Podcasts about stanford law

Do asylum seekers in the U.S. have rights? Can the U.S. government forcibly deport them to a prison in El Salvador without due process? What about green card holders attending college? Since taking office, President Trump has focused on legal and undocumented immigrants alike, from Venezuelan asylum seekers to visa and green card college students—invoking the Alien Enemies Act to deport some, and even defying court orders. In this episode, Stanford Law immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón joins Rich Ford for a discussion about these unprecedented actions while also addressing the broader implications for human rights and the U.S.'s role as a refuge for persecuted individuals—and the potential for America's diminished international reputation and influence in the world.Links:Jennifer Chacón >>> Stanford Law pageLegal Phantoms >>> Stanford Law pageSurveillance Footage Shows Arrest of Tufts U. Student  >>> NY Times pageWhat the Venezuelans Deported to El Salvador Experienced >>> Time magazine pageConnect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X (00:00:00) : Introduction of guest Jennifer Chacón and Unprecedented Actions(00:09:00): Redefinition of Wartime Acts and Due Process(00:17:56): Legal Frameworks and Immigration Detention(00:18:36): Aggressive Tactics and Legal Boundaries(00:31:55): Vision of the United States and Future Outlook(00:32:54): Vigilance and Civic Engagement

The TikTok ban decision passed down by the Supreme Court late last year is a clear violation of First Amendment precedent, but President Trump's refusal to enact it as law is a constitutional crisis in the making. We brought Stanford Law professor, rising First Amendment star scholar, and Moderated Content host Evelyn Douek on the […]

Welcome back to 'AI Lawyer Talking Tech'! In today's episode, we're diving into the dynamic world of legal technology, where artificial intelligence continues to reshape the practice of law. From new AI-powered platforms designed to streamline workflows and analyze vast datasets, to discussions around the ethical considerations and regulatory landscape of this rapidly evolving field, we'll explore the latest advancements and the crucial conversations they're sparking within the legal profession. Stay tuned as we unpack the key developments that are impacting how legal services are delivered and consumed.The AI Ethics Dilemma: How Law Firms Are Navigating the Challenges of Artificial Intelligence19 Mar 2025Firsthand.coIt's Actually Not About The AI: A Conversation With Jordan Furlong19 Mar 2025Above The LawPractical applications of legal technology in government legal departments19 Mar 2025Thomson ReutersHow A SXSW Panel Should Make Us Rethink The Legal Profession's Rural Crisis19 Mar 2025Above The LawGenerative artificial intelligence is supercharging legal analytics19 Mar 2025ABA JournalThe Future of AI Compliance—Preparing for New Global and State Laws19 Mar 2025Smith AndersonPolicymakers and Industry Leaders Discuss AI Innovation at Bloomberg Industry Group Executive Forum19 Mar 2025Bloomberg GovernmentYour Personal Cell Phone and Discovery: Bring Your Own Device Policy Considerations19 Mar 2025New York State Bar AssociationData Privacy in the Age of Generative AI: Legal and Ethical Implications for Indian Corporations19 Mar 2025JD SupraLegalweek 2025: Legal Spend Management and Cost Control: Invoice Review Isn't Enough19 Mar 2025Elevate ServicesLegaltech Latest: Entegrata closes seed funding for data lakehouse business as Caddi launches following $5m backing19 Mar 2025Legal IT InsiderHow AI is Augmenting Human-Led Legal Advice at Citizens Advice20 Mar 2025Legaltech on MediumMore than data: AI, law & the indispensable human19 Mar 2025Thomson Reuters InstituteAI Legal Battles: Canada and Beyond18 Mar 2025GenAI-Lexology#0080: (CCT) Unpacking the “Human Element” in the GenAI Equation19 Mar 2025ILTA VoicesLitera flexes its platform with the launch of Litera One and Litera AI+19 Mar 2025Legal IT InsiderTop Five AI Procurement Questions General Counsel for Manufacturers Should Consider20 Mar 2025Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz PCBlog Post Will Ling Chi Kill The Corporate Transparency Act?19 Mar 2025Allen MatkinsCopyright Office Solidifies Stance on the Copyrightability of AI-Generated Works19 Mar 2025Perkins CoieBig Tech Calls for National AI Regulation to Stop Patchwork of State Laws: What Employers Need to Know19 Mar 2025Fisher & Phillips LLPKirkland & Ellis Partner: Slow-Evolving Case Law Is a Major E-Discovery Challenge19 Mar 2025Kirkland & Ellis LLPThe Rise of Micro-Credentials in BigLaw: How Certifications Are Shaping Legal Careers18 Mar 2025Firsthand.coLawyers Using AI Produce Better Work In Half The Time, Landmark Study Finds19 Mar 2025Forbes.comProfessional-grade GenAI: Four common questions, answered18 Mar 2025Thomson ReutersSteering through the UK's business legalities with a lawyer18 Mar 2025London Daily NewsExterro and Integreon Join Forces to Deliver the Gold Standard in Managed E-Discovery and Document Review Solutions18 Mar 2025EDRMCleary Gottlieb + Springbok AI: BigLaw Finally Gets It?18 Mar 20253 Geeks and a Law BlogRead more : Stanford Law's Rhode Center Launches Multidistrict Litigation Toolkit18 Mar 2025Stanford Law School

Welcome to today's episode of 'AI Lawyer Talking Tech', your source for the latest developments at the intersection of law and technology. The legal world is experiencing a rapid transformation, driven by advancements in artificial intelligence and a growing need for efficiency and specialization. Today, we'll delve into the increasing adoption of AI in various aspects of legal practice, from enhancing lawyer productivity and research to managing complex litigation and ensuring regulatory compliance. We'll also explore the evolving landscape of legal careers, the importance of data security, and the strategic decisions law firms are making to stay ahead in this dynamic environment.The Rise of Micro-Credentials in BigLaw: How Certifications Are Shaping Legal Careers18 Mar 2025Firsthand.coLawyers Using AI Produce Better Work In Half The Time, Landmark Study Finds19 Mar 2025Forbes.comProfessional-grade GenAI: Four common questions, answered18 Mar 2025Thomson ReutersSteering through the UK's business legalities with a lawyer18 Mar 2025London Daily NewsExterro and Integreon Join Forces to Deliver the Gold Standard in Managed E-Discovery and Document Review Solutions18 Mar 2025EDRMCleary Gottlieb + Springbok AI: BigLaw Finally Gets It?18 Mar 20253 Geeks and a Law BlogRead more : Stanford Law's Rhode Center Launches Multidistrict Litigation Toolkit18 Mar 2025Stanford Law SchoolHow to Have Secured Background Checks18 Mar 2025Santa Clarita Valley SignalAhead of the curve: reputation management in 202518 Mar 2025Financier WorldwideHeld to account: CFPB targets big tech18 Mar 2025Financier WorldwideAI and Beyond: Key Trends at ABA TECHSHOW 202518 Mar 2025LawyeristMarketing Partner Forum 2025: Which is more difficult? Getting the resources or getting the buy-in?18 Mar 2025Thomson ReutersPhantom Precedents: When AI Hallucinations Invade Judicial Reasoning18 Mar 2025SpicyIPEntegrata Raises $4.5M To Further Its Mission To Transform Law Firm Data Analytics and Business Intelligence18 Mar 2025LawSitesMake Sure You're Covered for the AI Copyright Fight: Insurance Safeguards After Thomson Reuters v. Ross18 Mar 2025IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property LawMaster of the Rolls gives speech on work of the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce18 Mar 2025SCL.orgUS equal opportunity commission demands 20 law firms disclose DEI employment practices18 Mar 2025MSN United StatesHow should law firms navigate data processing with their service providers?18 Mar 2025Law SocietyThe 5 biggest drawbacks of not using legal AI in your law firm18 Mar 2025Today's ConveyancerCleary Gottlieb Acquires Springbok AI to Boost Legal Tech Innovation18 Mar 2025Lawyer MonthlyThe rise of consultant lawyers and the future of legal services18 Mar 2025Legal FuturesLegal Innovators California: Dr Megan Ma + Legal AI18 Mar 2025Artificial LawyerGC Forum: Building a Case for the CLO of the Future18 Mar 2025JD SupraFederal Judicial Conference To Revise Rules of Evidence To Address AI Risks18 Mar 2025Debevoise Data BlogEnhance Your Justia Lawyer Directory Profile with AI-Powered Biography Assistance & Attract More Clients18 Mar 2025Legal Marketing & Technology BlogEntegrata Raises Seed Financing to Transform Legal Data Analytics and AI-Powered Insights18 Mar 2025Legaltech on MediumMarketing Partner Forum 2025: Which is more difficult? Getting the resources or getting the buy-in?18 Mar 2025Thomson Reuters Institute1/3 (Wrongly) Believe AI Will Do ‘Most Legal Tasks' By End Of 202518 Mar 2025Artificial LawyerHarbor acquires CLIENTSFirst Consulting to scale marketing tech offering18 Mar 2025Legal IT InsiderRelativity Announces its Fourth Annual AI Visionaries List18 Mar 2025Legal Technology News - Legal IT Professionals | Everything legal technology

Send us a textGuest Rahul Athaveya, a Stanford Law graduate turned tech entrepreneur, shares his profound journey from addiction and incarceration to redemption and purpose. Rahul discusses his experiences in prison, including founding the Prison Poetry Project, which has helped inmates through education and creative expression. The episode features heartfelt poetry readings, including Rahul's piece 'Incarceration' and Katische's own reflections on love and transformation. Rahul's near-death experience during COVID-19 and his subsequent recovery and reintegration into society highlight the power of resilience and hope. Join Katische and Rahul for an inspiring conversation about the human spirit, redemption, and the healing power of poetry.Chapter Timestamps:00:00 Introduction to the Infinite Life Podcast00:39 New Season: Conversations with Katische01:17 Rahul's Poem: Incarceration02:48 Introducing Rahul Athaveya03:55 Rahul's Journey and Poetry05:38 The Story Behind 'To Have Loved'08:09 Rahul's Writing Journey in Prison15:55 The Impact of Poetry in Prison24:46 Transformative Power of Education and Hope29:24 Introduction to Prison Life30:08 Reading 'Oh, Mongolian Beef'31:55 The Reality of Prison Food34:08 The Business of Prisons36:45 A Near-Death Experience48:47 Life After Prison50:59 Reflections on Love and Family53:46 Closing Thoughts and PoetryPodcaster?- host with Buzzsprout Buzzsprout is my podcast host of choice! 3 years in podcasting has led me to Buzzsprout!Looking for Podcast Guests? PodmatchTake the hassle out of endless emails, Facebook groups and pitches to get Pro guests. Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showFind out more about Katische and book sessions at https://katische.com/ Connect with and follow Katische on Facebook, LinkedIn, Goodreads, YouTube and Amazon

What are the legal implications of the unprecedented mass pardoning of the January 6th rioters? What does it say about American rule of law? President Biden's DOJ prosecuted nearly 1,600 of the January 6, 2021, rioters—many for acts of shocking violence against police and government offices. On January 20, newly sworn-in President Trump, in one of his first official acts, issued a sweeping grant of clemency to all of the rioters charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol attack. He pardoned most defendants and commuted the sentences of 14 members of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers militia, most of whom had been convicted of seditious conspiracy. The response from some of these violent rioters since the pardons has been alarming.“The people who did this, they need to feel the heat. We need to find and put them behind bars for what they did,” said Enrique Tarrio, the former national Proud Boys leader, sentenced to a 22-year sentence on seditious conspiracy charges, on Alex Jones' podcast soon after his pardon. Our guests today are Stanford Law Professor Shirin Sinnar and former DOJ prosecutor Brendan Ballou.Sinnar's scholarship, including a recent study of hate groups, focuses on the legal treatment of political violence, the procedural dimensions of civil rights litigation, and the role of institutions in protecting individual rights and democratic values in the national security contextBallou was a lawyer at the Department of Justice for five years. He resigned on January 23 soon after President Trump's pardons. In a New York Times opinion essay, he wrote: “For while some convicted rioters seem genuinely remorseful, and others appear simply ready to put politics behind them, many others are emboldened by the termination of what they see as unjust prosecutions. Freed by the president, they have never been more dangerous.” He graduated from Stanford Law in 2016.Links:Shirin Sinnar >>> Stanford Law pageNew York Times piece by Brendan Ballou >>> I Prosecuted the Capitol Rioters. They Have Never Been More Dangerous.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/X(00:00:00) The January 6th Prosecutions and the Pardon Power(00:06:26) Rewriting History and the Threat of Political Violence (00:11:56) The Future of Political Violence in the U.S. (17:24) Addressing Militia Violence and Legal Gaps(21:37) State-Level Prosecutions and Risks of Expanding Criminal Laws(25:27) Pardons, Political Violence, and Historical Parallels  

Brought to you by Trade Coffee! Get up to 3 bags free with any new Trade subscription at drinktrade.com/OA OA1117 - As Donald Trump's executive branch nominees continue to work their way through the confirmation process, we welcome Stanford Law professor Anne Joseph O'Connell to learn more about one of the most important legal protections we have against a fully imperial presidency. Professor O'Connell is one of the leading academic experts on the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, the legislation which Trump may or may not have intentionally circumvented in his last term to install acting heads of departments which would otherwise require Senate confirmation, and provides some essential background and context for what we might expect in his second term as his appointments continue to work their way through the confirmation process. Also covered: getting fired by Trump, defending pandas in court, Aileen Cannon and Clarence Thomas's fringe theory about the unconstitutionality of special counsels, and what Professor O'Connell learned from her time clerking for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  “Actings,” Anne Joseph O'Connell, Columbia Law Review (2020) Prof. O'Connell's Stanford Law bio page Bluesky post with Prof. O'Connell's notice of termination from the Trump administration Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Criminal law expert and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky joins Pam Karlan to discuss his book Criminal Justice in Divided America: Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy, published in January. In this episode, they explore what he sees as the failures of America's criminal justice system—from overly harsh sentences and prosecutorial abuses to the under-utilization of the jury system—that don't just harm individuals, but erode the very foundations of democratic governance. They also examine the rise and fall of community policing, the role of mental health in police encounters, and the impact of jury service on civic engagement, offering insights into how criminal justice shapes political and social landscapes while proposing steps toward reform.Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, teaches and writes about policing, prosecution, criminal law and the law of evidence at Stanford Law, where he is also the faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law pageCriminal Justice in Divided America, Police, Punishment, and the Future of Our Democracy >>> Stanford Lawyer magazine online feature(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Criminal Justice and the Erosion of DemocracyPam Karlan welcomes professor David Sklansky and explains the link between the crises of criminal justice and democracy, discussing how failures in criminal law and policy have undermined democratic values. The conversation touches on racial disparities, equal protection, and how the criminal justice system has contributed to public distrust in government institutions.(00:05:15) Chapter 2: Policing and PolarizationKarlan and Sklansky delve into the historical role of policing in fueling political polarization, particularly during the rise of crime as a central political issue in the late 20th century. Sklansky highlights the impact of police abuse on public confidence, the Republican Party's pivot toward tough-on-crime policies, and how bipartisan approaches to policing briefly improved public trust.(00:09:12) Chapter 3: The Rise and Fall of Community PolicingThe discussion focuses on community policing as a promising reform effort that ultimately fell short. Sklansky critiques its limited engagement with younger residents and those affected by police violence. He explains how the movement's failure to address systemic issues, like excessive police violence, eroded its credibility and relevance in modern reform conversations.(00:14:15) Chapter 4: Guns, Policing, and Mental Health CrisesThe discussion explores the connection between America's lax gun laws and police killings, highlighting the role of training and the unique challenges posed by mental health crises. Sklansky addresses the need for better collaboration between police and other services while emphasizing the importance of proper training in de-escalation.(00:19:00) Chapter 5: Small Police Departments and Training ChallengesKarlan and Sklansky examine the implications of having too many decentralized police departments in the U.S. They discuss issues like poor training, rehiring problematic officers, and the proliferation of SWAT teams. Sklansky offers insights on potential reforms and the influence of state and federal coordination in improving policing.(00:21:32) Chapter 6: The Role of Juries in DemocracyKarlan and Sklansky delve into the jury system as a cornerstone of democracy, discussing its impact on civic engagement, cross-sectional representation, and public trust. They highlight the need for systemic changes to improve accessibility, fair cross-section representation, and community participation in jury duty.

This week, I talk to Lael Weinberger about the doctrine of church autonomy—what it is and, more importantly, where it came from. Lael has written an excellent paper on the origins of church autonomy (here), as well as put to practice his musings in a recent amicus brief he filed in the D.C. Circuit in the case of O'Connell v. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (here). After we spent some time digging into Lael's past, we got to business discussing his paper and brief. Some of the topics we discussed included the definition and scope of church autonomy, the jurisdictional nature of this topic as it relates to the state and the church, the history of its development in the 19th century, and much more. Lael Weinberger is an attorney and legal scholar. He currently works of Gibson Dunn in Washington, D.C. (bio), and serves as a nonresident fellow at Stanford Law (bio). In the past, he clerked for Justice Neil Gorsuch on the United States Supreme Court, Judge Frank Easterbrook on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and Chief Justice Daniel Eismann on the Idaho Supreme Court. He earned a law degree with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School. He also holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, with a focus on American legal history. Cross & Gavel is a production of CHRISTIAN LEGAL SOCIETY. The episode was produced by Josh Deng, with music from Vexento.

Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate with host Rich Ford. Though unenforceable since 1948, these clauses are a lingering reminder of housing segregation and racism in the United States, as Professor Ho's own experience of discovering a covenant barring Asians from purchasing his home highlights. The conversation also looks at legislative efforts to remove the covenants and an innovative AI tool developed by Stanford's RegLab that helps counties identify and redact these covenants, streamlining the process while preserving the historical record.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Dan Ho  >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford's RegLab >>> Stanford Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to Racial Covenants and AB 1466Host Rich Ford introduces the episode, guests Professor Dan Ho and SLS student Mirac Suzgun, and the topic of racial covenants in real estate. They discuss the persistence of racially restrictive covenants, despite being declared unenforceable by the Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kramer (1948), and highlight California's AB 1466 law, which aims to address the issue.(00:04:00) Chapter 2: The Role of AI in Redacting Racial CovenantsDan Ho explains how Santa Clara County faced the challenge of identifying and redacting racial covenants from millions of historical deed records. The conversation shifts to the AI tool developed by Stanford's RegLab, which automates the identification of racially discriminatory language in property documents. Mirac Suzgun elaborates on the stages of the AI tool, including OCR and machine learning, to help counties meet their legal obligations.(00:10:01) Chapter 3: Historical Context and Persistence of Racial CovenantsRich Ford and Dan Ho delve into the history of racial covenants, explaining their rise after the Buchanan decision (1917) and their persistence even after the Shelley v. Kramer ruling. They discuss how these covenants, though unenforceable, served as a community signaling function, reinforcing housing segregation for decades.(00:16:13) Chapter 4: The Legacy of Racial CovenantsRich Ford and Mirac Suzgun discuss the evolution of state-sponsored race segregation and the role of private covenants in perpetuating housing discrimination. They emphasize how these covenants, often embedded in property deeds, remain binding on homeowners, illustrating the historical entrenchment of racial segregation in real estate.(00:18:48) Chapter 5: Uncovering Historical Data and ResponsibilityDan Ho shares findings from a study revealing the prevalence of racial covenants in Santa Clara County. The discussion highlights the significant responsibility of a small number of developers in enforcing these covenants, contrasting this with the example of Joseph Eichler, who resisted such practices and promoted housing reform.(00:23:11) Chapter 6: Utilizing Technology for Social JusticeThe conversation shifts to the innovative tools developed to identify and address racial covenants in property records. The hosts explore the implications of these discoveries for understanding historical injustices and the importance of retaining historical records while advocating for modern social justice initiatives, plus closing remarks.

How are victims of intimate partner violence meant to protect themselves—and, often, their children—without winding up dead, in hospital, or prison? It's a situation that many find themselves in. Approximately 15 percent of women in the United States are victims of intimate partner violence, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. But the legal system is not set up to help them. In this episode the executive director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Debbie Mukamal, and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes join Pam and Rich to discuss the Center's new study “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence,” that offers groundbreaking data and personal stories from women currently in prison because of intimate partner violence. They also touch on the systemic failures in the justice system in handling these complex cases.  Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Debbie Mukamal  >>> Stanford Law School PageFatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introductions and Goals of the Research Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss how the project on women incarcerated for killing their abusers began during the pandemic, sparked by a lack of national data on these cases with Debbie Mukamal and SLS student Jacqueline Lewittes. Mukamal explains how her team's long-standing relationships with the California Department of Corrections facilitated their research access despite COVID-19 restrictions.(00:04:12) Chapter 2: Research Design and Challenges The team outlines the complexities of designing the study, including broadening the focus beyond intimate partner killings and overcoming barriers like accessing reliable court records. They explain how they relied on direct interviews and used validated tools like the Danger Assessment and Composite Abuse Scale to assess the severity of abuse.(00:08:42) Chapter 3: Striking Findings and Legal Implications Explore key findings, including the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries among respondents and the failure of self-defense laws to protect abused women. Jacqueline highlights a specific case that illustrates how memory loss due to abuse complicates self-defense claims, underscoring the systemic legal failures.(00:18:30) Chapter 4: The Role of Intimate Partner Violence in Homicide CasesThe group delves into the startling statistics of women convicted of homicide in connection to intimate partner violence. Debbie Mukamal discusses how nearly 74% of women in their study had experienced abuse at the time of the offense, breaking down the subcategories of cases, from those who killed their abuser to others involving child fatalities.(00:21:25) Chapter 5: Systemic Failures in Protecting Abuse VictimsExamine the various ways in which the legal system fails to protect women who are victims of abuse. From denied protective orders to mistreatment by police and ineffective legal defense, the discussion highlights the failures at multiple levels and the resulting harsh sentences.(00:23:55) Chapter 6: Law Reform and the Impact of Trauma on Legal CulpabilityThis segment focuses on potential legal reforms, including changes to homicide statutes and the need for better understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in abuse survivors. Debbie Mukamal and Pam Karlan discuss the implications of TBI on a woman's ability to recall facts, and how reforms could better account for their experiences.

How can museums remain relevant in the digital age, where visual imagery is more accessible than ever? What role do museums play in fostering creativity and innovation in their communities?Stephen Reily is the Founding Director of Remuseum, an independent research project housed at Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville, Arkansas. Funded by arts patron David Booth with additional support by the Ford Foundation, Remuseum focuses on advancing relevance and governance in museums across the U.S. He works with museums to create a financially sustainable strategy that is human-focused, centering on inclusion, diversity, and important causes like climate change. During his time as director of the Speed Art Museum in Louisville, KY, Reily presented Promise, Witness, Remembrance, an exhibition in response to the killing of Breonna Taylor and a year of protests in Louisville. In 2022, he co-wrote a book documenting the exhibition. As an active civic leader, Reily has been a part of numerous community organizations and boards, like the Reily Reentry Project, supporting expungement programs for Kentucky citizens, Creative Capital, offering grants for the arts, and founded Seed Capital Kentucky, a non-profit that aims to improve the food economy in the area.A Yale and Stanford Law graduate, Reily clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens before launching a successful entrepreneurial career, experiences he draws upon for public engagement initiatives.“The opportunity is that we have never had a public that is more passionate and obsessed with visual imagery. If the owners of the best original imagery in the world can't figure out how to take advantage of the fact that the world has now become obsessed with these treasures that we have to offer as museums, then shame on us. This is the opportunity to say, if you're spending all day scrolling on Instagram looking for amazing imagery, come and see the original source. Come and see the real work. Let us figure out how to make that connection.”https://remuseum.orghttps://crystalbridges.orgwww.stephenreily.comwww.kentuckypress.com/9781734248517/promise-witness-remembrancewww.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.orgIG www.instagram.com/creativeprocesspodcast

“The opportunity is that we have never had a public that is more passionate and obsessed with visual imagery. If the owners of the best original imagery in the world can't figure out how to take advantage of the fact that the world has now become obsessed with these treasures that we have to offer as museums, then shame on us. This is the opportunity to say, if you're spending all day scrolling on Instagram looking for amazing imagery, come and see the original source. Come and see the real work. Let us figure out how to make that connection.”Stephen Reily is the Founding Director of Remuseum, an independent research project housed at Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville, Arkansas. Funded by arts patron David Booth with additional support by the Ford Foundation, Remuseum focuses on advancing relevance and governance in museums across the U.S. He works with museums to create a financially sustainable strategy that is human-focused, centering on inclusion, diversity, and important causes like climate change. During his time as director of the Speed Art Museum in Louisville, KY, Reily presented Promise, Witness, Remembrance, an exhibition in response to the killing of Breonna Taylor and a year of protests in Louisville. In 2022, he co-wrote a book documenting the exhibition. As an active civic leader, Reily has been a part of numerous community organizations and boards, like the Reily Reentry Project, supporting expungement programs for Kentucky citizens, Creative Capital, offering grants for the arts, and founded Seed Capital Kentucky, a non-profit that aims to improve the food economy in the area.A Yale and Stanford Law graduate, Reily clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens before launching a successful entrepreneurial career, experiences he draws upon for public engagement initiatives.https://remuseum.orghttps://crystalbridges.orgwww.stephenreily.comwww.kentuckypress.com/9781734248517/promise-witness-remembrancewww.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.orgIG www.instagram.com/creativeprocesspodcast

“The opportunity is that we have never had a public that is more passionate and obsessed with visual imagery. If the owners of the best original imagery in the world can't figure out how to take advantage of the fact that the world has now become obsessed with these treasures that we have to offer as museums, then shame on us. This is the opportunity to say, if you're spending all day scrolling on Instagram looking for amazing imagery, come and see the original source. Come and see the real work. Let us figure out how to make that connection.”Stephen Reily is the Founding Director of Remuseum, an independent research project housed at Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville, Arkansas. Funded by arts patron David Booth with additional support by the Ford Foundation, Remuseum focuses on advancing relevance and governance in museums across the U.S. He works with museums to create a financially sustainable strategy that is human-focused, centering on inclusion, diversity, and important causes like climate change. During his time as director of the Speed Art Museum in Louisville, KY, Reily presented Promise, Witness, Remembrance, an exhibition in response to the killing of Breonna Taylor and a year of protests in Louisville. In 2022, he co-wrote a book documenting the exhibition. As an active civic leader, Reily has been a part of numerous community organizations and boards, like the Reily Reentry Project, supporting expungement programs for Kentucky citizens, Creative Capital, offering grants for the arts, and founded Seed Capital Kentucky, a non-profit that aims to improve the food economy in the area.A Yale and Stanford Law graduate, Reily clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens before launching a successful entrepreneurial career, experiences he draws upon for public engagement initiatives.https://remuseum.orghttps://crystalbridges.orgwww.stephenreily.comwww.kentuckypress.com/9781734248517/promise-witness-remembrancewww.creativeprocess.infowww.oneplanetpodcast.orgIG www.instagram.com/creativeprocesspodcast

The bedrock of the legal profession is a commitment to upholding the rule of law. Unfortunately, as Stanford Law researchers discover in the complex world of international sanctions, lawyers can often facilitate non-compliance and evasion.It's been two years since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. And yet, businesses are still skirting sanctions imposed on Russia. As Erik Jensen, director of the Rule of Law Program at Stanford Law School, and law students Sarah Manney and Kyrylo Korol explore in this episode of Stanford Legal, lawyers could be playing a critical role in enabling Russian Oligarchs' evasive maneuvers.With hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan, the three guests explore the intricate relationship between legal practice and international sanctions, discussing insights from their research, the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, and potential solutions for safeguarding the rule of law.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Erik Jensen >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and OverviewKyrylo Korol discusses the responsibility of lawyers to uphold democracy and the impact of their actions on the profession. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the topic of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the international response.(00:01:33) Chapter 2: Genesis of the Policy LabErik Jensen explains the inception of the Policy Lab focusing on sanctions against Russia, including the motivation from an S-Term course and subsequent student enthusiasm.(00:03:16) Chapter 3: Kyrylo Korol's Personal MotivationKyrylo Korol shares his dual perspective as a Ukrainian and American lawyer, emphasizing the need to keep the discussion on Russia's war against Ukraine alive and his personal drive to support Ukraine.(00:05:32) Chapter 4: Focus of the Policy LabThe team discusses the main areas of their research, including the role of Russian oligarchs in the war and the involvement of legal professionals in facilitating sanctions evasion.(00:12:57) Chapter 5: Comparative Analysis and Legal FrameworksThe conversation shifts to the comparative study of how different countries regulate lawyers concerning sanctions and money laundering, and the ethical obligations of U.S. lawyers with Sarah Manney.(00:21:25) Chapter 6: Challenges and Implications for the Legal ProfessionThe team delves into the implications of their findings for the legal profession, discussing the balance between upholding legal privileges and preventing abuse, and addressing systemic risks and de-risking issues.

Michael McConnell is a Stanford Law professor and today we will discuss the Chevron Doctrine. The Supreme Court has just repealed the Chevron Doctrine in one of the Supreme Court's most important rulings of the year. This decision ends judicial deference for interpretations made by bureaucrats in the Federal agencies. For the past 40 years, the Supreme Court has allowed bureaucratic experts to interpret ambiguous statutes if their analysis was reasonable. No more. Now decision making goes back to the judiciary on how to interpret the law. Get full access to What Happens Next in 6 Minutes with Larry Bernstein at www.whathappensnextin6minutes.com/subscribe

01:00 Philosopher and author Rony Guldmann, https://ronyguldmann.com/ 17:00 Why the swift crackdown on the protests? 33:00 Conservative Claims of Cultural Oppression, https://ronyguldmann.com/conservative-claims-cultural-oppression/ 36:00 Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, Stanford Law profs and progenitors of disgraced FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried. https://ronyguldmann.com/faq/ 42:00 Affirmative action and student protests 57:30 Rony's memoir: The Star Chamber of Stanford, https://ronyguldmann.com/ 58:20 The Craft of Writing Effectively, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=154774

The Department of Justice in the US has filed a lawsuit against Live Nation Entertainment, Ticketmaster's parent company, alleging that it has created an illegal monopoly in the live entertainment industry. Guest: Mark Lemley, Professor of Law at Stanford Law and Director of the Law, Science and Technology Program at Stanford University Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Seg 1: Why do humans cry? For more than 20 years a study has been ongoing on when and why we cry, and it turns out crying may help us obtain better insight into human nature. Guest: Dr. Ad Vingerhoets, Professor of Clinical Psychology at Tilburg University Seg 2: View From Victoria: Rustad rules out a coalition John Rustad is ruling out a coalition and a non-compete clause, which means nothing is happening on merger talks anymore and BC United will need to go at it alone. Guest: Rob Shaw, Political Correspondent for CHEK News Seg 3: The Weekly Cecchini Check-in: The Trump trial is going into closing arguments and Nikki Haley says she will vote for Trump after all.  Guest: Reggie Cecchini, Washington Correspondent for Global News Seg 4: Kickin' it with the Caps Disappointment from Whitecap fans as news broke that Lionel Messi will not be traveling with the team for a showdown in Vancouver. Guest: Vanni Sartini, Coach of the Vancouver Whitecaps Seg 5: Does Live Nation have a stronghold on the concert ticket industry? The Department of Justice in the US has filed a lawsuit against Live Nation Entertainment, Ticketmaster's parent company, alleging that it has created an illegal monopoly in the live entertainment industry. Guest: Mark Lemley, Professor of Law at Stanford Law and Director of the Law, Science and Technology Program at Stanford University Seg 6: Was the serial killer linked to four Calgary cold cases operating in BC? Gary Allen Srery, a suspected serial killer from the United States, has been posthumously identified as responsible for the murders of four young females in Calgary during the 1970s. Guest: Travis McKenzie, Staff Sergeant of Alberta's RCMP Historical Homicide Unit Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many businesses and governments have a goal of reaching net zero emissions. Sounds good. But what does “net zero” even mean? And how do we get there? Alicia Seiger is a lecturer at Stanford Law School and leads sustainability and energy finance initiatives at Stanford Law, Graduate School of Business, and the Doerr School for Sustainability. She argues that when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, businesses need to get as good at accounting for their pollution as they are for their dollars. Guest: Alicia Seiger, Lecturer, Stanford Law School It's time for our annual spring appeal! At Climate One, we believe in the power of open conversations to drive positive change. Through our thought-provoking discussions and interviews, we strive not only to raise awareness of climate issues and solutions, but to also empower individuals — like each of our valued listeners — to take tangible steps toward a more sustainable future.  You can show your support for Climate One by contributing to our spring fundraising campaign. For complete show notes, visit our website. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Highlights from this week's conversation include:Eric's background in venture and investing (0:02)Lessons from a Bottom Decile Experience (2:20)Motivation to Enter the Venture Capital Space (3:45)Challenges for New LP Allocators (6:08)Supporting Emerging Managers (7:35)Specialists vs. Generalists (10:53)Judging New Fund Managers (16:24)Attributes for Winning in Fund Management (18:57)Insider Segment: Building Teams in Venture Capital (21:00)Starting in Venture Capital (27:02)Future of Venture Capital (28:14)Finding Family Offices (31:16)Investing through fund of funds (34:32)Engagement with LPAC (38:02)Follow-on strategy and tiered investment (40:24)Challenges and advice for emerging managers (45:03)Eric Sippel is an esteemed philanthropist and investor. He currently runs his family office and is an active investor and adviser to real estate, venture capital, and hedge funds. Previously, he was the COO of Eastbourne Capital Management, a multi-billion dollar hedge fund firm, and a Partner at Shartsis, Friese & Ginsburg, where he was a nationally recognized hedge fund and venture capital lawyer.  Eric graduated from Stanford Law with Distinction and Wesleyan University with Honors in General Scholarship. Eric has served on many nonprofit boards, including his current role as Chair of Goodwill of San Francisco, San Mateo, and Marin Counties.Armstrong International is a specialist financial services executive search firm with 30 years'​ experience across Public and Private Markets. Our consultants possess deep subject matter expertise within; Fixed Income, Equities, Private Equity, Private Debt, Digital (Data Science & Technology), Private Wealth, Corporate Finance, Real Estate, Infrastructure, Emerging Markets, Credit, FX, Emerging Markets & Commodities We are trusted by some of the world's leading financial institutions, who use us for 3 primary reasons: industry expertise, speed of hire, and ease of doing business. We like to innovate and have been at the forefront of some of the most profitable and exciting changes in the industry, including the technology revolution and the ever-expanding world of Private Markets.Swimming with Allocators is a podcast that dives into the intriguing world of Venture Capital from an LP (Limited Partner) perspective. Hosts Alexa Binns and Earnest Sweat are seasoned professionals who have donned various hats in the VC ecosystem. Each episode, we explore where the future opportunities lie in the VC landscape with insights from top LPs on their investment strategies and industry experts shedding light on emerging trends and technologies. Follow along and subscribe at swimmingwithallocators.com.The information provided on this podcast does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this podcast are for general informational purposes only.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays an increasingly prominent role in modern life, medicine included. While the technology promises to improve health care in many ways, it also carries potentially serious risks. That raises a critical question: when AI harms patients, who's responsible? Join Cameron English and Dr. Barbara Billauer on Episode 70 of the Science Dispatch podcast as they discuss AI in medicine with Stanford Law professor Michelle Mello:

How do startups maneuver through the complex intersection of law, sustainability, and innovation? Sam McClure, a beacon of environmental advocacy and Stanford Law lecturer, joins me to unwrap this intricate puzzle, sharing his transition from a government career to fostering eco-conscious businesses.  As we traverse Sam's journey and the evolution of Stanford's pro bono legal aid for startups, you'll be privy to tales of resilience and the profound impact of environmental stewardship across professional endeavors. We examine the gritty realities of co-founder dynamics and client relations, shedding light on the virtues of patience, humility, and the power of human connections that often turn legal challenges into growth opportunities. We also delve into the subtleties of non-verbal communication and how our behaviors can either erode or cultivate trust and leadership within our teams – insights you won't want to miss for your own professional toolkit.  From algae farming to solar energy, learn about the exciting legal frontiers these innovative ventures face and how they're paving the way for a future where business success and environmental health go hand in hand. Join us for an episode that's not just about legalities and startups, but a journey towards a greener tomorrow. In this episode, you'll hear about: Stanford Startup Law Sustainability Program Navigating co-founder and client relationships Leadership, trust, and self-care practices Long-term views on the climate crisis Circular economy and sustainability startup trends Navigating sustainability and law Follow and Review: We'd love for you to follow us if you haven't yet. Click that purple '+' in the top right corner of your Apple Podcasts app. We'd love it even more if you could drop a review or 5-star rating over on Apple Podcasts. Simply select “Ratings and Reviews” and “Write a Review” then a quick line with your favorite part of the episode. It only takes a second and it helps spread the word about the podcast. Supporting Resources: https://law.stanford.edu/sam-mcclure/ https://law.stanford.edu/startup-law-sustainability https://www.cedargrovecounsel.com/ https://www.amazon.com/Leadership-Self-Deception-Getting-Out-Box/dp/1523097809/ref=sr_1_1?hvadid=580751260451&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9031968&hvnetw=g&hvqmt=e&hvrand=7134004013860384827&hvtargid=kwd-307853283104&hydadcr=22595_13493276&keywords=leadership+and+self-deception+book&qid=1707334425&sr=8-1  

Writer Kiwi Smith recalls the making of the 2001 classic LEGALLY BLONDE. Fresh off of her first hit 10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU, Kiwi and her writing partner Karen McCullah were eager to find a story centered on female empowerment that was fun, fresh, smart, and accessible. She found all that and more in an unpublished manuscript about a sorority girl going to Stanford Law. Kiwi remembers wearing pink to their studio pitch and being fully committed to bringing Elle's story to the screen in the right way. A huge part of that was the casting. Among many others, Britney Spears was floated as a possible idea, but it was undeniably Reese Witherspoon's part. Reese emerged as a true leader and her turn as Elle is the stuff of movie legend and inspired a generation of beautiful, smart, and successful women.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/hollywood-gold--5670584/support.

Why does the U.S. have the highest incarceration rate in the industrialized world, with individuals, communities, and taxpayers paying a steep price for lengthy prison terms for even nonviolent offenders?  Michael Romano, a criminal justice lawyer who founded and directs the Three Strikes Project at Stanford Law School, the first law school program of its type in the country focused on securing reduced sentences for incarcerated people deemed to be serving disproportionate sentences, has spent his career on this uniquely American challenge. As the project's director for the past 16 years, Mike has worked with Stanford Law students to win the release of more than 200 Californians imprisoned under the state's Three Strikes law.Along with helping hundreds of people sentenced to life in prison for minor/nonviolent crimes, the Three Strikes team also worked to change California's Three Strikes Law. In 2012 they celebrated passage of the Three Strikes Reform Act, a landmark legislative effort led from start to finish by Stanford Law students and project staff members in partnership with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XMichael Romano >>> Twitter/X

Rundown -    Intro with Troubadour Dave Gunders - 00:35   "Tarred and Feathered" by Dave Gunders - 14:02   John Walsh in Craig's Lawyers' Lounge - 19:20   Craig's Lawyers' Lounge welcomes John Walsh, former US Attorney for District of Colorado under President Obama, who is now seeking the job of Denver DA in this year's election. Find out what makes this Stanford Law grad tick.  https://www.walshfordenver.com/   Show begins with Troubadour Dave Gunders and host discussing dynamic guest, John Walsh and the remarkable $83.3 million dollar verdict in favor of E Jean Carroll against Donald J. Trump in US District Court in NYC. Opening dialogue addresses what happens next. Next, to honor the verdict against female abuser Trump, we play Tarred and Feathered, a funny song of revenge by Dave Gunders.   Learn about John Walsh growing up in metro Denver and serving as a clerk in DC Circuit Court. Walsh went on to be an Assistant US Attorney in Los Angeles in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Once back in Denver, John Walsh has had successful law practices and raised his three kids in the Mile High City.   The MAGA threat on US democracy and Rule of Law is reviewed. John Walsh worked hard to fight the Big Lie in the courts of Michigan during November and December 2020. Listen to how difficult and tense that litigation became.   Find out about the big names that John Walsh has interacted with along the way. Adam Schiff, Joyce Vance, Preet Bharara, Elena Kagan, Ken Salazar, Bill Ritter, Norm Early, Beth McCann and Barack Obama get name dropped.   The January 6 insurrection followed Trump's Big Lie and John Walsh wants folks to follow the ruling of renowned Reagan appointed federal Judge Lamberth who has sized up the effect of relentless MAGA propaganda.   Lamberth wrote, “In my 37 years on the bench, I cannot recall a time when such meritless justifications of criminal activity have gone mainstream. I have been dismayed to see distortions and outright falsehoods seep into the public consciousness.”   The MAGA threat to Rule of Law is thoroughly reviewed. Denver feels the impact of too many social and political problems, but remains one of the great cities in the world.   This podcast is a love letter to Denver, even with her flaws, where John Walsh wants to be Chief Law Enforcement Officer. Size up would be Denver District Attorney, his personality and professional qualifications.

James and Al welcome Stanford Law's Pam Karlan, academy member George Stevens, and economic maven Roger Altman to get their takes on the year ahead in their field of expertise. In the financial arena, they cover the importance of the economy to a Democratic victory in 2024, the factors driving inflation, and how we managed to avoid the predicted recession.  Legally, they look ahead to the coming developments facing Trump in his court cases, and what's next in the intensifying battle over reproductive rights.  Looking at entertainment, they analyze the impact of the strikes on Hollywood, and share their Best Picture and Super Bowl predictions. Email your questions to James and Al at politicswarroom@gmail.com or tweet them to @politicon.  Make sure to include your city, we love to hear where you're from! Check James Carville's new videos: #TrumpStinks James Carville Explains… Why Mike Johnson is a P.O.S. James Carville Explains… everything about Mike Johnson James Carville on the trail of Lauren Boebert Get More From This Week's Guests: George Stevens: Oscars.org | IMDB | Website Roger Altman: Evercore | The Hamilton Project  Pam Karlan: Stanford Law | DOJ.gov | Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Please Support Our Sponsors: Co-Pilot: Use our link at mycopilot.com/warroom to get a 14-day FREE trial AND 20% off your first month of personalized fitness if you sign up before February 1st!

As we close out 2023, we are replaying some of our most listened to episodes. Not surprisingly, AI was the hot topic this year and as its acceptance grows, so to tough questions, like whether AI developers need permission to use copyrighted works and other IP before using it to train artificial intelligence? In a very popular episode, Professor Mark Lemley of Stanford explained whey he does not think so because he believes that copyrighted works used to train AI fall should under the fair use exception to copyright law. Professor Lemley is the Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, an author of seven books and more than 130 articles on intellectual property, antitrust and related areas of the law. He is also a co-founder of Lex Machina and most recently of Counsel to Lex Lumina, a boutique IP law firm. Professor Lemley argues that AI companies should be permitted to use copyrighted works to train AI models without first getting permission from owners because of the benefits AI will yield and the impossibility of tracking down millions of copyright owners to get permission. He also believes that it is a fair use for AI developers to use works protected by intellectual property laws to train artificial intelligence models because such a use is transformative and the more data available to the AI, the more accurate it will be.

This Day in Legal History: Racially-Integrated Bus Service Begins in MontgomeryOn this day in legal history, December 21st, we spotlight a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement: the start of racially-integrated bus service in Montgomery, Alabama. On December 21, 1956, a significant change unfolded in the streets of Montgomery as buses began operating under a new, integrated system. This historic shift came after enduring federal court rulings that conclusively terminated the practice of on-board segregation.The genesis of this transformative moment can be traced back to the courageous efforts of the African American community in Montgomery. Their resilience was epitomized in the Montgomery Bus Boycott, a protest sparked by Rosa Parks' refusal to give up her seat to a white passenger. This boycott, lasting over a year, was a strategic and peaceful defiance against segregation and racial injustice.Two key figures in this historic change were Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Rev. Ralph Abernathy. As prominent leaders of the bus boycott, they symbolized the relentless struggle for equality and justice. On that significant day, they were among the first to ride the buses under the newly implemented integrated service.The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the subsequent integration of the bus service marked a crucial victory in the civil rights movement. It not only challenged and changed segregation laws but also galvanized the fight for civil rights across the United States. This event is a testament to the power of collective action and the enduring pursuit of equality.The legacy of December 21, 1956, continues to resonate as a reminder of the long and ongoing journey towards racial equality. It stands as a beacon of hope and a symbol of the enduring spirit of resistance against injustice. Today, we remember and honor this monumental day in legal history, a day that forever changed the fabric of American society.The U.S. Supreme Court, reshaped by former President Donald Trump, is set to confront a series of cases that could significantly impact the 2024 presidential election. Central to these cases is Trump's role in the events leading up to the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, where his supporters attempted to obstruct the certification of Joe Biden's victory. These cases mark the Supreme Court's most politically charged involvement in elections since the decisive 2000 ruling in favor of George W. Bush.Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Berkeley Law School, highlights the unprecedented potential of the court to influence the upcoming election, particularly regarding Trump's ballot eligibility and the progression of his federal criminal prosecution. Amidst a conservative shift in American law, the court's approach to these cases is closely watched, especially after recent rulings on key issues like abortion and gun rights.A pivotal moment is Trump's vow to challenge a Colorado court ruling disqualifying him from the state's primary ballot. The outcome of this appeal could set a precedent for similar challenges in other states. Currently, Colorado is the only state among 32 to disqualify Trump based on the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those involved in insurrection from holding federal office. The Supreme Court's decision in the Colorado case could influence similar efforts nationwide, with Michigan, a politically critical state, also considering a related case.Leah Litman, a law professor at the University of Michigan, underscores the high stakes of these disputes for democracy, particularly in their implications for upholding the peaceful transition of power.The court is also entangled in criminal cases against Trump. Special Counsel Jack Smith has requested the court to rule on Trump's claim of immunity from prosecution for actions related to his 2020 election defeat. Additionally, the court will decide if obstruction charges related to the January 6 assault are applicable, which could affect Trump, who faces similar charges.Trump, facing four criminal prosecutions, has pleaded not guilty in all cases. His legal team may soon seek Supreme Court intervention in a defamation lawsuit by E. Jean Carroll. Despite the court's conservative leaning, experts like Stanford Law's Michael McConnell do not anticipate bias in favor of Trump, even though the legal issues are more nuanced than in post-election litigation.Trump legal clashes reach US Supreme Court as 2024 election nears | ReutersA U.S. federal judge has temporarily blocked a California law set to ban the carrying of guns in most public places from January 1. U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney, of the Central District of California, issued a preliminary injunction stating that the law would unconstitutionally deprive concealed carry permit holders of their Second Amendment right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense. He described the law as "sweeping" and "repugnant to the Second Amendment."California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed intentions to appeal the decision, arguing that if the ruling stands, it would put communities at risk by allowing guns in areas frequented by families and children. Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the decision, voicing concerns about the proliferation of guns in sensitive areas like hospitals, libraries, and playgrounds.The law, signed in September, aimed to prohibit concealed firearms in 26 types of "sensitive places," including hospitals, playgrounds, and places of worship. Judge Carney's ruling pointed out that the law would turn almost every public place in California into a 'sensitive place,' effectively negating the Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves in public.The Second Amendment's interpretation has long been debated in the U.S., especially with gun violence being a leading cause of death among children since 2020. Judge Carney referenced recent Supreme Court rulings that have expanded gun rights, stating that individuals must be able to exercise their right to self-defense, including bearing arms responsibly.Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, which filed the lawsuit, argued that the state's politicians are refusing to accept Supreme Court rulings that uphold gun carrying rights. Michel hailed the court's decision as a recognition of the state's overreach in gun control measures.US federal judge blocks California law barring guns in public | ReutersIn 2023, global mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity dropped to its lowest point in a decade, influenced by high interest rates and economic slowdowns. The total M&A volume fell 18% to around $3 trillion, the lowest since 2013. Dealmakers attribute this decline to increased financing costs for acquisitions and economic uncertainties making price agreements challenging.Despite the downturn, experts foresee a rebound in M&A activity. In the United States, M&A volumes decreased by 8% to $1.42 trillion, while Europe and the Asia Pacific regions saw sharper declines. Private equity-led buyout volumes globally also fell by 38%. However, the fourth quarter of the year showed a 19% increase in deal volumes, mainly driven by significant transactions in the oil and gas industry, including Exxon Mobil's $60 billion acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources and Chevron Corp's $53 billion purchase of Hess Corp.The report highlights the challenges in deal-making due to a tough antitrust environment and lengthy regulatory reviews, especially for cross-border deals. The uncertainty of regulatory regimes due to upcoming elections in the U.S. and India may also affect M&A activities. However, corporate buyers are expected to continue their strategic M&A planning.Shareholder activism is rising, potentially driving more M&A activity. M&A advisers are optimistic, noting a more robust pipeline of deals for 2024 compared to the previous year. This optimism is echoed by Jim Langston of Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, who notes an acceleration in market confidence and active transaction dialogues.Dealmakers see rebound after global M&A volumes hit decade-low | ReutersNasdaq Inc.'s rules requiring listed companies to have diverse boards or explain their absence will take effect by December 31, following the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) approval in 2021. These regulations, surviving a legal challenge from two conservative groups in the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, are based on the premise that board diversity information is significant to investors.Companies must now include at least one board member who is a woman, belongs to an underrepresented minority, or identifies as LGBTQ+, or publicly explain non-compliance. Nasdaq's definition of underrepresented minorities includes various racial and ethnic groups. Exceptions are provided for newly listed companies and those with small boards.By the end of 2025, companies on Nasdaq's Global or Global Select market tiers must have at least two diverse directors—one being a woman and the other from an underrepresented minority or LGBTQ+ community. Smaller firms have until 2026 to meet this requirement. Companies with small public floats or revenues can satisfy this with two female directors, regardless of minority or LGBTQ+ status. Foreign companies and smaller boards have more lenient requirements.Since 2022, companies have disclosed board demographics using Nasdaq's diversity matrix. However, a Bloomberg Law analysis observed a decrease in boards with women and minority or LGBTQ+ directors from 2022 to 2023.The Fifth Circuit could still overturn these rules if the full court decides to review the decision by the three-judge panel, which was composed of judges appointed by Democratic presidents. The majority of judges on the full court are appointed by Republicans.Non-compliant companies will receive a grace period from Nasdaq's Listing Qualifications Department. Persistent non-compliance could lead to delisting, subject to an appeal to a Nasdaq hearings panel.Contested Nasdaq Board Diversity Rules Take Effect: Explained Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As the year ends, we take a look back at our judicial system and look forward to what we can expect from it in 2024 with legal expert Dahlia Lithwick, a Senior Editor at Slate and a Contributing Editor at Newsweek. She graduated from Stanford Law and has been covering the courts for over two decades. She hosts the podcast, Amicus. In the pod today, Bill and Dahlia discuss the current state of the American judicial system, focusing on the impact of the Trump administration's appointments and the potential consequences for the 2024 presidential election. They discuss the role of the Supreme Court and its shift to the right under Trump, with three of his appointees now sitting on the bench. They also discuss the potential for authoritarianism if Trump were to return to office, with the former president currently arguing in various courtrooms that he is exempt from the justice system due to his previous role as president.. The podcast ends with a discussion on the legacy of Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the Supreme Court, and her belief in the importance of the court's reputation.Today's Bill Press Pod is supported by The International Brotherhood of Teamsters. More information at Teamster.org.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Tesla autopilot safety recall and the job cuts at GM Cruise top the headlines on episode 349 of Smart Driving Cars. Bryant Walker Smith, Affiliate Scholar at Stanford Law and Assoc. Professor of Law and Engineering at the University of So. Carolina, joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin. Plus May Mobility, a new AI Center at Princeton and more. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smartdrivingcars/support

This Day in Legal History: Bush v. Gore HeardOn December 11, 2000, a pivotal moment in United States legal history unfolded as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Bush v. Gore case, a lawsuit that effectively determined the outcome of the 2000 Presidential election. This case, arising from the hotly contested and incredibly close Florida vote recount, was not only a critical legal battle but also a significant event in American political history.The controversy began when the results of the presidential election in Florida were so close that it triggered a mandatory recount. However, the process was fraught with legal challenges and disputes over vote-counting methods, including the infamous "hanging chads" on punch-card ballots. The Bush campaign eventually sought the intervention of the Supreme Court to halt the recount, arguing that the varying standards of the recount process in different counties violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.The Supreme Court's decision to hear the case was itself momentous, given the high stakes of a presidential election hanging in the balance. On December 12, a day after the oral arguments, the Court delivered a landmark 5-4 decision. It ruled that the Florida Supreme Court's method for recounting ballots was unconstitutional due to inconsistent evaluation standards, and that there was insufficient time to establish a new recount process before the December 18 deadline for states to choose their electors.This ruling effectively awarded Florida's electoral votes to George W. Bush, granting him the presidency. The decision was controversial and remains a subject of debate among legal scholars, political scientists, and historians. It highlighted the Supreme Court's pivotal role in resolving electoral disputes, raised questions about the political impartiality of the judiciary, and sparked discussions about election processes and the Electoral College system.On this day in legal history, the Bush v. Gore decision stands as a reminder of the complexities and intricacies of the American legal and political systems, and the profound impact that Supreme Court decisions can have on the course of the nation's history.Alex Jones, the right-wing conspiracy theorist and general looney tune, has been authorized to sell personal assets including firearms, jewelry, cars, boats, and a cryogenic chamber on his Infowars shows. This decision, sanctioned by Judge Christopher M. Lopez of the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, aims to help Jones cover the costs of his personal bankruptcy. Jones filed for bankruptcy protection following a court order to pay over $1 billion in defamation judgments related to his false claims about the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.Despite his bankruptcy, Jones remains responsible for approximately $1.1 billion of the $1.4 billion owed from defamation judgments in Connecticut and Texas. The sales, as proposed last month, are meant to fund legal fees and, if any surplus remains, creditor payments as part of a Chapter 11 plan. Among his disclosed assets, Jones has nearly 50 firearms valued at around $72,000, 19 watches including a $25,000 Rolex, and a cryogenic chamber worth $4,000.Jones also plans to sell items from his storage units and homes, such as home furnishings, gym equipment, jewelry, cars, and boats. This move has attracted criticism from families of Sandy Hook victims due to Jones' extravagant spending during bankruptcy. The attorneys representing Jones intend to file a bankruptcy exit plan soon, while the Sandy Hook victims' families have suggested that he pay at least $85 million over 10 years or undergo an orderly liquidation. The case, involving various legal representatives, is ongoing in the Southern District of Texas Bankruptcy Court.Alex Jones Gets Green Light to Sell His Guns, Cars on Talk ShowsFormer President Donald Trump has announced he will not testify in a New York civil fraud trial, where his company is accused of misrepresenting property values to secure favorable financing. This trial, which commenced in October, is among several legal challenges Trump faces while he pursues a return to the White House. Trump made this declaration on social media, stating he had nothing further to add beyond calling the trial "complete and total election interference."During his initial court appearance in November, Trump often evaded direct responses and voiced complaints about being treated unfairly. The presiding judge, Arthur Engoron, has found that Trump and his adult sons engaged in financial statement manipulation to obtain better terms from banks and insurers. New York Attorney General Letitia James is seeking $250 million in damages and aims to permanently prohibit Trump and his sons from operating businesses in New York.In addition to this civil trial, Trump is contending with four separate criminal indictments, including two related to his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. He has pleaded not guilty in all cases. Despite these legal entanglements, Trump maintains a strong lead in the Republican nomination race to potentially challenge Democratic President Joe Biden in the upcoming election.Former President Donald Trump says he will not testify in New York fraud trial | ReutersRudy Giuliani, former New York City Mayor and lawyer for Donald Trump, faces a civil defamation trial starting Monday. This trial stems from Giuliani's false accusations against Georgia election workers Wandrea “Shaye” Moss and her mother Ruby Freeman, claiming they rigged the 2020 presidential election. A federal judge has already found Giuliani liable for defaming Moss and Freeman, leaving the jury to decide the damages owed.Moss and Freeman allege Giuliani led a "sustained smear campaign" against them as part of Trump's efforts to contest his election loss. Both women, who will testify at the trial, were subjected to racist abuse and threats following Giuliani's claims. Giuliani's spokesperson, Ted Goodman, has labeled the case politically motivated, while Giuliani's defense may argue that his comments minimally impacted the plaintiffs.Giuliani had inaccurately described surveillance footage, falsely claiming the workers hid illegal ballots and exchanged a USB drive, which turned out to be a ginger mint. A state investigation confirmed Moss and Freeman were lawfully counting votes. U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell, overseeing the case, has already ruled that they are entitled to damages for defamation, emotional distress, and conspiracy.This trial could exacerbate Giuliani's financial and legal troubles, as he also faces a racketeering case in Georgia and has pleaded not guilty. The outcome of this trial is awaited amidst a backdrop of Giuliani's numerous legal and professional challenges post-2020 election. Moss and Freeman previously settled defamation claims with One America News Network.Giuliani heads to trial over false vote fraud claims about Georgia poll workers | ReutersStanford Law School has introduced a novel student loan alternative, the Flywheel Fund, which bases repayment on graduates' future earnings. The program, distinct from traditional student loans, allows participants to repay 10% of their income for 12 years after graduation, regardless of their career path. The Flywheel Fund, launched in 2022 with donations, has received a $1.7 million investment from Stanford Law to support the initiative.Unlike typical loan forgiveness programs, the Flywheel Fund does not restrict graduates who move out of public interest roles. The program is particularly suited for students aiming for lower-paying public interest jobs, but it also accommodates those entering the private sector. The increasing cost of legal education has been a longstanding concern, with the average debt for law graduates reaching significant amounts.Law graduates' earning potential varies widely, with a stark contrast between salaries in large law firms and public interest positions. The Flywheel Fund is currently unique to Stanford, but its founder is in discussions to expand it to other elite law schools. Critics, however, note the limitations of such programs due to the substantial upfront investment required.Stanford's program is appealing, especially for students interested in public interest law, about 30% of the class. The school covers full repayment for those earning under $100,000 and subsidizes payments for those earning up to $115,000, with an income cap set at $225,000. This innovative approach to financing legal education could significantly alter the landscape if successful and expandable to more students.Stanford Law to fund student loan alternative based on grads' future earnings | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Since 2023, Rukaiyah Adams has served as CEO of the 1803 Fund, an innovative firm that seeks to grow shared prosperity through the alignment of financial investments and investments in community-based organizations. It is not a conventional investment firm, and it is not traditional philanthropy—its work includes aspects of both and is ultimately about ‘investing for the people'. Rukaiyah has been a pioneer in socially responsible investing, establishing key frameworks in the field. Previously she was CIO at Meyer Memorial Trust, where she spent 8 years growing the foundation's assets under management to more than $1 billion. Rukaiyah has also managed a $6.5 billion fund at The Standard and chaired the Oregon Investment Council, the board that manages approximately $100 billion of public pension and other assets for the State of Oregon. During her time as chair, the Oregon state pension fund was among the top-performing public pension funds in the United States.  Rukaiyah holds a BA from Carleton College, a JD from Stanford Law, and an MBA from Stanford Graduate School of Business. In this episode, we discuss: ●      A need to move away from putting bandaids on broken systems and move toward building new systems with awareness and intention ●      The problem inherent in reacting versus responding ●      The gifts of awareness that 2020 brought Key Takeaways: ●      The legacy of African Americans serving as the "original capital" in America is a deep stain on our history. It's a narrative that's still being wrestled with today. Rukaiyah explained it well: Imagine moving from being an object in the economic system to being a subject in control of it. Moving from being chess pieces to becoming the players. With the lens of being players in control, let's look at the term “capitalism”. The word "capital" isn't just about dollars; it encapsulates the value and benefits you bring to the table through your skills, energy, and time. Think of it as the ink in your personal narrative. The "ism" suffix? It converts the noun “capital” into action, practice, and process. No matter who you are, or what narrative society has tried to force on you, it's worth asking yourself: what story do you want to help write with your ink?  How do you want to use your inherent capital to contribute to—or reshape—existing narratives? What practices do you want to support, and where can you build something better than we ever imagined possible? ●      Language isn't just a collection of words and grammar; it's the very framework that shapes our perceptions and dreams. If your aspirations are so grand that no existing term captures their magnitude, then it's time to create new language. Once that new language is in place, it acts like a bridge, facilitating collaboration and sparking movements. Then we can evaluate the systems that support this new dream and identify those that act as roadblocks. Language shapes the way we think and defines the boundaries of our dreams; it's a tool for both reflection and revolution. ●      Discomfort is a precursor to growth. Much like a toddler learning to walk, stepping into unfamiliar territory is bound to involve stumbles and moments of frustration. But it's within this discomfort and uncertainty that expansion takes root. When you stretch beyond your current boundaries, knowledge, and capabilities, you're essentially investing in your future. And the currency? It's your newfound growth and abilities. Discomfort always precedes expansion; it's the gritty, less Instagrammable side of personal development. Yet, it's precisely in navigating this discomfort that your new capabilities evolve and eventually become as natural as walking.  References: ●      Connect with Rukaiyah on LinkedIn ●      1803 Fund ●      “A Love Letter to Portland, OR”, Rukaiyah's 2nd TEDx talk ●      “Homegirls' Guide to Being Powerful”, Rukaiyah's 1st TEDx talk ●      Meyer Memorial Trust ●      Michael McAfee ●      Beyond Doer and Done to: Recognition Theory, Intersubjectivity, and the Third by Jessica Benjamin ●      Albina Vision Trust Connect & Share: If you enjoy the podcast, would you please consider leaving a short review on Apple Podcasts/iTunes? It takes less than 60 seconds, and it really makes a difference in helping to convince hard-to-get guests. I also love reading them! If this episode resonated with you, I ask you to send it to a friend. Help bring even more visibility to these leaders that are using business as a force for good! Subscribe to the Purpose and Profit newsletter to make sure you don't miss future episodes.  This podcast is for you, the listener. I'd love to hear what resonated with you, or if you have a suggestion on who would be a great guest for this show. Please send me a note at info@KathyVarol.com.

Host: Leah Murray Sandra Day O’Connor graduated from Stanford Law in the early 1950s and was only offered one job: secretary at a law firm. Why? Because women couldn’t possibly be lawyers at that time… However, she became the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court. Leah and KSL Legal Analyst Greg Skordas discuss her powerful legacy.

Host: Leah Murray Rep. Brian King announces run for Governor’s seat The Governor has a challenger… Representative Brian King has announced today that he will run for Governor Cox’s seat in 2024. He joins the show to discuss why he’s decided to run and how he plans on winning the favor of Utah voters. Utah Board of Higher Education’s resolution on free expression on campus The Utah Board of Higher Education adopted a new resolution regarding free expression on campus. KSL Legal Analyst Greg Skordas joins the show to discuss this new resolution and what it does for students on campus. The Legacy of Sandra Day O’Connor Sandra Day O’Connor graduated from Stanford Law in the early 1950s and was only offered one job: secretary at a law firm. Why? Because women couldn’t possibly be lawyers at that time… However, she became the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court. Leah and KSL Legal Analyst Greg Skordas discuss her powerful legacy. Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy settlement is brought before the Supreme Court Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, is involved in a $6 billion bankruptcy settlement that’s been brought before the Supreme Court today. OxyContin is an addictive pain medication that stirred up our country’s opioid epidemic. KSL Legal Analyst Greg Skordas joins Leah to break down this case.

From the recent Senate dress code controversy to landmark legal cases, explore the nuanced intersection of the law and fashion, gender identity, and cultural expression. Join Pam Karlan and Rich Ford to delve into the intricate world of dress codes and the law, examining their historical roots and contemporary implications.The discussion begins with the recent Senate dress code controversy, unravelling the political and cultural factors at play. The hosts delve into the historical context, touching on sumptuary laws in medieval Europe and the Great Male Renunciation, offering valuable insights into the evolution of societal norms. Pivotal legal cases such as Jespersen v. Harrah's and the challenges surrounding gender-specific dress codes and religious exemptions are dissected. Throughout the episode, engaging anecdotes and thought-provoking analysis provide listeners with a profound understanding of the legal complexities shaping our attire, identities, and societies.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XRich Ford's Book >>> Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made HistoryChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionPam Karlan and Rich Ford introduce the episode, Rich's book 'Dress Codes, How the Laws of Fashion Made History'(00:01:08) Senate Dress Code DramaThe recent elimination and subsequent reinstatement of the dress code in the U.S. Senate; specific mention of John Fetterman & Kyrsten Sinema.(00:03:55) Solicitor General's OfficeAnalysis of the gendered nature of dress code challenges faced by the first female Solicitor General, Elena Kagan, in navigating the formal attire expectations.(00:06:53) Dress Code MessagesExamination of the message behind politicians & tech industry dress choices to send a message(00:09:47) The Personal Side of Dress CodesRich Ford's personal experiences and anecdotes, including his participation in Esquire's Best Dressed Real Man contest.(00:10:39) Sumptuary Laws and Fashion in the Middle AgesDiscussion on medieval sumptuary laws and their detailed regulations on attire, reflecting societal hierarchies and power dynamics.(00:12:27) Earrings as Signifiers: From Medieval Italy to Modern CampusesExploration of earrings as symbols, from distinguishing religious groups in medieval Italy to contemporary cultural identifiers on college campuses.(00:15:04) The Great Masculine Renunciation and Gendered AttireExamination of the historical shift in men's fashion during the 1700s, marking the beginning of subdued, practical attire and its implications on gender roles.(00:17:30) Modern Title VII ChallengesIn-depth analysis of modern legal cases involving gender and dress codes specifically discussing Jespersen v. Harrah, and the Amy Steven's case involving transgender rights & how gender expression is changing.(00:22:18) Sex, Race, & Dress CodesReflection on cases where hairstyles were the center of dress-code legal cases, particularly affecting members of a particular race.(00:26:28) Religious Exemptions and Dress Codes: A Global PerspectiveExploration of religious exemptions from dress codes, and the clash between cultural expression and state regulations.(00:27:02) Conclusion

The many indictments against Donald Trump, former president and current Republican frontrunner for the 2024 presidential contest, have left many scratching their heads. Is the Florida documents case more important than the Georgia election interference one? Is it all just political theatre, or is this serious? Here to help make sense of it is former prosecutor and criminal law expert David Alan Sklansky, who joins Pam and Rich for this episode about the criminal cases against Trump and how they might play out in this critical campaign year. From the intricacies of witness testimonies to the strategic implications for co-defendants, this episode touches on the unprecedented challenges faced by judges, lawyers, and the American legal system.This is the first episode of the newly-relaunched Stanford Legal podcast;  make sure you're following so you don't miss an episode!Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XDavid Sklansky >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionRich Ford and Pam Karlan reintroduce the Stanford Legal podcast after a hiatus, as well as guest David Alan Sklansky. Overview of the four major criminal indictments against Trump.(00:05:02) Severity and Strength of ChargesAnalysis of the seriousness of charges & assessment of the legal strengths of different cases, highlighting the Florida case as particularly challenging for Trump.(00:07:25) Trump's Trial StrategiesPrediction of strategies to delay the trials, including attempts to change judges, create discovery disputes & Trump's courtroom absence during the trials.(00:12:05) The Judges Navigate Trump's CasesSklansky discusses the particular challenges the judges are facing presiding over these trials.(00:15:04) Ensuring an Unbiased JuryDiscussion on the difficulty of finding jurors unafraid to participate due to potential threats or intimidation. Insight into the legal system's approach to selecting jurors and the importance of reasoned deliberation.(00:18:12) Trump's CodefendantsAnalysis of co-defendants in the cases, highlighting the New York and Georgia indictments. (00:22:24) Strategic Implications of ConvictionDiscussion on how trial outcomes may influence co-defendants' decisions & their repeated testimonies and its impact on legal proceedings.(00:24:18) Legal Representation ChallengesExamination of co-defendants' legal representation, including lawyers paid by the Trump campaign, as well as the intersection of cases, and unprecedented  consequences.(00:26:30) March to Trial and Democracy's FutureDiscussion on the anticipation of the D.C. election fraud trial in March and its historical significance.

Author Brendan Ballou joins me to discuss his superb new book, Plunder: Private Equity's Plan to Pillage America in the latest episode of The Grant Williams Podcast. After graduating Columbia and Stanford Law, Brendan served as a Federal prosecutor and Special Counsel for Private Equity in the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, where his mandate was to investigate private equity's influence on financial markets. What he found shocked Brendan and moved him to write a book chronicling the outsize effect private equity has had in so much of American life over the last several decades. From nursing homes to prison phone companies, Brendan details how private equity has reshaped American business by raising prices, reducing quality, cutting jobs, and shifting resources from productive to unproductive parts of the economy. Forced to take on huge debts and pay extractive fees, companies purchased by private equity firms are often left bankrupt, or shells of their former selves, with consequences to communities that long depended on them. Every episode of the Grant Williams podcast, including This Week In Doom, The End Game, The Super Terrific Happy Hour, The Narrative Game and Shifts Happen, is available to Copper, Silver and Gold Tier subscribers at my website www.Grant-Williams.com. Copper Tier subscribers get access to all podcasts, while members of the Silver Tier get both the podcasts and my monthly newsletter, Things That Make You Go Hmmm… Gold Tier subscribers have access to my new series of in-depth video conversations, About Time.

Judge Kyle Duncan, a conservative on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arrived on the Stanford Law School campus on March 9. He was there to deliver remarks to students at an event hosted by the campus Federalist Society group, but Duncan never had the opportunity to deliver his talk. Upon entering the lecture call, students began heckling Duncan, preventing him from speaking. Finally Tirien Steinbach, associate dean for diversity, equity, and inclusion at Stanford Law, stood up and took the podium. For about six minutes, she spoke to the students and to Duncan. “For many people in this law school … your advocacy, your opinions from the bench land as absolute disenfranchisement of their rights,” Steinbach said. When Duncan tried to respond, Steinbach told the judge, “Please let me finish.” Multiple students began shouting, “Let her finish” as they pounded their desks. Duncan stood by and allowed Steinbach to complete her lecture. Now, the media watchdog group Accuracy in Media is calling on Stanford Law to dismiss Steinbach. “These crybullies throw metaphorical punches all day long and they never have to take one in return, and that's where we step in," Adam Guillette, president of Accuracy in Media, says. Accuracy in Media has a mobile billboard on the Stanford campus naming the students who heckled Duncan and calling for Steinbach's termination. The law school did issue an apology and has placed Steinbach on paid leave, but has stopped short of terminating her. “These people, who think they know it all and seek to lecture federal judges, don't even apply the basic level of common sensewhich makes sense because they don't apply the basic level of civility,” Guillette says. Guillette joins "The Daily Signal Podcast" today to explain how Accuracy in Media is advocating that Steinbach be fired. He also explains how his organization has gone undercover in public schools to expose how classrooms teach diversity, equity, and inclusion. Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The disruption of Judge Kyle Duncan's speech at Stanford Law School ... Why did people have a problem with Duncan? ... Will the current Supreme Court overturn Obergefell v. Hodges ... The necessity of free inquiry and reasoned discourse ... What it's like being a FedSoc conservative at Stanford Law ... The fallout from the Duncan protests ... The vulgarity of the insults hurled at Duncan ... The role of conservatives at Stanford ...

Our overlords at YouTube are active throttling this channel, so please make sure to like, subscribe, and share so we can defeat them! The infighting between supporters of Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis started heating up this week. With it starting to get out of hand, we need to remember this is a distraction from the real goal: beating the Left. Both sides have fair points, and there's nothing wrong with constructive criticism. Whoopi Goldberg defended the Stanford Law students who heckled and shut down a conservative judge. Yes, these people have a right to protest, but shutting down events and squashing ideas isn't a great way to go about it. UpRising Bakery, a Chicago-area business that hosted a family-friendly drag show, announced it is closing its doors this month as sales slowed to a crawl. Hopefully, this trend will continue as people support companies and businesses that support their values. Lazy parenting has become far too widespread and we need to put an end to it. If you don't want to actively raise your kids, why have them in the first place? We're joined by Sara Gonzales, BlazeTV host and parenting expert, to get her thoughts on giving kids iPads and screens instead of proper attention. HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra announced a program to go into schools and get students on Medicaid, because big government wants you dependent on it for as much as possible. Today's Sponsors: PureHealth Reignite your metabolism… Burn fat… Boost energy. And fight fatty liver that affects 100 million Americans.. Well, the good folks over there put together a short presentation that shares 4 warning signs of a damaged or fatty liver… The warning sign number 2 is downright scary. You can watch this free presentation and learn more about your liver health right now.. Just head over to https://www.CheckYourLiver.com/Chad Patriot Mobile Patriot Mobile, America's ONLY Christian conservative wireless provider, offers dependable nationwide coverage on ALL THREE MAJOR networks, so you can get the best possible service in your area. PLUS, they offer a COVERAGE GUARANTEE. If you're not happy with your coverage, you can switch to a different network FOR FREE, without changing carriers! All this plus the knowledge that you are supporting free speech, the sanctity of life, Second Amendment, and our military and first responder heroes! Their 100% US-based customer service team makes switching easy! Just go to https://www.PATRIOTMOBILE.COM/CHAD or call them right now at 878-PATRIOT! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Unprepared, scatterbrained, and guestless, Jonah returns to the AMA format on today's program, releasing Guy, his immigrant majordomo, from the grimy basement where he normally resides to field an unusual assortment of listener questions. Things get off to an innocuous start: There's some shameless plugging of Jonah's books, a hefty digression into the various strands of conservatism, and a rambly assessment of the recent controversy at Stanford Law. But though the latter half of this episode features no discussion of cruises, it still offers its fair share of bizarre images, one of which may forever change Jonah and John Podhoretz's friendship. Show Notes: - Wolfram & Hart - David Oshinsky: “Heil Woodrow” - Yuval Levin: “Redeeming the Miracle” - Sarah Isgur interrogates Jonah on Dispatch Live - The Remnant with Philip K. Howard - Skijoring Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

First, we talked with Jason Whitlock about how sports became woke, how China is the biggest influence in American sports culture now, and how being conservative changed his career. Next, Leo Terrell talks about the release of the J6 videos and how the J6 committee should face consequences for withholding evidence in Jacob Chancely's case. Then, Lauren Boebert talks about the newly released J6 videos, how we're winning against media manipulation, and the Covid hearings. Finally, Charlie Gasparino on the recent bank failures and why the terrible economic policies of the Biden administration are going to lead to a world of hurt. BONUS: Dan, talking about the snowflakes at Stanford Law goes on an epic rant about safe spaces. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Editors' Picks:Rich: The Iraq symposium in the latest magazine issueCharlie: Dan McLaughlin "A Misleading Defense of Fox in the Dominion Case”Maddy: Judges James Ho and Elizabeth Branch's piece "Stop the Chaos: Law Schools Need to Crack Down on Student Disrupters Now"Michael: W. James Antle III's magazine piece "Iraq Was a Setback for Conservatism"Light Items:Rich: NCAA seasonCharlie: With the Beatles albumMaddy: A St. Patrick's Day mealMichael: Listening to Andy Irvine and Paul BradeySponsor:DonorsTrustThis podcast was edited and produced by Sarah Colleen Schutte.

Colorado lawmakers appear intent on having the most liberal abortion laws in the nation. John and Maria discuss the ramifications of the recent meltdown at Stanford Law School over the appearance of a conservative federal judge. — Recommendations — I Was There When podcast 52 Weeks in the Word devotional Segment 1 - Colorado Abortion Laws Segment 2 - Higher Education Christian Legal Society Submit a comment at regulations.gov ChristianLawStudents.org Segment 3 - Stories of the Week "Of Primates and Percentages: No, Humans Aren't 99% Chimp" Breakpoint

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In Joe Biden's (and the Democratic Party's) twisted worldview, the bad people are the ones who want to stop kids from being swallowed up by transgenderism. The Pope strongly disagrees with the President… Is vaping as bad as smoking?  Do all women get sexually harassed sometime during their lives? What is the best response to harassment? Callers have stories.  Stanford Law has gone full Yale. Law students shout down a conservative judge. The law school's reputation is being ripped to shreds by its leftist student body and administration... Dennis talks to Bradley Davis, one-time PragerForce member who now works for PragerU.Thanks for listening to the Daily Dennis Prager Podcast. To hear the entire three hours of my radio show as a podcast, commercial-free every single day, become a member of Pragertopia. You'll also get access to 15 years' worth of archives, as well as daily show prep. Subscribe today at Pragertopia dot com.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

By now you've probably heard about Judge Duncan's bad day at Stanford Law School. No worries if not, because this Marvel-length special episode will leave no question unanswered. To complete the autopsy, Sarah and David are joined by Original Jurisdiction's David Lat and the man of the dark hour himself, Fifth Circuit Judge Kyle Duncan. They discuss the Stanford standoff and the ongoing trend of student disruptions, the response from Stanford administrators, whether shouting down speakers is a form of speech, how the judge responded to the students and whether he thinks federal judges should boycott the school, and more. Prepare yourself for a two-hour marathon that will leave you wondering, was the juice worth the squeeze? Show Notes: -David Lat: Yale Law is no longer #1 for free speech debacles -Ed Whelan on Stanford Law (includes video) -David Lat on ideological diversity in law firms -David Lat's follow-up piece -Article: Stanford Tells Federalist Society Students To 'Reach Out' to Diversity Dean Who Encouraged Disruption of Their Event—and To Shut Up on Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Megyn Kelly is joined by David Sacks, founder of Craft Ventures and co-host of the All-In Podcast, and Vivek Ramaswamy, GOP candidate for president and founder of Strive Capital, to discuss and debate the Silicon Valley Bank collapse, what it means for America, whether this is a bailout of the bank or a bailout of tech startups and entrepreneurs, who should be responsible for helping the tech startups, whether there will be a run on more banks in America and a cascading effect, evaluating risk management and due diligence in the wake of the collapse, how to fix the problem short-term and long-term, how the Biden administration may have played a role in this, and more. Then Tim Rosenberger, president of The Federalist Society at Stanford University, joins to discuss the mayhem at Stanford Law School after students protested a federal judge in extreme ways, faculty joining in on the protesting, the corruption and boneheaded training of our young people, the partial apology coming now, and more. Finally, Megyn Kelly breaks down what happened at the Oscars last night, including a pro-America speech and a winner slamming Don Lemon.David - http://www.craftventures.com Vivek - https://www.vivek2024.comTim - https://twitter.com/TimJRJR Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKellyTwitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShowInstagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShowFacebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at: https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow

Charlie welcomes Trump Endorsed candidate for the U.S. Senate from the state of Arizona, Blake Masters. Masters has also been endorsed by Charlie Kirk personally, and Turning Point Action. Blake makes his case to the voters of Arizona, explaining why a mid-30s, Peter Thiel backed, Stanford Law educated father chose to enter into one of the most contentious Senate races in the country. America First, pro-family values, pro-family formation, anti-CRT, anti-radical gender ideology, anti-illegal invasion, and much more, Blake lays out why he feels he deserves to be the GOP candidate for Arizona, and why he thinks he can beat Mark Kelly in the general. As a representative of the new generation of fighting conservatives rising up to reform and renew the GOP from within, this is a critical race we must all be aware of and invested in if we are going to take back power in the US Senate and elect representatives who will not back down when we send them to Washington.  Support the show: http://www.charliekirk.com/support See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.