies for enterprise functions: Data Privacy, Compliance, Legal Operations, and Government Affairs. She has transformed the function to create one global team.Before joining TelevisaUnivision, Ramos was part of Mastercard. She served as General Counsel across North America, providing strategic advice on all legal, regulatory, government, and franchise affairs. Prior to that role, Ramos was Senior Vice President, Global Public Policy and Regulatory Strategy Counsel.Ramos is an advocate for diversity to advance business and society. Ramos is a life member of The Council on Foreign Relations, is Co-chair of the Alumni Advisory Board for Inclusion & Engagement at The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and is Director on the Board of Latino Justice and the YWCA Greenwich. She has been a generous mentor and she is a vocal advocate for advancing diversity in the legal profession.Among Ramos' recognitions she has been awarded with the Daily Business Review's 2023 Florida Legal Awards in the General Counsel Impact category, recognized as a Legal Champion of the Arts by Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, the Change Agent award by the Council of Urban Professionals, the National Women in Law Award for Transformative Leadership by Corporate Counsel, the Aiming High Award by Legal Momentum, and the Breaking the Glass Ceiling Award from the Leadership Institute for Women of Color Attorneys.Ramos received her J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School and received a B.A cum laude in International Relations and in French. She also served as an Exec. Editor of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. In addition, Ramos carried out part of her undergraduate studies at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques in Paris, France.Amor Boutique Hotel is a beautiful and secret spot in Sayulita Mexico. Our family and friends love it and you will, too! This spot is a safe and family-friendly spot 30 minutes from Puerto Vallarta airport. Amor Boutique Hotel - Sayulita Mexico

Pilar S. Ramos is the General Counsel and Corporate Secretary of TelevisaUnivision Inc., the world's leading Spanish-language content and media company. She joined the company in a historic $4.8 billion merger of two Spanish language media giants – Univision Communication Inc. & Televisa.In her role, Ramos restructured the legal department to create one global team and build synergies for enterprise functions: Data Privacy, Compliance, Legal Operations, and Government Affairs. She has transformed the function to create one global team.Before joining TelevisaUnivision, Ramos was part of Mastercard. She served as General Counsel across North America, providing strategic advice on all legal, regulatory, government, and franchise affairs. Prior to that role, Ramos was Senior Vice President, Global Public Policy and Regulatory Strategy Counsel.Ramos is an advocate for diversity to advance business and society. Ramos is a life member of The Council on Foreign Relations, is Co-chair of the Alumni Advisory Board for Inclusion & Engagement at The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and is Director on the Board of Latino Justice and the YWCA Greenwich. She has been a generous mentor and she is a vocal advocate for advancing diversity in the legal profession.Among Ramos' recognitions she has been awarded with the Daily Business Review's 2023 Florida Legal Awards in the General Counsel Impact category, recognized as a Legal Champion of the Arts by Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts, the Change Agent award by the Council of Urban Professionals, the National Women in Law Award for Transformative Leadership by Corporate Counsel, the Aiming High Award by Legal Momentum, and the Breaking the Glass Ceiling Award from the Leadership Institute for Women of Color Attorneys.Ramos received her J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School and received a B.A cum laude in International Relations and in French. She also served as an Exec. Editor of the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. In addition, Ramos carried out part of her undergraduate studies at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques in Paris, France.Amor Boutique Hotel is a beautiful and secret spot in Sayulita Mexico. Our family and friends love it and you will, too! This spot is a safe and family-friendly spot 30 minutes from Puerto Vallarta airport. Amor Boutique Hotel - Sayulita Mexico

President Biden invited top Republican and Democratic congressional leaders to the White House Wednesday to discuss the aid package for Ukraine and Israel that he proposed last year. We get the latest from NPR's Mara Liasson. And, the Supreme Court is considering a case involving herring fishing, but the implications could ripple across federal agencies. Ryan Mulvey, a lawyer at Cause of Action who has worked with the fishing company at the center of the Supreme Court case, and Kate Shaw, professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, join us. Then, Grist's Lylla Younes talks about the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to let Louisiana approve new carbon capture projects.

(0:00) Intro.(1:28) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel.(2:15) Start of interview.(3:16) Yifat's "origin story." (6:20) Yifat's bio and positions at the University of Haifa and Technion - Israel Institute of Technology.(8:00) About Elizabeth Pollman, Professor at the Penn Carey Law School at the U. of Pennsylvania.(9:57) About their article, Ousted (2023). "We use that term broadly to refer to being forced or pushed to step down from the CEO role, specifically that managerial role, despite having significant control. And what we're arguing is that there's a whole bunch of countervailing forces and factors that can work to limit the durability of the founder CEO's power and ultimately can lead to them resigning from that managerial role."(11:58) Examples of countervailing forces and factors to the founder/CEO power. Differences between public and private companies. Influence of voting rights.(15:20) Influence of margin loans (backed by founder stock) and secondary sales in corporate governance. *Reference to E41 with Maureen Farell on Cult of We (Aug 2021).(19:31) Conflict with regulators, investors and other stakeholders (example: Uber). *Reference to Elizabeth Pollman's article on Regulatory Entrepreneurship. (22:19) On employee pressure in corporate governance.(23:00) On OpenAI's board debacle (involving Sam Altman's ouster and reinstatement). (29:31) Other founder/CEO cases referenced in Ousted. *Mention of E64 with Keir Gumps, involved in Uber's governance clean-up. Cases of Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) and Sam Bankman-Fried (FTX). On externalities from lack of corporate governance in startups, particularly unicorns. The impact of the Power Law in VC-backed companies.(36:26) Take-aways from their article Ousted. Gap between academia and practice.(40:04) Elizabeth Pollman's article Startup Failure. *Reference to E3 with Elizabeth Pollman on Startup Governance and Regulatory Entrepreneurship (May 2020)."[I]t's really important that law and culture facilitate the efficient flow of the failure of venture-backed startups and that failed startups can do so with honor because that's what sustains our system in a big way, out of which comes these few successes. But we also have to have a way of dealing with lots of failed startups (ie. M&A, acquihires, ABCs, and liquidation)."*Reference to my newsletter describing a time of "downrounds, shutdowns and recaps" on a monthly basis.(44:28) Yifat Aran's article The RSU Time Bomb: Regulating Startup Equity Compensation in the Unicorn Era. Triggered by Stripe's downround in March 2023 (raising $6.5 billion at $50 billion valuation).(52:51)  On current equity compensation practices and the private/public market divides.(54:51) Consequences of startups staying private for longer (SPL) or forever.- Rapid fire questions for Yifat Aran:(58:31) Books that have greatly influenced her life: The Death of Ivan Ilyich by Leo Tolstoy (1886)(59:56) Her mentors: Dorit Beinisch (Former President of the Supreme Court of Israel)Joe Grundfest, Stanford Law School.Elizabeth Pollman, Penn Carey Law School.(01:02:30) Quotes that she thinks of often or lives her life by: "I believe that you can achieve everything, but you aren't likely to achieve everything at the same time."(01:03:13) An unusual habit or absurd thing that she loves: chic flicks and gummy bears to write papers.(01:03:46) A living person she admires: Arthur Rock.Elizabeth Pollman is a Professor of Law and the Co-Director of the Institute for Law & Economics at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. She teaches and writes in the areas of corporate law and governance, as well as startups, venture capital, and entrepreneurship.Yifat Aran is an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Haifa. She is also a lecturer in the MBA program at the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, and a research fellow at the Rutgers Institute for the Study of Employee Ownership and Profit Sharing. She is primarily interested in corporate law and governance and securities regulation, with a focus on venture capital and entrepreneurship. __This podcast is sponsored by the American College of Governance Counsel. You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__You can join as a Patron of the Boardroom Governance Podcast at:Patreon: patreon.com/BoardroomGovernancePod__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

In ancient times, debtors were treated with severe punishment, even sometimes being dismembered. So when did things start to shift towards debt forgiveness leading up to the modern-day concept of filing for bankruptcy?David Skeel is the S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. He's the author of several books that look at the history of corporate law, debt, and bankruptcy, including Icarus in the Boardroom: The Fundamental Flaws in Corporate America and Where They Came From and Debt's Dominion: A History of Bankruptcy Law in America. He and Greg discuss the origins of debt forgiveness in the world, how Christianity and the Bible played a role in that shift, and the proper amount of risk corporate leaders should take. *unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:A biblical perspective on debt and bankruptcy17:40:  There's a verse in the Old Testament that says you cannot take as collateral a debtor's millstone. And the idea there is that is the tool of the trade. There's another verse that says if you take the debtor's cloak as collateral, you've got to give it back at the end of the day. The idea being that the debtor's going to need that to keep warm. Even going back thousands of years, a sense that there needs to be a balancing. You need to make it possible for creditors to get repaid, but you also need to be aware of the humanity of the debtor and the needs of the debtor.Debt is like sex and fire09:28: Debt is like sex and fire; both of them were important in the ancient world and are important now, but they also have some dangerous downsides if they're misused. And that's the picture you get of debt: that people need debt is inevitable, but it's easy for people to get in over their heads, and there needs to be a way to deal with that possibility.How do you respond to risk-taking?29:43: One simple response to the risk-taking concern is to be mindful of regulations that create bad incentives in that respect, such as tax rules. And also, things like disclosure can make a difference.Sometimes lots of failures is an indication of a good economy or a good system, not a bad one23:32: There is empirical evidence that shows that in countries where you have a more generous bankruptcy system and more generous availability of a fresh start, you do get more entrepreneurship. There is a direct relationship between the two, but risk-taking can sometimes be problematic.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Republic of Debtors: Bankruptcy in the Age of American Independence by Bruce MannThomas H. JacksonBankruptcy Reform Act of 1978Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at University of PennsylvaniaDavid Skeel on XHis Work:Icarus in the Boardroom: The Fundamental Flaws in Corporate America and Where They Came From (Law and Current Events Masters)The New Financial DealDebt's Dominion: A History of Bankruptcy Law in AmericaTrue Paradox: How Christianity Makes Sense of Our Complex World 

Listen to this segment of The Chris & Amy Show where Chris and Hancock are joined by Kermit Roosevelt III, a David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and member of the working group at the American Academy of Arts & Sciences that produced The Case for Supreme Court Term Limits. They discuss Supreme Court Term Limits and Roosevelt shares why he supports them.

In hour 2 of The Chris & Amy Show, Chris and John Hancock are joined by Kermit Roosevelt III, a David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and member of the working group at the American Academy of Arts & Sciences that produced The Case for Supreme Court Term Limits. They discuss Supreme Court Term Limits and Roosevelt shares why he supports them. They then are joined by KMOX Sports Talent Matt Pauley who discusses the Texas Rangers winning the World Series and what is next for the Cardinals.

What happens if you don't protect your IP, and is it worth all the paperwork? Jeannell Darden, CEO of Moisture Love, shares her story of battling trademark and copyright issues, and how she overcame it. Learn when and how to start the process, what to consider when rebranding, how to avoid trademark disputes, whether you should register your logo, and where to find legal support for small businesses. Cynthia Dahl, Practice Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, offers her insights. Stay tuned to the end of the episode where host Andrea Marquez lists her key takeaways!—(07:04) Considerations to make when rebranding.(14:54) Considerations for founders regarding trademark and protection.(16:47) When should small business owners start considering intellectual property (IP) protection.(18:08) Mistakes to avoid when protecting your brand.(20:16) How to avoid confusion among consumers and trademark disputes.(22:09) Should you register your logo?(24:18) Andrea mentions the cost of legal help for small businesses and points out free resources recommended by Cynthia. She also lists the key takeaways from the episode.—Click HERE to leave us a message!By submitting your voicemail, you're granting us permission to use the recording in episodes of This is Small Business. Please note, voicemails will not receive direct responses. For help with other questions to Amazon unrelated to this show, you can reach out to Amazon's customer service team at amazon.com/contact-us.

Professor Hoffman first explains his thesis that falling transaction costs has led to the proliferation of form contracts into areas where they little have social value, resulting in social harms that require a new approach. We then discuss his proposal that states deny enforcement of written contracts for small dollar transactions by adopting what he calls a “Statute Against Forms.” Under such a statute, for contracts at the lowest dollar amount (e.g. $100 or less), only oral contracts would be enforceable. In our discussion, we consider the potential benefits of this approach for industry and consumers, why this approach might be preferable to the current regime of policing contract terms using doctrines such as unfairness and unconscionability or to an approach that focuses on adhesion, and whether it would be preferable to address this issue on the federal rather than the state level. We also discuss reactions to Professor Hoffman's proposal. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr's Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the conversation.

My guests today are Mark Fenster of the University of Florida Levin College of Law and Dave Hoffman of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. We're discussing Mark's recent article, How Reputational Nondisclosure Agreements Fail (Or, In Praise of Breach), forthcoming in The Marquette Law Review. Mark Fenster is the Marshall M. Criser Eminent Scholar Chair in Electronic Communications and Administrative Law at the Levin College of Law. His legal research has focused on government transparency, legal intellectual history, and constitutional limits on government regulation. He is the author of the book The Transparency Fix: Secrets, Leaks, and Uncontrollable Government Information (Stanford University Press, 2017), and his articles and essays have appeared in the California Law Review, Michigan Law Review, and the Iowa Law Review, among others. David Hoffman is the William A. Schnader Professor of Law and Deputy Dean at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Professor Hoffman is a widely-cited scholar who focuses his research and teaching on contract law.  His work is typically interdisciplinary, built through collaboration with co-authors from a variety of fields. He has engaged in the national conversation sparked by the #metoo movement, publishing a paper with a (then) Penn Carey Law student that argues that nondisclosure clauses in employment contracts violate public policy.Further Reading:Mark Fenster Bio, University of FloridaDave Hoffman Bio, University of PennsylvaniaMark Fenster, How Reputational Nondisclosure Agreements Fail (Or, In Praise of Breach), SSRNDavid Hoffman & Erik Lampmann, Hushing Contracts  

Alvin and German conduct a great conversation with Trian Fund Management's Analyst, Tino Majoni.'13. A member of the Alumni Council, Tino started his career at Prudential Financial as a Senior Analyst, Mergers and Acquisitions. He thrives in the integration of business and law. Since Colgate he has earned his MBA in Finance and Accounting from The Wharton School and his JD focused in Corporate Law from the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. While at Colgate, he was President of the African Students Union, Vice Captain of the Colgate Club Cricket, and a member of Brothers of Colgate, He received his Bachelor in Mathematical Economics and Computer Science.

When President Biden lifted the COVID-19 public health emergency in May, he subsequently removed the Title 42 provision limiting immigration into the United States on the grounds of a public emergency. What was Title 42? What will replace it? And, how does this affect the processing and number of immigrants coming to the U.S.?? Fernando Chang-Muy is the Thomas O'Boyle lecturer of law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. He tells us about the immigration process and how the U.S. benefits from foreign workers. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Are we being ‘duped' by our current cultural conception of what it means to be a mother? In this episode, I speak with Tess Wilkinson-Ryan who is a law professor and moral psychologist at The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Tess is the author of her recently released book: FOOL PROOF: How Fear of Playing the Sucker Shapes Ourselves and the Social Order―and What We Can Do About It. The book is on the psychology of feeling duped or betrayed, exploring the human experience of feeling like a ‘sucker', and we focus our conversation on one particular chapter of the book: Mothersucker. Tess shares how motherhood can be like playing a relentless public goods game (she explains what this is in the episode) in which a mother's job is to contribute, but everyone else gets to play whatever strategy they want and benefit from her work while she remains undervalued and taken for granted. We unpack the discrepancy between the cultural promise and social rewards of motherhood with what mothers then experience, and Tess shares research into the bias and discrimination that mothers face. This conversation explores the relationship between individualism and care-work, the ways mothers are socialized into patriarchal motherhood, collectivism, the allocation of resources, the economy of motherhood and more. We also explore the dynamic between an individual mothers' life, psychology and decision-making, with the broader social-cultural-moral context of motherhood that she is living within. You can find more about Tess here - https://twitter.com/tesswilkry or https://www.tesswilkinsonryan.com/ Purchase Tess's Book: Fool Proof: How Fear of Playing the Sucker Shapes Our Selves and the Social Order—and What We Can Do About It: https://www.harpercollins.com/products/fool-proof-tess-wilkinson-ryan?variant=40485173723170 Episode shownotes: https://drsophiebrock.com/podcast96

Welcome back to Environmental Professionals Radio, Connecting the Environmental Professionals Community Through Conversation, with your hosts Laura Thorne and Nic Frederick! On today's episode, we talk with Tiffany Duong  explorer and storyteller at Ocean Rebels, and JD Reinbott, marine conservationist and queer rights advocate about New Career Paths, Handling Toxic Feedback, and Networking.   Read their full bios below.Thank you to our episode sponsor, Center for Open Exploration (C4OE)! Donors can reach out to Erica Moulton at erica.moulton@gmail.com Showtimes:2:11 Nic & Laura discuss healthy & unhealthy determination14:46  Interview with Tiffany Duong & JD Reinbott starts15:53  New career paths26:50  Handling toxic feedback33:58  NetworkingPlease be sure to ✔️subscribe, ⭐rate and ✍review. This podcast is produced by the National Association of Environmental Professions (NAEP). Check out all the NAEP has to offer at NAEP.org.Connect with Tiffany Duong at https://www.linkedin.com/in/tiffanytvduongConnect with JD Reinbott at https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-reinbott/Guest Bios:Tiffany Duong is a writer, explorer and motivational speaker. She holds degrees from UCLA and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Inspired by a dive trip, she left corporate law to campaign for our planet. Now, from dense jungles, remote oceans and her slice of paradise in the Florida Keys, she gives voice to what's happening in the natural world. Her mission is to inspire meaningful action and lasting change. Follow her on Twitter/Instagram @tiffmakeswaves.As someone who has had an affinity for the marine world from a young age, JD Reinbott has dedicated his life to conserving the numerous ecosystems and organisms found within the ocean. This self-proclaimed coral nerd has worked extensively on restoration projects around the globe but finds the most rewarding aspect of such to be the community-based engagement that is needed to allow these initiatives to succeed. Recently JD has focused his attention on highlighting the need for further representation of the LGBTQIA+ community within the realm of marine science to ensure that diversity is celebrated both above and below the surface.Music CreditsIntro: Givin Me Eyes by Grace MesaOutro: Never Ending Soul Groove by Mattijs MullerSupport the showThanks for listening! A new episode drops every Friday. Like, share, subscribe, and/or sponsor to help support the continuation of the show. You can find us on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and all your favorite podcast players.

In this episode of See generally, Kimberly Kessler Ferzan, Earle Hepburn Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Institute of Law and Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, joins Kristen Marino to discuss her research in criminal law theory and evidence. Professor Ferzan begins by describing her path to becoming a law professor and her experience working at the U.S. Department of Justice. Then, she discusses her forthcoming article, The Trouble with Time Served. She analyzes the potential justifications for pretrial detention and the practice of awarding credit for time served, arguing ultimately that this approach contributes to ongoing issues with the criminal justice system and that, alternatively, we should financially compensate defendants who are preventively detained. Additionally, Professor Ferzan describes her recently published paper, #WeToo, where she illustrates that the #MeToo movement's success was facilitated by group allegations. She analyzes the impacts that this phenomenon will have on the criminal justice system, including the effects of its intersection with racial injustices. Interview by Kristen Marino, Media Editor, Vol. 171, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Produced and edited by Andrew Gormley. Cover Art by Emily Horwitz, Online Executive Editor, Vol. 170, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Transcript. Cite as: See generally, A Conversation with Professor Kimberly Kessler Ferzan, U. Pa. L. Rev. (May 5, 2023), https://anchor.fm/see-generally-podcast. © University of Pennsylvania Law Review 2023.

Tiffany Duong is an Ocean Explorer who gets stories about her adventures to hungry readers around the world. She heard about our submersible project and stopped by for a couple of days to learn more. Her mission is to involve and inspire others to see our world in an entirely different way – and to want to save it. She hold degrees from UCLA (international development) and University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (climate, refugee, environmental law) and is a trained climate reality leader with Al Gore's Climate Reality Project. She lectures at the University of Miami Osher Lifelong Learning Institute and writes for the Keys Weekly Newspaper group. When she's not campaigning for the planet, she can be found scuba diving the Florida Keys, out on expedition, or searching for the world's best cheesy fries.

In this episode of See generally, Dave Hoffman, Deputy Dean and William A. Schnader Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, joins Kristen Marino to discuss his research in contract law. Professor Hoffman begins by describing his path to academia and interdisciplinary methodological approaches. Then, he describes his forthcoming article, Nonparty Interests in Contract Law, in which he identifies “nonparty defaults” as a judicial technique for resolving contract disputes. He develops a normative account of when courts should advance these nonparty interests. Additionally, Hoffman outlines his forthcoming article, Defeating the Empire of Forms, which argues that the scope of forms in people's lives is a social problem that could be remedied by a reverse statute of frauds. Lastly, he discusses the collective implications of these articles. Interview by Kristen Marino, Media Editor, Vol. 171, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Produced and edited by Andrew Gormley. Cover Art by Emily Horwitz, Online Executive Editor, Vol. 170, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Transcript. Cite as: See generally, A Conversation with Professor Dave Hoffman, U. Pa. L. Rev. (Mar. 28, 2023), https://anchor.fm/see-generally-podcast. © University of Pennsylvania Law Review 2023.

Professor Amy Wax of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School joins Josh to discuss the battle to keep her job after Dean Theodore Ruger sought "major sanctions" following her public expression of various conservative viewpoints.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Tiffany Duong '06 is an ocean explorer and storyteller. Inspired by an epic dive trip to the Galapagos, she left corporate law to campaign for our planet. Now she writes, speaks and hosts expeditions from dense jungles to remote oceans to the changing Arctic. Listen to learn how she gives voice to what's happening in the natural world in order to inspire meaningful action and lasting change. She holds degrees from UCLA and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, in International Development Studies and Environmental Law, respectively. She's also a trained climate organizer, member of The Explorers Club, and climate educator with the University of Miami Lifelong Learning Institute. Website: http://www.tiffanyduong.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tiffanyduong Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tiffmakeswaves/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TiffMakesWaves LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tiffanytvduong/

Microsoft's Beth Henderson and DLA Piper's Lisa Dewey open this episode, a recording of a recent panel discussion on the access to justice crisis in America held at Microsoft's headquarters in Redmond, Washington. Professor Rebecca (Becky) Sandefur of Arizona State University's School of Social and Family Dynamics and Jim Sandman of the Future of the Profession Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School join Beth and Lisa in a discussion on the growing movement to provide equal access to legal services.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In 1873, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling decided The Slaughterhouse Cases, which narrowly interpreted the new Privileges and Immunities Clause of the recently ratified 14th Amendment. With this year marking the 150th anniversary of the decision, we're joined today by two leading scholars to understand what The Slaughterhouse Cases were about, and why some scholars and judges–including current Supreme Court justices like Justice Clarence Thomas–have criticized the decision and its effect on constitutional law doctrines; while others have agreed with its interpretation. Guests Kurt Lash, professor at the University of Richmond Law School, and Kermit Roosevelt, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, join to discuss the history and story of the case; what happened after it was decided; and what would happen in constitutional law today if the case was overturned. Host Jeffrey Rosen moderates.    Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.    Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr.    Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.    You can find transcripts for each episode on the podcast pages in our Media Library.

Yvonne R. Cort is a Partner at Capell Barnett Matalon & Schoenfeld LLP, where she focuses her practice on resolving Federal and New York State tax controversies. Yvonne has been selected to New York Metro SuperLawyers, a designation given to only 5% of the lawyers in the state. She has served as Chair of the IRS Downstate New York Practitioner Liaison Group and Chair of the Business Law, Tax and Accounting Committee of the Nassau County Bar Association. She is a member of the Executive Committee of the NYS Bar Association Tax Section, where she has contributed to policy papers.. Yvonne has been honored as a Long Island Business News Top 50 Women in Business, and is a recipient of the Long Island Power Women in Business award from Long Island Press. Yvonne received her B. A. magna cum laude from the University of Rochester, and her J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Yvonne is admitted to the Bar in New York and Pennsylvania, and admitted to practice before the United States Tax Court. She is a Steering Committee Member for Women Owned Law.   Listen to this informative The Confident Retirement episode with Yvonne Cort about tax law controversy and how to handle. Here is what to expect on this week's show: Misconceptions about tax law. What is a residency audit? Misconceptions about being audited by the IRS. It's important to get a professional involved ASAP. What about interest and penalties on the taxes? Who makes decisions on how money is spent?   Connect with Yvonne: https://cbmslaw.com/team/yvonne-r-cort/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Holly Fernandez Lynch and I continue our discussion of clinical research ethics with co-hosts Rahima Ghafoori and Caroline Gozigian (UVA Law '23). In this Part 2 of our interview, we focus on questions of payment, exploitation, and trust. As a reminder, in Part I, Holly introduced the basic regulatory framework governing clinical trials, with a focus on laws and rules impacting payment. She also discussed the benefits of and concerns about human challenge studies, and shared some historical examples. Holly Fernandez Lynch, JD, MBE, is Assistant Professor of Medical Ethics in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the Perelman School of Medicine (PSOM), University of Pennsylvania. She has a secondary appointment as an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.A lawyer and bioethicist by training, Professor Fernandez Lynch's scholarly work focuses on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pharmaceutical policy, access to investigational medicines outside clinical trials, clinical research ethics, and the ethics of gatekeeping in health care. Her specific areas of expertise include Institutional Review Board (IRB) quality, payment to research participants, research prioritization, pre-approval access pathways (e.g., Expanded Access, Emergency Use Authorization, and Right to Try), and efforts to balance speed and certainty in drug approvals, including pathways that rely on post-approval trials such as accelerated approval. Links:Lynch HF, Darton TC, Levy J, McCormick F, Ogbogu U, Payne RO, Roth AE, Shah AJ, Smiley T, Largent EA. Promoting Ethical Payment in Human Infection Challenge Studies. Am J Bioeth. 2021 Mar;21(3):11-31. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1854368. Epub 2021 Feb 4. PubMed PMID: 33541252.Shah SK, Miller FG, Darton TC, Duenas D, Emerson C, Lynch HF, Jamrozik E, Jecker NS, Kamuya D, Kapulu M, Kimmelman J, MacKay D, Memoli MJ, Murphy SC, Palacios R, Richie TL, Roestenberg M, Saxena A, Saylor K, Selgelid MJ, Vaswani V, Rid A. Ethics of controlled human infection to address COVID-19. Science. 2020 May 22;368(6493):832-834. doi: 10.1126/science.abc1076. Epub 2020 May 7. PubMed PMID: 32381590.Largent EA, Heffernan KG, Joffe S, Lynch HF. Paying Clinical Trial Participants: Legal Risks and Mitigation Strategies. J Clin Oncol. 2020 Feb 20;38(6):532-537. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.00250. Epub 2019 Jun 14. PubMed PMID: 31199697.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 75 years ago by the United Nations, set forth a set of civil, social, and economic rights that inspired the development of human rights' laws around the world. The declaration has been a north star for those working to build an equitable and fair society for all people ever since. But over the intervening decades, our economic agenda and policymaking have often focused on economic growth and business success metrics at the expense of human well-being. This economic framework, which preferences profits over people, has contributed to skyrocketing wealth and income inequality, economic instability, social unrest, and recently the rise of new authoritarian movements. The economic rights from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, however, are reemerging as part of a call for a more moral and equitable economic order. In this context, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and The New School's Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy recently announced the Partnership for a Human Rights Economy. The partnership will help advance scholarship and economic policymaking toward achieving human rights. On January 19, the Aspen Institute Economic Opportunities Program and The New School's Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy hosted a conversation on “Economics Reimagined: A Discussion on Building a Human Rights Economy.” Enjoy this engaging and informative discussion among our expert panelists and speakers about how we can change our economic framework to help build a more moral and inclusive economy. This event features opening remarks from Todd Howland (UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights), followed by a panel discussion with Rangita de Silva de Alwis (University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School), Jim Wallis (Georgetown University Center on Faith and Justice), Darrick Hamilton (The New School), Thea Lee (U.S. Department of Labor), and moderator Binyamin Appelbaum (The New York Times Editorial Board).

Holly Fernandez Lynch and I discuss clinical research ethics, including challenge trials, research subject payment, and diversity in medical research with co-hosts Rahima          Ghafoori and Caroline Gozigian (UVA Law '23). In this episode, Holly introduces the basic regulatory framework governing clinical trials, with a focus on laws and rules impacting payment. She also discusses the benefits of and concerns about human challenge studies, and shares some historical examples. In the next episode, Part II of our interview, we explore issues of coercion, inducement, and exploitation more explicitly.Holly Fernandez Lynch, JD, MBE, is Assistant Professor of Medical Ethics in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the Perelman School of Medicine (PSOM), University of Pennsylvania. She co-chairs the PSOM Research Ethics and Policy Series (REPS) and serves as Assistant Faculty Director of Online Educational Initiatives in the Department, where she helps lead the Master of Health Care Innovation. She has a secondary appointment as an Assistant Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.A lawyer and bioethicist by training, Professor Fernandez Lynch's scholarly work focuses on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pharmaceutical policy, access to investigational medicines outside clinical trials, clinical research ethics, and the ethics of gatekeeping in health care. Her specific areas of expertise include Institutional Review Board (IRB) quality, payment to research participants, research prioritization, pre-approval access pathways (e.g., Expanded Access, Emergency Use Authorization, and Right to Try), and efforts to balance speed and certainty in drug approvals, including pathways that rely on post-approval trials such as accelerated approval.Links:Lynch HF, Darton TC, Levy J, McCormick F, Ogbogu U, Payne RO, Roth AE, Shah AJ, Smiley T, Largent EA. Promoting Ethical Payment in Human Infection Challenge Studies. Am J Bioeth. 2021 Mar;21(3):11-31. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1854368. Epub 2021 Feb 4. PubMed PMID: 33541252.Shah SK, Miller FG, Darton TC, Duenas D, Emerson C, Lynch HF, Jamrozik E, Jecker NS, Kamuya D, Kapulu M, Kimmelman J, MacKay D, Memoli MJ, Murphy SC, Palacios R, Richie TL, Roestenberg M, Saxena A, Saylor K, Selgelid MJ, Vaswani V, Rid A. Ethics of controlled human infection to address COVID-19. Science. 2020 May 22;368(6493):832-834. doi: 10.1126/science.abc1076. Epub 2020 May 7. PubMed PMID: 32381590.Largent EA, Heffernan KG, Joffe S, Lynch HF. Paying Clinical Trial Participants: Legal Risks and Mitigation Strategies. J Clin Oncol. 2020 Feb 20;38(6):532-537. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.00250. Epub 2019 Jun 14. PubMed PMID: 31199697.

In this episode of See generally, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Professor Elizabeth Pollman joins Kristen Marino to discuss her research in corporate governance, venture capital, and startups. First, Professor Pollman describes her new article, The Making and Meaning of ESG. In the paper, she outlines the history of ESG, explains different conceptions and usages of the term, and offers an analytic critique of the term and its consequences. Then, she discusses her working paper, Startup Failure, which serves as a sequel to Startup Governance. She offers an original theory about the law and culture of startup failures. Lastly, Professor Pollman discusses her role as co-director of the Institute for Law & Economics at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Interview by Kristen Marino, Media Editor, Vol. 171, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Produced and edited by Andrew Gormley. Cover Art by Emily Horwitz, Online Executive Editor, Vol. 170, University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Transcript. Cite as: See generally, A Conversation with Professor Elizabeth Pollman, U. Pa. L. Rev. (Nov. 21, 2022), https://anchor.fm/see-generally-podcast. © University of Pennsylvania Law Review 2022.

Three experts on cities discuss the efforts of urban communities to navigate climate change. --- Experts from the University of Pennsylvania are on the ground at COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. In this special series from Energy Policy Now, they share their observations from the global climate conference and insights into key issues under negotiation. Eugenie Birch, Bill Burke-White, and Mauricio Rodas of the University of Pennsylvania explore the challenges that climate change, and effects ranging from extreme heat to flooding, present to cities in an era of rapid urbanization. They also discuss how cities are acting in concert to address climate impacts. Eugenie Birch is the Lawrence C. Nussdorf Chair of Urban Research and Education at the University of Pennsylvania's Weitzman School of Design. Her recent work focuses on global urbanization. Bill Burke-White is a Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and an expert on U.S. foreign policy, multilateral institutions, and international law. Mauricio Rodas is a Visiting Fellow with the University of Pennsylvania's Perry World House. From 2014 to 2019 he was the mayor of Quito, Ecuador.   Energy Policy Now is produced by The Kleinman Center for Energy Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. For all things energy policy, visit kleinmanenergy.upenn.eduSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Professor Cara McClellan, former counsel at NAACP LDF, and founding Director of the Advocacy for Racial and Civil Justice Clinic, at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Professor McClellan takes us through an extensive trial record largely ignored in oral arguments at SCOTUS this past week.  Then, Dahlia is joined by David Rothkopf whose book, American Resistance: The inside story of how the deep state saved the nation, details the folks who stuck around and tried to hold the line during the Trump years, and what we can learn from them.  In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Mark Joseph Stern to talk about the judges pushing back in gun cases post Bruen, and the lower courts defying Supreme Court precedent as they seek to curtail LGBTQ rights.  Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Professor Cara McClellan, former counsel at NAACP LDF, and founding Director of the Advocacy for Racial and Civil Justice Clinic, at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Professor McClellan takes us through an extensive trial record largely ignored in oral arguments at SCOTUS this past week.  Then, Dahlia is joined by David Rothkopf whose book, American Resistance: The inside story of how the deep state saved the nation, details the folks who stuck around and tried to hold the line during the Trump years, and what we can learn from them.  In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Mark Joseph Stern to talk about the judges pushing back in gun cases post Bruen, and the lower courts defying Supreme Court precedent as they seek to curtail LGBTQ rights.  Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In conversation with Dorothy Roberts Referred to by Jelani Cobb as ''a Dean of American journalism,'' Charlayne Hunter-Gault has chronicled some of the past half-century's most important moments in Black life, culture, and politics. Often the only Black woman in the newsroom, she wrote for The New Yorker and The New York Times, where in 1968 she established the paper's Harlem bureau. Also a broadcast journalist, Hunter-Gault served as a reporter and anchor for PBS's McNeil-Lehrer Newshour, NPR's chief Africa correspondent, and the South Africa bureau chief for CNN. Her many honors include two Emmy Awards, two Peabody Awards, and honors from the National Urban coalition and the National Association of Black Journalists. Ranging from the Civil Rights Movement to Barack Obama's presidential election, My People is a definitive compilation of reportage and commentary that explores the Black American experience.  Dorothy Roberts is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. She is also founding director of the Penn Program on Race, Science & Society in the Center for Africana Studies and the author of several books that focus on health, social justice, and bioethics. Her most recent book is Torn Apart: How the Child Welfare System Destroys Black Families-and How Abolition Can Build a Safer World. (recorded 10/24/2022)

Is rigor necessary to teach more inclusively? What is a deficit ideology and how does it affect students? In this episode, Jamiella Brooks, director of student equity and inclusion initiatives at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, and Julie McGurk, director of faculty teaching initiatives at Yale University's Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning, answer these questions, and discuss three principles that instructors can use to reframe their thinking about rigor.This discussion stems from a session hosted by Drs. Brooks and McGurk, “Rigor as Inclusive Practice: Beyond Deficit Models,” presented at the Fall 2021 POD Network conference. This session was also written about in the Chronicle of Higher Education article, “The Redefinition of Rigor” (March 2022). Note: at the time of recording, Jamiella Brooks served as an Associate Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of Pennsylvania.Resources:“10 Dysfunctional Illusions of Rigor.” To Improve the Academy (2010). Craig E. Nelson. Volume 28, 2010. “Readers Respond on Rigor” (February 2022). Matt Reed in “Confessions of a Community College Dean,” Inside Higher Ed. The work of Uri Treisman, executive director of the Charles A. Dana Center, The University of Texas at Austin Transparency in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education (TILT)

Jennifer Leonard is the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School's chief innovation officer and the executive director of the Future of the Profession Initiative. As chief innovation officer, Jennifer advances projects that evolve our understanding of the skills and knowledge lawyers need to thrive in a rapidly changing professional landscape. She and her colleagues also develop multidisciplinary projects that engage law students with creative thinkers from the Wharton School, Penn Engineering, the School of Nursing, and more to design solutions and make civil legal systems more accessible. In today's episode, Jennifer tells us about her groundbreaking role as the first and only chief innovation officer at a law school, how she is using design thinking to collaborate across Penn and with peers at other law schools, and her advice for creative law students who want to enter the world of Big Law—as well as her advice for those firms.

Is today's America really the one the Founding Fathers envisioned? That is the question constitutional scholar Kermit Roosevelt asks, tracing the majority of American political sentiments from the modern day not back as far as the Revolution, but to the Reconstruction era. Kermit Roosevelt is a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania and the great-great grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt. He is an expert in constitutional law, national security, conflicts of law and civil liberties. His work has been published in the Virginia Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, and the Columbia Law Review and he is the author of two historical novels examining themes of equality and civil liberty. In his latest book, The Nation That Never Was: Reconstructing America's Story, Roosevelt argues that America in the modern day is not the ideological descendant of the era of the Founding Fathers but that of Reconstruction and Abraham Lincoln. Examining the writings, history and political thought of America's first century, he explains that many of the country's core political beliefs, especially equality, originated in the Reconstruction era not as a return to the Founder's vision but as a rejection of it. Join us as Roosevelt rethinks how American history is viewed, and how the ideas underpinning the country have shifted in the past two centuries—and along with it, what it means to be American itself. SPEAKERS Kermit Roosevelt III David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Author, The Nation That Never Was: Reconstructing America's Story In Conversation with David Spencer Founder, SenSpa; Member, Commonwealth Club of California Board of Governors We are currently hosting all of our live programming via YouTube live stream. This program was recorded Live on September 8th, 2022 by the Commonwealth Club of California. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

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.

There was a lot to take in as a result of this most recent Supreme Court term, so you would be forgiven if, while processing the overturning of Roe v. Wade and some of the other headline making decisions that were rendered, you may have missed a case involving Miranda rights. What did the court decide in Vega v. Tekoh, and why is it important? We asked David Rudovsky, Senior Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and a civil rights attorney with the firm of Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing, Feinberg & Lin, LLP. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Last month an appeals court in Missouri confirmed a decision that awarded a woman more than $5 million from Geico after she says she contracted an STD from her partner in his car. That claim raises the question of what's considered "the normal use of a vehicle." Tom Baker, an insurance law professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, explains that how the case got to this point and details other interesting insurance claims he's seen.

Among the flurry of significant decisions made by the Supreme Court in the final days of its term was a 6-3 ruling in favor of a former Washington state public high school football coach who led his players in prayer. Was this case simply a matter of free speech, or does it signal a potentially deeper shift? Kermit Roosevelt, Professor for the Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, examines the implications of the Supreme Court's verdict, and how it could make the separation of church and state more muddled. Roosevelt recently published his latest book, The Nation That Never Was. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode of Along the Way Life's Journey, I chat with David Anderman and he certainly has a vast journey to discuss; all the way from Star Wars to SpaceX. David is an attorney and seasoned executive with a passion for business strategy and making deals. His sweet spot is the intersection of technology, media, and consumer products. He is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania with a BA, studying Film Theory and Political Science. He then earned  his JD at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School where he  was the Executive Editor of the Law Review, all while interning and drafting opinions at the Supreme Court of California. David is currently the President of Proxima Centauri where he advises technology startups and venture funds on strategy, dealmaking, IP, and other critical matters. Follow David: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidanderman/ Website: https://www.proximacentauri.com/ Follow Carl: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/toeverypageaturning/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CarlBuccellatoAuthor LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/carl-buccellato-60234139/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVB3YH1iQxK4IL4ya5j4-Jg Website: https://toeverypageaturning.com/ Produced by: https://socialchameleon.us

Last October, we released an episode entitled, “The Case for Supreme Court Reform.” Since then, the urgency to reform our highest court has only intensified, as public trust in the Court continues to decline and the Court's legitimacy along with it. This week, Jeanne Hruska speaks with Kermit Roosevelt from the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School about the "how to" of Supreme Court reform. They dive into the mechanics of establishing term limits for justices and expanding the Court. They also discuss the difference between the symptoms and the cause of the Court's legitimacy crisis.   Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.org Today's Host: Jeanne Hruska, ACS Sr Advisor for Communications and Strategy Guest: Kermit Roosevelt, David Berger Professor for the Administration of Justice at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Link: "Coming to Terms with Term Limits: Fixing the Downward Spiral of Supreme Court Appointments," by Kermit Roosevelt III and Ruth-Helen Vassilas Link: "I Spent 7 Months Studying Supreme Court Reform. We Need to Pack the Court Now," by Kermit Roosevelt III Link: "The Supreme Court isn't well. The only hope for a cure is more justices," by Nancy Gertner and Laurence H. Tribe Link: "Majority Say Let Roe Stand; Scotus Approval Rating Drops," Monmouth University Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2022.

Each year millions of Americans face the reality of living with a mental illness. Since 1949, the United States has observed the month of May as Mental Health Awareness Month to raise awareness and educate the public about mental illnesses, the realities of living with these conditions, and strategies for attaining mental health and wellness. In this episode of Measured Justice, our hosts Erik Luna and Ashley Oddo are joined by Stephen Morse, the Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law, Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry, and Associate Director for the Center for Neuroscience & Society at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; as well as Margo Schlanger, the Wade H. and Dores M. McCree Collegiate Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School, to discuss the effects of mental health on the criminal justice system. Our guests take a look at mental health while incarcerated including access to care, access to medications and the types of charges that can be attributed to mental health issues; the implications of solitary confinement on a prisoner's mental health; and the fact that prisoners with mental health issues are more likely to be incarcerated for a longer period of time and have a worse experience in incarceration than those without.

The so-called “Don't Say Gay” law down in Florida has generated a lot of headlines. So what does it actually say, and how will it affect children, teachers, and school districts? It's an important question, and a lot of the analysis has been twisted by one political narrative or another. We wanted to dig into what the law actually says and the ripple effects it can and is already having in education, so we asked Tobias Wolff, the Jefferson B. Fordham Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School to come on the podcast and explain. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Biden thought he could bury his weaksauce Supreme Court commission report by releasing it right before Christmas. Nice try Joey. We talked to commission member Kermit Roosevelt, of University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, about being radicalized by his fellow liberals on the commission. Not because they're radical too, but because they're so institutionalist he got fed up.The full version of this premium episode is available exclusively to our Patreon supporters. To join, visit www.patreon.com/fivefourpod See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Last week, Justice Stephen G. Breyer announced his decision to retire after 28 years on the U.S. Supreme Court. To reflect on his legacy, both personal and professional, today's episode is a two-part conversation with guests who have unique insights into Justice Breyer's life and work. Joining host Jeffrey Rosen for the first part of the conversation are two former law clerks to Justice Breyer. Neal Katyal, who clerked for Justice Breyer from 1996 – 1997, is a partner at Hogan Lovells and the Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of National Security Law at Georgetown University Law Center, and Theodore Ruger, who clerked for Justice Breyer from 1997 – 1998, is the Dean of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and Bernard G. Segal Professor of Law. For the second part of the conversation, Nell Breyer, executive director of the Marshall Scholars Association and Foundation and Justice Breyer's daughter, joins us to share some family memories and life lessons learned from her dad.   The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. In honor of the 234th anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, every dollar you give to support the We the People podcast campaign will be doubled with a generous 1:1 match up to a total of $234,000, made possible by the John Templeton Foundation! Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

Last week, Justice Stephen G. Breyer announced his decision to retire after 28 years on the U.S. Supreme Court. To reflect on his legacy, both personal and professional, today's episode is a two-part conversation with guests who have unique insights into Justice Breyer's life and work. Joining host Jeffrey Rosen for the first part of the conversation are two former law clerks to Justice Breyer. Neal Katyal, who clerked for Justice Breyer from 1996 – 1997, is a partner at Hogan Lovells and the Paul and Patricia Saunders Professor of National Security Law at Georgetown University Law Center, and Theodore Ruger, who clerked for Justice Breyer from 1997 – 1998, is the Dean of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and Bernard G. Segal Professor of Law. For the second part of the conversation, Nell Breyer, executive director of the Marshall Scholars Association and Foundation and Justice Breyer's daughter, joins us to share some family memories and life lessons learned from her dad.   The National Constitution Center relies on support from listeners like you to provide nonpartisan constitutional education to Americans of all ages. In honor of the 234th anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, every dollar you give to support the We the People podcast campaign will be doubled with a generous 1:1 match up to a total of $234,000, made possible by the John Templeton Foundation! Visit www.constitutioncenter.org/we-the-people to donate, and thank you for your crucial support. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Continue today's conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly.

This Postscript engages two of the country's most celebrated legal scholars to discuss the criminalization of abortion and miscarriage, the elimination of exceptions for rape and incest, the political and legal repercussions of the Supreme Court's ruling on Texas SB-8, and yesterday's news from the FDA making medication abortions more accessible to some women in the United States. Michele Goodwin is a chancellors' Professor of Law at the University of California, Irvine Law School. She recently authored Policing the Womb: Invisible Women and the Criminalization of Motherhood (Cambridge University Press 2020) and you can hear her interview with New Books in Law. Her widely New York Times essay, “I was Raped by My Father and an Abortion Saved My Life,” interrogates the impact of abortion on girls who are raped by family members. The episode of her podcast with Renee Bracey Sherman mentioned in the conversation is On the Issues with Michele Goodwin, “Supreme Court Rundown: Will Roe Survive?.  Mary Ziegler is the Stearns Weaver Miller Professor at Florida State University College of Law and visiting professor at Harvard Law School Spring 2022. Her most recent book is Abortion and the Law in America: A Legal History, Roe v. Wade to the Present (Cambridge University Press, 2020) and Dollars for Life: The Antiabortion Movement and the Fall of the Republican Establishment is forthcoming from Yale University Press in 2022. Dr. Ziegler's public facing scholarship includes her recent piece in The Atlantic exploring the constitutional chaos that may be created as other states deploy Texas's anti-abortion bounty system. Their coauthored “Whatever Happened to the Exceptions for Rape and Incest” in The Atlantic is mentioned in the podcast – as well as forthcoming scholarship on medication abortion by Allison Whelan, Sharswood Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School is also mentioned. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Postscript engages two of the country's most celebrated legal scholars to discuss the criminalization of abortion and miscarriage, the elimination of exceptions for rape and incest, the political and legal repercussions of the Supreme Court's ruling on Texas SB-8, and yesterday's news from the FDA making medication abortions more accessible to some women in the United States. Michele Goodwin is a chancellors' Professor of Law at the University of California, Irvine Law School. She recently authored Policing the Womb: Invisible Women and the Criminalization of Motherhood (Cambridge University Press 2020) and you can hear her interview with New Books in Law. Her widely New York Times essay, “I was Raped by My Father and an Abortion Saved My Life,” interrogates the impact of abortion on girls who are raped by family members. The episode of her podcast with Renee Bracey Sherman mentioned in the conversation is On the Issues with Michele Goodwin, “Supreme Court Rundown: Will Roe Survive?.  Mary Ziegler is the Stearns Weaver Miller Professor at Florida State University College of Law and visiting professor at Harvard Law School Spring 2022. Her most recent book is Abortion and the Law in America: A Legal History, Roe v. Wade to the Present (Cambridge University Press, 2020) and Dollars for Life: The Antiabortion Movement and the Fall of the Republican Establishment is forthcoming from Yale University Press in 2022. Dr. Ziegler's public facing scholarship includes her recent piece in The Atlantic exploring the constitutional chaos that may be created as other states deploy Texas's anti-abortion bounty system. Their coauthored “Whatever Happened to the Exceptions for Rape and Incest” in The Atlantic is mentioned in the podcast – as well as forthcoming scholarship on medication abortion by Allison Whelan, Sharswood Fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School is also mentioned. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Watch the eventhere. In conversation with Dorothy Roberts Sandra Shaber Memorial Lecture Recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the ''100 Most Influential Lawyers in America,'' Kathryn Kolbert made history in 1992 when she argued the case Planned Parenthood v. Casey before the U.S. Supreme Court, a case widely recognized as protecting the right to an abortion guaranteed by Roe v. Wade. The founder of the Athena Center for Leadership at Barnard College and the cofounder of the Center for Reproductive Rights, she created and was the executive producer of NPR's Justice Talking series. Julie F. Kay has spent decades on the front lines of the legal fight to advance gender equality and religious freedom in the U.S. and internationally. After starting her career in law as a staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights , she has since helped pave the way for the legalization of abortion in Ireland, fought to protect the parenting rights of people leaving ultra-religious communities, and served as a founding president of Women's Link Worldwide.  In Controlling Women, Kolbert and Kay offer a comprehensive account of the struggle to safeguard the protections of Roe v. Wade and preserve women's fundamental reproductive rights in the face of nearly 50 years of legal battles. Dorothy Roberts is a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. She is also founding director of the Penn Program on Race, Science & Society in the Center for Africana Studies and the author of several books that focus on health, social justice, and bioethics. (recorded 12/14/2021)

Welcome back to Environmental Professionals Radio, Connecting the Environmental Professionals Community Through Conversation, with your hosts Laura Thorne and Nic Frederick! On today's episode, we talk with Tiffany Duong, writer, explorer and motivational speaker about Chasing Your Dreams, Environmental Storytelling and Adventuring.   Read her full bio below.Help us continue to create great content! If you'd like to sponsor a future episode hit the support podcast button or visit www.environmentalprofessionalsradio.com/sponsor-form  Showtimes: 1:57  Nic & Laura talk about rejection8:36  Interview with Tiffany Duong starts10:45  Tiffany chases her dreams to the Galapagos19:39 Connecting the dots in the Amazon28:25  Environmental storytelling34:18  Adventuring Please be sure to ✔️subscribe, ⭐rate and ✍review.  This podcast is produced by the National Association of Environmental Professions (NAEP). Check out all the NAEP has to offer at NAEP.org. Connect with Tiffany Duong at linkedin.com/in/tiffanytvduong Guest Bio:Tiffany Duong is a writer, explorer and motivational speaker. She holds degrees from UCLA and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Inspired by a dive trip, she left corporate law to campaign for our planet. Now, from dense jungles, remote oceans and her slice of paradise in the Florida Keys, she gives voice to what's happening in the natural world. Her mission is to inspire meaningful action and lasting change. Follow her on Twitter/Instagram @tiffmakeswaves. Music CreditsIntro: Givin Me Eyes by Grace MesaOutro: Never Ending Soul Groove by Mattijs MullerSupport the show (https://www.environmentalprofessionalsradio.com/sponsor-form)

In this episode, AAI Vice President of Legal Advocacy Randy Stutz sits down with Professor Herb Hovenkamp for a wide ranging conversation about current debates over first principles of antitrust law.  When the Supreme Court says, “the antitrust laws protect competition,” what exactly is it saying they protect?  While there seems to be confusion in the popular press about the meaning of antitrust law's “consumer welfare” goal, is there confusion (or disagreement) among antitrust experts, too? In exploring these fundamental questions, Stutz and Hovenkamp discuss whether competition can be defined other than by reference to its effects; the price and non-price effects caused by competition; the proper definition of consumer welfare; how antitrust applies to labor markets and handles welfare tradeoffs; the Supreme Court's decision in NCAA v. Alston; how to evaluate behavior that has effects in multiple markets; how to deal with evidentiary challenges associated with measuring output effects, including in exclusionary conduct and merger cases involving nascent competitors; how output effects should be considered in light of the need for “sustainable competition”; and the problem of biased error-cost analysis in the federal courts. Moderator: Randy Stutz, Vice President of Legal Advocacy, American Antitrust Institute Guest: Prof. Herbert Hovenkamp, James G. Dinan University Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and The Wharton School

The immigration system in the United States has a lot of serious problems. While immigration was a constant focus during the Trump administration, the problems in the system predate that administration, and for the most part they still exist today. Why is immigration reform so hard to accomplish in America? What are the key issues everyone agrees on, and why don't they get fixed? And what can the country do right now to address the biggest problems with our immigration system? Sarah Paoletti, Practice Professor of Law and Director of the Transnational Legal Clinic at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School talks on the podcast about the biggest holes in American immigration and why the system tends to stay broken.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hear Jennifer Leonard, Chief Innovation Officer and Executive Director of the Future of the Profession Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, describe what innovation means, how it works, and how it shows up in the legal profession and beyond.  Instagram: @_leadersandchangemakers Email: leadersandchangemakers@gmail.com

On September 15, 2021, The Federalist Society's Practice Groups hosted a conference titled The Antitrust Paradox: Where We've Been and Where We're Going. This panel of experts reviewed the history of antitrust law, with a special focus on the consumer welfare standard, and offered their diverse perspectives on its origins, purposes, and effectiveness.Featuring:Prof. Elyse Dorsey, Visiting Scholar, University of Virginia; Adjunct Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityProf. Michael L. Katz, Sarin Chair Emeritus in Strategy and Leadership, Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley; former Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economic Analysis, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of JusticeBilal Sayyed, Senior Adjunct Fellow, TechFreedom; former Director, Office of Policy Planning, Federal Trade CommissionModerator: Hon. Makan Delrahim, Adjunct Lecturer in Law, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; former Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

The Jepson Leadership Forum, Moving People: The Perils and Promise of Nationalism, presents Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, President and CEO of the International Peace Institute, Perry World House Professor of Practice of Law and Human Rights, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and former Jordanian Ambassador to the United States for the webinar "The Promise of Global Human Rights." The Forum invites scholars, activists, and experts to discuss the moral, ethical, and legal implications of global migration and asylum. Join us as we explore how leaders and communities navigate the economic, social, and cultural transformations of a world with -- and without -- borders and walls. Sept. 13, 2021

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.

This week's guest is Jennifer Leonard, Chief Innovation Officer at The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and the Executive Director of the Future of the Profession Initiative (FPI) at Penn Law. Jennifer joins us to talk about her work with FPI, the record $125M donation to Penn Law from the W.P. Carey Foundation, and the amazing Board of Advisors and people behind FPI. The multidisciplinary approach that FPI takes toward shaping the future of the practice brings together the wealth of schools there at Penn, including the Wharton School, Penn Engineering, the School of Nursing, and more. This approach fits Penn's founder, Benjamin Franklin's "entire notion of what education should be is deeply interdisciplinary" and it bridges the ideas of different industries in a way that overcomes some self-limitations that the legal industry places upon itself. The Future of the Profession Initiative allows for creative approaches to how we educate our lawyers, and how we envision what the profession looks like in ten years with events such as the Law 2030 Conference, and the Future of Racial Equality webinar. One of the most unique projects coming out of Penn Law and FPI is the Five-Year Out Academy which brings back Penn Law alumni at their five-year post-graduation mark and helps these grads navigate the next phase of their career. Information Inspirations There are big data, and there are small data, and there is storytelling. The trick is understanding how to leverage all three. The upcoming webinar on "Storytelling: How to bridge the gap between small and big data" looks to explain exactly how to do that. Sara Lin, a former guest on the podcast, points out that Data Science and Library Science are partners when it comes to ways of working smarter with information. Her article, "10 ways Data science can help Librarians" in AALL Spectrum, checks off the reason librarians need to develop data science skills. Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT) are a big deal these days. K&L Gates decided to put out a client alert explaining NFTs and then minted that article into its own NFT. In-house legal departments are demanding that tech companies start recruiting talent who have firsthand knowledge of the problems facing their departments. With companies like Deloitte hiring people like Bob Taylor, it seems that some are getting the message. 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.

Voter suppression can be used as a tactic to influence the results of an election by discouraging and preventing certain groups from voting. It has become an important issue of discussion after the 2020 Election. We were honored to invite three keynote speakers to join us in conversation to discuss the past and current mechanisms of voter suppression in the US. We welcomed Professor Michael Kang from Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, Professor Neil Makhija from the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, and Professor Kate Shaw from Cardozo School of Law to lead a fruitful discussion on these topics.

In this episode, we speak with Xander Meise, Senior Fellow at the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law at University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Political Partner of the Truman National Security Project, and Adjust Professor at Georgetown University Law Center. We discuss the future of climate policy in the U.S. and abroad and explore the best possible methods of negotiating international climate agreements, ethical government actions, and potential pitfalls awaiting current efforts.

In this episode, we speak with Professor Kermit Roosevelt of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. We discuss the ins and outs of the impeachment process and how it differs from a criminal process. This episode was recorded on February 15, 2021, two days after President Trump was acquitted by the Senate on the impeachment charge of inciting an insurrection.

Today we'll meet Sheila Murphy. Sheila always wanted to be a lawyer. As Sheila approached her college years, she elected to attend Binghamton University. She completed her coursework early there, so she worked for a year before starting at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. After earning her JD, she was ready to meet her early vocational goal. She was now an attorney.   Sheila went to work for the firm of Thacher, Proffitt and Wood, and with much consternation, became a litigator for them. She had a fear of public speaking and was certain she didn't belong in the position, but she decided she had to give it a shot. To her surprise and relief, she became increasingly better at the work as time went on. Her successes gave her a new confidence and maturity, and she enjoyed her career at the firm until it was time for a change when she and her husband began their family.   Thus, Sheila's first professional pivot came after the birth of her child. Though she loved her work, she found herself looking for another position that might be more accommodating to her family needs. She had established a sizable professional network, and she began searching out leads for an opportunity to take her career in the new direction she wanted. She found that opportunity at MetLife. There she worked again in litigation along with business advising and some oversight of regulatory attorneys. Her years there were both happy and fruitful as she once more gained great experience and learned from the work she did.   It was during these years that Sheila had a realization and epiphany that made a huge difference to her career. Listen as she recounts to Amy what occurred and how that event caused her to assert herself in her work and thus move forward professionally.   She spent many happy years there, but she began thinking about what she should do next. As she thought over her idea of a bold move, she began what she calls an “interview tour”. She networked with knowledgeable individuals to gain clarity and insight into her possibilities. She did a verbal needs assessment to see where her skills might best serve. Then she pondered the “what ifs”. “What if I decide to do this? How would I go about it?” She refined her list of possibilities and made the decision that she wanted to continue to work with other attorneys. She tested her business concepts on many of them and they gave her great feedback. Eventually she was ready to resign from MetLife and become her own boss with her own business.   Her business now focuses on working with two groups. The first group is comprised of women attempting to gain control over their careers. She helps them find their way to the next level and/or develop their own book of business. The second group is made up of business professionals who are not lawyers. They gain guidance on climbing their own career ladders and navigating the corporate climate. In her new role as a career coach, consultant and advisor, she is helping professionals shortcut those hurdles she maneuvered. She works to help her clients find their own path to forging the careers that they deserve. Though her life remains full of challenges, she says her happiness is now “through the roof”.   Topics in this episode: Methods for attracting clients to your business How to meticulously build career and business models How good networking strategies enhance a career How to plan for a successful outcome How self-evaluation is an important first step Why careful financial planning is essential before starting a business   Links: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sheilamurphyfocusforward/ focus-forward-consulting.com

“Innovation isn't about disrupting everything and turning the world on its head; Innovation can be a tiny adjustment in the way you operate,” says Jennifer Leonard, Chief Innovation Officer and Executive Director of the Future of the Profession Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. In the inaugural episode of Strategy Sphere, Lavinia Calvert and Deborah Farone speak with Leonard, addressing how to focus on end users and how — using the tools of radical collaboration — each of us can uncover unexpected solutions to age-old problems. Hosts: Lavinia Calvert & Deborah Farone Co-Producers: Katelin Zweifel-Korzuchin & Brit Nowacki  Audio Engineer: Nikki Rasmussen Editor: Jessica Penfield

December 8th is safe harbor day. It's a key date for presidential elections and the Electoral College, dating back to the election of 1876, when the country was still scarred by the aftermath of the Civil War. So what does the safe harbor deadline mean for the 2020 election? What is the status of President Trump's remaining lawsuits challenging the results of the election? And... why is Texas suing Pennsylvania? Dr. Claire Finkelstein, Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School joins KYW Newsradio in Depth to break down what safe harbor day means for the increasingly strange situation happening in Washington DC and what to expect from the court challenges that haven't been settled yet. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This year's public-health crisis has ravaged state budgets across the country, as revenues plummet while spending explodes. For some states, this has dramatically worsened pre-existing fiscal problems caused by decades of mismanagement of pension obligations. Guest David Skeel argues that in order to help those states in particular, Congress should create the option of state-government bankruptcy, which current law does not allow. https://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/dskeel/ (David Skeel) is the S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and the author of https://www.amazon.com/Debts-Dominion-History-Bankruptcy-America/dp/0691116377/?tag=natioaffai-20 (Debt's Dominion: A History of Bankruptcy Law in America). David also served as a member of Puerto Rico's Financial Oversight and Management Board, following the territory's bankruptcy crisis in 2016.  This podcast discusses themes from David's essay in the Summer 2020 issue of National Affairs, “https://nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/state-bankruptcy-revisted (State Bankruptcy Revisited).”