Podcasts about uc hastings

Land Back is an Indigenous-led movement focused on returning land to Indigenous Tribes in a way that strengthens Indigenous sovereignty and communities. This episode features a discussion about how Land Back comes up in the context of estate planning and introduces key concepts for estate planners, financial advisors, and tax advisors to assist clients in taking suchaction.About Our Guests:Alma Soongi Beck is an attorney in  Lathrop GPM Private Client Services Practice Groups. Beck is certified as a specialist in estate planning, trust, and probate law by the State Board of Legal Specialization, and her practice focuses on trusts, charitable planning, gift and estate tax planning, and post-death administration including trust administration and probate. She speaks regularly on estate planning issues affecting LGBTQ+ and unmarried couples, on the evolution of gender and parentage in estate planning and administration, and on Land Back to Indigenous Tribes. She has previously served on the boards of the Transgender Law Center, Our Family Coalition, Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom (BALIF) and the Korean American Bar Association of Northern California (KABANC). Prior to joining Lathrop GPM (formerly Hopkins & Carley), Alma was a partner at Lakin Spears, LLP, as well as founder and principal attorney for The Beck Law Group, P.C. A Korean American child of immigrants, Beck had led workshops on implicit bias for legal professionals, college students, and climate organizations since the 1990s, most recently for the Climate Reality Project Bay Area Chapter. Jo Carrillo JD/JSD is Professor of Law and Faculty Director of the Indigenous Law Center (ILC) at UC Law San Francisco (formerly UC Hastings). For over three decades, Carrillo has taught and written extensively in property and property-related subjects, including Federal Indian Law. Carrillo earned her BA from Stanford University, her JD from the University of New Mexico, and her JSD from Stanford Law School. She is a member of the Order of the Coif, the American Law Institute, and a former Trustee of the Law & Society Association; she was aVisiting Scholar at The Center for the Study of Law & Society at UC Berkeley Law, and a Visiting Professor at Stanford Law School. As Faculty Director of the UC Law Indigenous Law Center, Carrillo facilitates a seminar series called Law &. This series brings lawyers, students, and California Tribal leaders into the law school classroom to discuss land back and land stewardship issues. Recently, again with assistance from the Resources Legacy Fund, Carrillo has undertaken to study land back transfer documents. Carrillo has served on the UC Law SF Legacy Committee. She now serves on the UC Law SF Restorative Justice Advisory Board, which counsels UC Law SF Chancellor and Dean David Faigman on decanal initiated restorative justice efforts for Indigenous communities in California. As a long-term project, Carrillo is co-editing a volume, with UCLA Professor of History Benjamin Madley, on redressing 19 th century state sponsored harms against California Indigenous Peoples..About Our Host:Erika Gasaway is a trust and estate litigation partner who was fomerly with Hopkins Carley, which is now LathropGPM. She is on the nationwide Private Client Services team and co-chairs the Trust & Estate Litigation Task Force. She is based in San Jose, California where she represents ultra-high and high net worth families, fiduciaries, and family offices to resolve disputes as various phases of their life cycles. Erika is a member of the California Lawyer's Association Trust and Estate Section's Executive Committee (“TEXCOM”).Thank you for listening to Trust Me!Trust Me is Produced by Foley Marra StudiosEdited by Todd Gajdusek and Cat Hammons

Mitchell Bisschop (Actor, "Royko") Anna Gardner (Executive producer, "Chicago Stories") Tania Lindsay (Producer, "Chicago Stories") Joe Ferguson (Former Chicago inspector general & President, Civic Federation; @JoeFergChicago) David Levine (Law professor and constitutional expert, UC Hastings; @uclaw_sf) Carla Bruni (Professor, School of the Art Institute of Chicago; @saic_news)

NOTE This episode is the first dual release show for Top Of The Game. It was produced by and originally released on Evan Epstein's podcast, Boardroom Governance, on August 26, 2024. Our host enjoyed the tables being turned on him and being a guest, The conversation covers a broad range of topics: leadership, capitalism, boards, technology (AI), macro dynamics and the future. Original

Send us a Text Message.lovethylawyer.comA transcript of this podcast is available at lovethylawyer.com. Shirish Gupta is an award-winning neutral known for his legal acumen and economic prowess, which makes him particularly adept at diving into complex financial/technical disputes, including IP, securities and accounting, and class actions. Shirish is sought out by Silicon Valley startups, as well as Fortune 500 companies.  Shirish is an active, hands-on mediator who works with the parties until the matter is fully resolved. For example, he once mediated a global settlement of all 36 pending and contemplated actions. Prior to joining JAMS, Shirish practiced law with Mayer Brown, Howard Rice and Flashpoint Law. His practice focused on the areas he specializes in as a neutral – commercial, securities, class actions, IP, founder disputes and employment. He also serves as a Lecturer at UC Berkeley Law School and an Adjunct Professor at UC Hastings. Furthermore, Shirish has been a leader in the majority and diverse bar associations. He served as Co-Chair of the California State Bar Council of Sections, President of the South Asian Bar of Northern California and Alternate Regional Governor of National Asian Pacific American Bar Association. He currently serves in the Intellectual Property Section of Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Silicon Valley.  Please subscribe and listen. Then tell us who you want to hear and what areas of interest you'd like us to cover.  Louis Goodman www.louisgoodman.comhttps://www.lovethylawyer.com/510.582.9090Music: Joel Katz, Seaside Recording, MauiTech: Bryan Matheson, Skyline Studios, OaklandAudiograms: Paul Roberts louis@lovethylawyer.com

Welcome back to Season 12 of the Neuroscience Meets Social and Emotional Learning podcast! In episode number 340, host Andrea Samadi speaks with John Ford, an experienced workplace mediator and author of "Peace at Work: The HR Manager's Guide to Workplace Mediation." With a wealth of expertise in conflict resolution, emotional intelligence, and soft skills training, John shares his journey from practicing law to becoming a mediator. He discusses the importance of trust, effective communication, and addressing conflict head-on in both personal and professional settings. Discover practical tools like talking sticks and empathy cards, and learn how to apply neuroscience and emotional intelligence to navigate conflicts and improve workplace dynamics. Don't miss this insightful conversation that bridges the gap between science and everyday application! Watch our interview here https://youtu.be/NShwQio_QAk EPISODE #340 with John Ford on “Peace at Work: Connecting Emotional Intelligence to Conflict Resolution” we will cover: ✔ The importance of acquiring Emotional Intelligence Skills for conflict resolution in our workplaces of the future. ✔ The influencers who inspired John Ford's work (Daniel Goleman, John Gottman, Ken Cloke and many more. ✔ Tools and resources to support Conflict Resolution in our workplaces.      On today's episode #340, we welcome John Ford[i] BA. LLB (UCT) Founder, Author of Peace at Work: the HR Manager's Guide to Workplace Mediation, who is an experienced workplace mediator and works as a Conflict Resolution Coach and Workplace Mediator.  He's also a past president of the Association for Dispute Resolution of Northern California and served as managing editor for Mediate.com for over 10 years. Currently, he teaches negotiation and mediation through UC Law SF (formerly UC Hastings). When I saw the work John has been doing, providing soft skills training on communication, conflict resolution, emotional intelligence, assertion, negotiation, mediation, dealing with difficult behavior, customer service, nonverbal communication, de-escalation, stress management, diversity and inclusion, I knew I had to have him on the podcast. I saw the importance of teaching our next generation of students these important social and emotional learning skills over 25 years ago, working with 12 teenagers, who turned their results in school, sports and their personal lives around, in a matter of weeks. I had to learn more about John Ford's pathway that took him from practicing law, to working on workplace mediation, training others in these important emotional intelligence training skills. Let's meet John Ford, and see what we can learn from his vast experience with conflict resolution to see how he gains trust, with a calming effect in the most difficult and tense situations.  Welcome John, thank you for meeting with me today. Where have we reached you today? (I'm located in Arizona). Q1: John, can you share what inspired you to transition from practicing law to focusing on workplace mediation and soft-skills training? Q2: Can you also explain how your work was influenced by all of these researchers and influencers that our listeners would know well. Like Daniel Goleman, the author of Emotional Intelligence, neuroscientist Antonio Damasio, John Gottman's evidence-based research as well as Paul Ekman's work on facial expressions. Q3: What are some other books that you can point us to improve these important skills, books, like Difficult Conversations (Douglas Stone, Bruce Patton and Sheila Hein), or Nonviolent Communication to help us to improve how to better communicate our feelings in our work and personal lives? Q4: I see you have created tools to help express our feelings without using blame (which we all know takes us down a pathway to more conflict). I don't remember how long along it was that I learned to take “you made me feel” out of my vocabulary, since no one can make me feel anything. It was a good lesson to keep in mind that only I control my feelings. Could you explain how The Empathy Set[ii] and The Talking Sticks work and the benefits they bring to users? Q5: In your opinion, what are the most common challenges organizations face when dealing with workplace conflicts? Q6: What advice would you give to someone who wants to start incorporating empathy and effective communication strategies into their professional or personal life? Final Thoughts: Can you share a success story that highlights the impact of your products or training programs on a team or organization? John, I want to thank you very much for meeting with me today. For people to learn more about you, what is the best place?   CONNECT with JOHN FORD   John Ford www.johnford.com www.empathyset.com www.empathysetapp.com john@johnford.com REFERENCES: [i] https://www.johnford.com/johnford     [ii] https://www.empathyset.com/  

JOAN OUT; TURI RYDER HOSTING - Robert Loerzel (Historian; @robertloerzel) - David Levine (Law professor and constitutional expert, UC Hastings; @uclaw_sf) - Nick Svanacini (Technical manager, AmericanEagle.com; @_Americaneagle) - Steven Pincus (British history professor, University of Chicago; @PincusSteven) - Joe Ferguson (Former Chicago inspector general & President, Civic Federation; @JoeFergChicago

Born in Milwaukee, self-proclaimed “Bar Groupie” Judge Marie Weiner made her way to the Bay Area in her teenage years and eventually went to school at UC Hastings. In this episode, we talk about her impressive journey presiding over high profile California cases, being a partner at Cotchett, Pitre, Simon & McCarthy, serving on the Conference of Delegates Group for San Mateo County, and being elected as the president of the San Mateo Bar in 2000.  We discuss Marie's passion for molding the law, a change in her workflow that she calls the “silver lining of the pandemic,” and how no matter how much she loved what she did, she prioritized having a work life balance. You can also hear about Marie's rich personal life, filled with family, singing, and Star Trek.  Contact Information: Marie Weiner, Retired: mweiner@astound.net Deborah Kemper, MBA:   deborahk@smcba.org 

This episode focuses on tips and techniques of improving study habits. This week Harjot Kaur (2L) at UC Hastings shares her advice on studying in law school . 

The primary advice I'd offer is to actively seek out perks and deals. Explore platforms like F6S, Gust, and various accelerators associated with companies that provide software discounts. For instance, UC Hastings has a program called Startup Legal Garage, offering free legal assistance for startups. Many similar programs exist, so thorough research is crucial. Adopt a lean approach and adhere to the philosophy that if you can build what you need, do so. If it's beyond your capacity, reconsider whether it's truly necessary. Be frugal, especially in the early idea stage; unnecessary expenditures should be minimized. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/the-inventive-journey/message

Frank H. Wu is an American law professor and author currently serving as the president of Queens College, City University of New York. He served as the William L. Prosser Distinguished Professor at UC Hastings. Wu was also the first Asian American to serve in that position.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Frank H. Wu is an American law professor and author currently serving as the president of Queens College, City University of New York. He served as the William L. Prosser Distinguished Professor at UC Hastings. Wu was also the first Asian American to serve in that position.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Youth-Led Climate LitigationWorldwide, litigants are turning to the courts as a forum for fighting climate change, filing lawsuits against governments in an attempt to force climate action. Plaintiffs in these lawsuits are often children and young adults, who represent those most affected by government climate inaction. A notable early example of youth-led litigation related to climate change was in the Philippines in the 1990s, where forty-three students sued the Philippine government to protect their village's forest. Though the case was initially dismissed in lower courts on the ground that the students were children and did not have legal standing to sue, the students ultimately won their case and deforestation was halted. In the United States in 2015, twenty-one young people, the organization Earth Guardians, and climate scientist James Hansen (collectively, “plaintiffs”), represented by lawyers from the organization Our Children's Trust, sued the U.S. government in a case called Juliana v. United States of America. The plaintiffs alleged that the U.S. government, in not taking sufficient action to fight climate change, knowingly violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights to life, liberty and property, and knowingly violated its commitment to protect public lands. In 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case on the ground that the legislative and executive branches have the power to address climate change, not the judicial system. Still, despite the ruling, Juliana v. United States catalyzed a climate litigation movement across the country and world, and a documentary film about the case increased its impact. The Ninth Circuit's ruling did not end the case, which was sent back to the district court for further proceedings. In June 2023, the district court granted the plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint. Plaintiffs are hoping to survive additional motions to dismiss so that the case can proceed to trial.   Our Children's Trust has sued state governments on behalf of young people in all fifty states. Although most of those cases have been dismissed, the first of these cases to go to trial was Held v. Montana in June 2023. Additionally, in September 2023, Navahine F. v. Hawaii Department of Transportation is set to go to trial. These trials are the first in the United States involving youth-led constitutional climate cases, with the plaintiffs both using language from Montana's and Hawaii's constitutions to make their case. Is Climate Change a Question for the Courts?This is an ongoing debate. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Juliana v. United States case in 2020, with the majority opinion concluding that climate change is an issue for Congress and the Executive Branch to handle, rather than the judicial system. But Hawaii's First Circuit Judge Jeffrey Crabtree argued, in response to lawyers for the Hawaii Department of Transportation who made a similar argument, that Navahine F. v. Hawaii Department of Transportation should be allowed to go to trial. Judge Crabtree wrote that “the courts unequivocally have an important and long-recognized role in interpreting and defending constitutional guarantees.” A separate and difficult legal question concerns the nature and extent of the public trust doctrine and what duty might apply to the government. The courts will need to wrestle with that set of issues if the cases reach the trial stage. Who is Julia Olson?Julia Olson is Executive Director and Chief Legal Counsel of Our Children's Trust, the organization representing the youth plaintiffs in the climate change litigation discussed in this article. She earned her law degree (JD) from the University of California College of Law, San Francisco (then known as UC Hastings) in 1997 and began her legal career representing grassroots conservation groups working to protect the environment, organic agriculture, and human health. Since becoming a mother, Julia has focused her advocacy on youth climate action and founded Our Children's Trust to further this mission. Further ReadingWatch Youth v Gov | NetflixMeet the Youth Plaintiffs, Our Children's TrustJuliana v. United States, Harvard Law Review (2021)It's Kids vs. the World in a Landmark Climate Complaint, Gizmodo (2019)Trump admin again asks Supreme Court to stop youth climate lawsuit, The Hill (2018) For a transcript, please visit the episode's page on our website at:  climatebreak . org

Script by: Brock Williams Audio by: Emma Mott Blurb by: Elizabeth SherstinskyFor a transcript, please visit the episode page on ClimateBreak.org Youth-Led Climate LitigationWorldwide, litigants are turning to the courts as a forum for fighting climate change, filing lawsuits against governments in an attempt to force climate action. Plaintiffs in these lawsuits are often children and young adults, who represent those most affected by government climate inaction. A notable early example of youth-led litigation related to climate change was in the Philippines in the 1990s, where forty-three students sued the Philippine government to protect their village's forest. Though the case was initially dismissed in lower courts on the ground that the students were children and did not have legal standing to sue, the students ultimately won their case and deforestation was halted. In the United States in 2015, twenty-one young people, the organization Earth Guardians, and climate scientist James Hansen (collectively, “plaintiffs”), represented by lawyers from the organization Our Children's Trust, sued the U.S. government in a case called Juliana v. United States of America. The plaintiffs alleged that the U.S. government, in not taking sufficient action to fight climate change, knowingly violated their Fifth Amendment due process rights to life, liberty and property, and knowingly violated its commitment to protect public lands. In 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case on the ground that the legislative and executive branches have the power to address climate change, not the judicial system. Still, despite the ruling, Juliana v. United States catalyzed a climate litigation movement across the country and world, and a documentary film about the case increased its impact. The Ninth Circuit's ruling did not end the case, which was sent back to the district court for further proceedings. In June 2023, the district court granted the plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend their complaint. Plaintiffs are hoping to survive additional motions to dismiss so that the case can proceed to trial.   Our Children's Trust has sued state governments on behalf of young people in all fifty states. Although most of those cases have been dismissed, the first of these cases to go to trial was Held v. Montana in June 2023. Additionally, in September 2023, Navahine F. v. Hawaii Department of Transportation is set to go to trial. These trials are the first in the United States involving youth-led constitutional climate cases, with the plaintiffs both using language from Montana's and Hawaii's constitutions to make their case. Is Climate Change a Question for the Courts?This is an ongoing debate. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Juliana v. United States case in 2020, with the majority opinion concluding that climate change is an issue for Congress and the Executive Branch to handle, rather than the judicial system. But Hawaii's First Circuit Judge Jeffrey Crabtree argued, in response to lawyers for the Hawaii Department of Transportation who made a similar argument, that Navahine F. v. Hawaii Department of Transportation should be allowed to go to trial. Judge Crabtree wrote that “the courts unequivocally have an important and long-recognized role in interpreting and defending constitutional guarantees.” A separate and difficult legal question concerns the nature and extent of the public trust doctrine and what duty might apply to the government. The courts will need to wrestle with that set of issues if the cases reach the trial stage. Who is Julia Olson?Julia Olson is Executive Director and Chief Legal Counsel of Our Children's Trust, the organization representing the youth plaintiffs in the climate change litigation discussed in this article. She earned her law degree (JD) from the University of California College of Law, San Francisco (then known as UC Hastings) in 1997 and began her legal career representing grassroots conservation groups working to protect the environment, organic agriculture, and human health. Since becoming a mother, Julia has focused her advocacy on youth climate action and founded Our Children's Trust to further this mission. Further ReadingWatch Youth v Gov | NetflixMeet the Youth Plaintiffs, Our Children's TrustJuliana v. United States, Harvard Law Review (2021)It's Kids vs. the World in a Landmark Climate Complaint, Gizmodo (2019)Trump admin again asks Supreme Court to stop youth climate lawsuit, The Hill (2018)

Ben and Nathan discuss score ranges and why your confidence in your ability shouldn't rise and fall with your practice test scores. The guys also review an unusual Logic Games question type that popped up on the November test, poke fun at an email soliciting donations for Nathan's alma mater, and celebrate another soul saved from law school. Watch Ben and Nathan's response to Yale and other law schools' decision to withdraw from the rankings. LSAT Demon LSAT Demon iOS App LSAT Demon Daily Watch Episode 377 on YouTube Thinking LSAT YouTube LSAT Demon YouTube 5:45 - A New LG Question Type? - Test takers encountered an unusual question type on the Logic Games section of the November test. Demon teacher Matt DuMont proves it's nothing the LSAT hasn't done before. 8:04 - Your Range Is Not a Fluke - Nathan and Ben reassure a Demon student that their recent high practice test score wasn't a fluke but a new max in their score range. 13:28 - Early Letters of Recommendation - The guys advise Demon student A.D. to go ahead and request a letter of recommendation from their employer even if they won't apply until next cycle. 16:31 - Eliminate Excuses - The 170s are within reach for Demon student Audrey now that she's embraced the Demon mindset and eliminated excuses from her study. 19:07 - Worth the Cost? - The guys review an email from UC Hastings that asks Nathan to donate money. Nathan's alma mater hopes their students “feel that the value of their education is worth the cost.” 23:32 - Advice for a Fifth Attempt - Listener Sarah asks for last-minute tips as she prepares for her final test attempt. Ben and Nathan's advice remains the same whether it's your first or fifth official test: treat it like any other practice test. 26:46 - A Vague Scholarship Offer - Demon student G shares an unsolicited email from Elon University School of Law advertising a vague potential scholarship and guaranteed residency-in-practice. The guys weigh in. 31:14 - Another Soul Saved - Despite enjoying LSAT study, Demon student Pat decided not to attend law school after realizing that they don't need a J.D. for the work they're interested in. 34:03 - One Logic Games Section Per Day? - Nathan and Ben advise Demon student Amina on how much to focus on LG while not neglecting the other sections of the test. 38:44 - A Canadian Success Story - A Canadian Demon student thanks the guys for helping them score 171 on the September LSAT. Should this student retake? Since Canadian law schools consider applicants' average LSAT scores, the answer is unclear. 41:26 - Prestigious Master's Degree - A listener asks if law schools will care about their master's degree from Oxford. The guys think so, but not as much as LSAT or UGPA. 43:25 - Addressing a Withdrawal - Listener Amanda wonders how law schools will view a withdrawal from a second bachelor's program. Ben and Nathan weigh in and draft a sample addendum to address the withdrawal.

Did you know that as a mediator you help parties exercise a superpower?  It's the superpower of everyday negotiation! Listen to this episode as Veronica talks with Lucia Kanter St. Amour--attorney, author, mediator, and VP of Board of UN Women San Francisco--about various topics in her #1 rated new release book on Amazon, For the Forces of Good: The Superpower of Everyday Negotiation.  Episode highlights include a discussion of the following: What is the distinction between impartiality and neutrality? Can one negotiate with bullies, and if so, how? How can a mediator handle two different stories from parties in mediation? What is interoception and why does it matter in mediation? About Lucia:   A member of the Neuroleadership Institute, Lucia has specific training in behavioral science, and how real people act in real conflict situations and decision-making. She is the Founder and Principal of her firm, Pactum Factum, which specializes in negotiation and dispute resolution; and a mediate.com Certified Online Mediator. A Vice President for UN Women, Lucia has also been practicing law since 1998. Ten years of her practice included regular clinical teaching positions in Mediation, and Negotiation at UC Hastings and UC Berkeley Law. She has also been a visiting lecturer at many prominent law and business universities in the U.S. and Europe; and served for a number of years as an annual Competition Judge and Mediator for the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, France. Just this year, she launched her own podcast “The Superpower Of Everyday Negotiation.” Her book: For the Forces of Good: The Superpower of Everyday Negotiation (praised by none other than Robert Cialdini and our very own Colin Rule of mediate.com, among many others) is a #1 rated new release book on Amazon and releases to the public on October 1, 2022. Connect with Lucia via email Lucia's Book Lucia's Podcast Lucia's previous guest appearance on the Mediate.com Podcast

UC Hastings law school is being sued by namesake's heirs over the decision to drop "Hastings" in the name. Kim McCallister, filling in for Mark Thompson, explains why the family is requesting the name to be reinstated or be paid the $100,000 plus interest that Hastings used to fund the school. With interest, the money would be $1.7 billion.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

UC Hastings law school is being sued by namesake's heirs over the decision to drop "Hastings" in the name. Kim McCallister, filling in for Mark Thompson, explains why the family is requesting the name to be reinstated or be paid the $100,000 plus interest that Hastings used to fund the school. With interest, the money would be $1.7 billion.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

0:00 -- Intro.1:23 -- Start of interview.3:32 -- Adam's "origin story". He grew up in southern California where he attended UCSD and graduated from UCLA. In college he became an activist focusing on the conflict in Darfur, Sudan, and developed a "targeted divestment" model. After college he became a social entrepreneur based in Washington, DC.4:06 -- His decision to pursue a JD/MBA from UC Berkeley. While in grad school "he fell in love with the startup tech scene" and during business school he tried to start his own startup but that's where he learned that "it doesn't matter how good your idea is when you don't have a good team and good execution." He then joined Gunderson Dettmer as a corporate associate supporting tech founders.7:14 -- Adam's new role as Assistant Dean for Executive Education and Revenue Generation at UC Berkeley's School of Law. How his initial work with 500 Startups with the BCLB sparked more executive education programs. 9:24 -- On the origin and mission of The Independent Director Initiative.12:20  -- What makes corporate governance in private venture-backed companies different to public companies. Explaining VC University (a partnership between Berkeley Law, NVCA and Venture Forward).15:42 -- The Academic Partners of the Independent Director Initiative: Berkeley Law Executive Education; Berkeley Law Center for Law and Business; Ira M. Millstein Center for Global Markets and Corporate Ownership at Columbia Law School; UC Davis School of Law; UC Hastings Law Center for Business Law; Institute for Law & Economics at the University of Pennsylvania; Silicon Valley Executive Center at Santa Clara University; Rowling Center at SMU Dedman School of Law; Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University; Stanford Center for Racial Justice at Stanford Law School; and Lowell Milken Institute for Business Law & Policy at UCLA School of Law.University of Washington School of LawThe Organizational Partners of the Independent Director Initiative: Ascend; BLCK VC; BoardList;Bolster;Corporate Directors Forum;The Fourth Floor;HBCUvc; Him for Her; LCDA;National Black MBA Association; National Venture Capital Association; NxtWorkVenture Forward.18:07 -- On the interest and number of applicants to the program (~500 applications, 80 got selected in first cohort).19:21 -- On fiduciary duties of directors in venture-backed companies (including dual-fiduciary conflicts). Role of independent directors, and boardroom diversity in private venture-backed companies. The Trados case (2013).38:43 -- The evolution of private markets and how its regulation may impact corporate governance.40:06 -- Take-aways from the program: 1) more education is needed for directors of venture-backed companies generally (beyond just independent directors), and 2) it was refreshing to see such a diverse and qualified group of executives that could serve on corporate boards.41:56 -- Where can people learn more and/or apply for the next cohort of the Independent Director Initiative: independent.venturecapitaluniversity.com42:57 -- Benefits for participants beyond just the two days of the program. Placements. 45:27 - Some of the books that have greatly influenced his venture career: Venture Deals, by Brad Feld and Jason Mendelson (2011)Secrets of Sand HIll Road, by Scott Kupor (2019)45:51 - Who were your mentors, and what did you learn from them (regarding this program)Evan Epstein (!)Afra Afsharipour, UC Davis Law School46:26 - Are there any quotes you think of often or live your life by? "You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step." Martin Luther King, Jr.46:26 - An unusual habit or an absurd thing that he loves: walking 40min for his commute. "Owning your downtime."48:55 - The living person he most admires: his wife.Adam Sterling is the Assistant Dean for Executive Education and Revenue Generation at UC Berkeley's School of Law and the Executive Director of the Berkeley Center for Law and Business. __ You can follow Adam on social media at:Twitter: @adambsterlingLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/adambsterling/__ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

In this podcast episode, AAI Vice President of Legal Advocacy Randy Stutz talks with two experts who have led pioneering empirical research into antitrust class actions, Rose Kohles and Josh Davis. Stutz talks with Kohles and Davis about the Huntington Bank and UC Hastings “2021 Antitrust Annual Report: Class Action Filings in Federal Court,” and how empirical research into antitrust class actions might challenge the entrenched views of both tort-reform advocates and class-action proponents.  The three discuss previous efforts at empirical study of antitrust class actions prior to the Annual Report, which is now in its fourth edition (5:00), the type and nature of empirical data that is available and collected in the Annual Report and the role of class-action policy debate in shaping empirical study more generally (10:10), how empirical data may inform new arguments that support or refute various arguments on different sides of class-action debates (17:43), whether empirical data could inform legal arguments or judicial decision-making in court, including in the issuance of fee awards (25:37), whether empirical data might suggest legislative or other class-action reform proposals (32:32), and interesting developments reflected in the most recent edition of the Annual Report, covering data from 2009-2021 (36:54). 

Saudi leader Mohammed bin Salman is being sued in federal court with regard to the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi. A key issue is whether MBS's apparent power and key leadership role give him immunity. We explore this issue, along with related foreign relations law questions, with Chimene Keitner, Fromm professor of law at UC Hastings and former counselor to the State Department.

Jennifer Oliva, professor of law at UC Hastings joins Mark Thompson to discuss the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jennifer Oliva, professor of law at UC Hastings joins Mark Thompson to discuss the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Matthew Coles, Professor of Constitutional Law at UC Hastings joins Mark Thompson to break down the recent Supreme Court rulings, starting with the decision to rule in favor of gun owners in New York. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Matthew Coles, Professor of Constitutional Law at UC Hastings joins Mark Thompson to break down the recent Supreme Court rulings, starting with the decision to rule in favor of gun owners in New York. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Far Away, LL.M. (UC Hastings).

In this episode of Rethinking Legal Ops, Sandro Tuzzo (cofounder Separate.us & Professor at UC Hastings) talks about the future of legal work and the role of AI in it. We cover topics like - What roles & tasks will be replaced by AI? How can you make AI work for you instead? And, how can you as a legal firm take advantage of AI to make more money.

Fed court keeps Saginaw Chippewa lawsuit against Blue Cross Blue Shield of MI on life support Bill to rename UC Hastings to be heard before CA committee this week KEYA staff works to get back on the air after ice build-up collapses radio tower CA Assembly holds hearing on Hastings Law School renaming bill

2,000+ U.S. National Park place names problematic Bill to rename UC Hastings to be heard before CA committee this week Miss Haskell pageant held after 2 year break

In this live recording of the Lawfare Live event, “Ukraine and the Future of National Security Law,” Natalie Orpett moderated a panel of experts, including Brian Finucane, senior adviser for the U.S. Program at the International Crisis Group; Chimene Keitner, professor of international law at UC Hastings; Todd Huntley, director of the National Security Law Program at Georgetown Law; and Scott R. Anderson, Lawfare senior editor and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. They talked about a wide range of issues coming out of the current conflict in Ukraine, ranging from war crimes, to sanctions, to information operations, to the multidimensional role that technology is playing. They talked about what we're seeing now and what it may mean for the future of national security law and international law. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

U.S. gas prices hit an all-time high the same day Biden announces a ban on Russian oil imports. Ravi, Cory, and Rikki discuss the global energy fallout of the war in Ukraine. Cyberattacks could also be a retaliatory measure Moscow looks to use in undermining the West. We discuss U.S. readiness to defend and respond. Law students at UC Hastings drown out a guest speaker over accusations of racist speech. We go through the Ilya Shapiro debacle. The city of Fort Lauderdale is firing its police chief over hiring practices so woke they're discriminatory. And finally, Cory wraps up with an update on TikTok banning posts in Russia. [1:10] U.S. Bans Russian Oil [12:55] Is Russian Cyberwar Next? [19:04] Law School Shout-down [25:04] Woke Police Chief Fired For Discrimination Check out our show notes: https://lostdebate.com/2022/03/08/ep-29/ Subscribe to The Lost Debate's YouTube channel: https://bit.ly/3Gs5YTF Sticher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-lost-debate iheart: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-the-lost-debate-88330217/ Amazon Music: https://music.amazon.co.uk/podcasts/752ca262-2801-466d-9654-2024de72bd1f/the-lost-debate LOST DEBATE ON SOCIAL: Follow Lost Debate Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lostdebate/ Follow Lost Debate on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lostdebate Follow Lost Debate on Twitter: https://twitter.com/thelostdebate

For the final episode of our 3 part series on democracy and technology, I am bringing you a conversation with Professor Chimène Keitner on cyber interference in democratic elections, and international law. We talk about the challenges and shortcomings of international legal structures in recognizing and responding to cyber interference in democratic processes, we discuss the way that democracies are made vulnerable by digital products, and Chimène explains what happened in the infamous Russian interference into 2016 election--and what might be in store for our democratic process as we approach the deeply consequential 2024 US Presidential election. Professor Chimène Keitner is the Alfred and Hanna Fromm Professor of International Law at UC Hastings, where she teaches courses on International Law; on Democracy, Technology and Security; and on legal approaches to Evidence, among many other topics. She is a leading authority on international law and civil litigation, and served as the 27th Counselor on International Law in the U.S. Department of State. She holds a bachelor's degree in history and literature with high honors from Harvard, a JD from Yale, where she was a Paul & Daisy Soros Fellow, and a doctorate in international relations from Oxford, where she was a Rhodes Scholar. She has authored two books and dozens of articles, essays, and book chapters on questions surrounding the relationship among law, communities, and borders, including issues of jurisdiction, extraterritoriality, foreign sovereign and foreign official immunity, and the historical understandings underpinning current practice in these areas. Professor Keitner has served on the Executive Council of the American Society of International Law and as Co-Chair of the ASIL International Law in Domestic Courts Interest Group. She is a member of the American Law Institute and an Adviser on the ALI's Fourth Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States. She is also a founding co-chair of the International Law Association's Study Group on Individual Responsibility in International Law., and a member of the state department's advisory committee on international law.   This episode was produced by Matt Perry. Our head of research is Sakina Nuruddin. Art by Desi Aleman.

Learn from Zehra (3L) at UC Hastings on how she landed a big law job despite not being in the top of her class.

This episode focuses on tips  and techniques of improving study habits. This week Harjot Kaur (2L) at UC Hastings shares her advice on studying in law school. 

California's major shops that sell toys and other child care items are already keeping these products, whether advertised to boys or girls, in the same sections unseparated by gender. exp-player-logo Assembly Bill 1084 would require large retail stores with more than 500 employees across the state to “maintain a gender neutral section or area … in which a reasonable selection of the items and toys for children that it sells shall be displayed, regardless of whether they have been traditionally marketed for either girls or for boys.” Long story short, a toy store or big-box retailer should have a toy or child care section that is not demarcated by gender. (For instance, a toy section at a Target that has fire trucks and dolls next to each other is fine, as long as they are not separated as “boys'” or girls'” toys.) “The University of California Hastings College of the Law Board of Directors voted today to authorize UC Hastings leadership to work with state legislators and other stakeholders to change the College's name,” the school's board of directors said in a statement last week. “UC Hastings was founded in 1878 by Serranus Hastings, who perpetrated genocidal acts against Native Californians in the 1850s in the Round and Eden valleys,” it added. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In recent months, there has been a raging debate over whether the state--or private actors--can require vaccine mandates.  Some resisters claim that such a mandate stands in opposition to their religious liberty; others maintain that the state should not have this authority.  Where did vaccine mandates--and the fierce resistance to them--come from?  Dorit Reiss, Professor of Law and James Edgar Hervey '50 Chair of Litigation at UC Hastings, and one of the country's leading authorities on vaccine mandates, joins then & now to discuss vaccine hesitancy and resistance throughout history, the role of religious exemptions, and the politicization of the pandemic.

Intro.(1:18) - Start of interview.(1:51) - Manny's "origin story". He grew up in Oxnard, CA. He went to Cornell University for undergrad and "that's probably the first time he realized that the rest of the world did not look like Oxnard." His foray into film studies, including at Université de la Sorbonne Nouvelle, also known as Paris III.(8:05) - His decision to go to law school.(9:34) - His start with Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal's (now Denton's) SF litigation practice. Later, his experience at the California Department of Justice (Consumer Law Section). His time with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (he was an enforcement attorney between 2011-2014). That was his first experience "building something."(14:38) - His time with Affirm (31st employee and first attorney). He was there between 2014 and 2019.(15:19) - His decision to leave Affirm to be appointed as the new Commissioner of the California Department of Business Oversight (now Department of Financial Protection and Innovation). The Department oversees the operations of state-licensed financial institutions, including banks, credit unions, money transmitters, issuers of payment instruments and travelers checks, and premium finance companies.(20:30) - His take on "fintech": "A lot of people use this term [fintech] as a noun, but I think of it more as an adjective that describes an ethos that embraces the democratization of financial services." Fintech also encompasses ubiquity ("meeting the customers where they are"), the increased computing decision-making power (larger data-sets), and interoperability.(26:49) - His take on the rise of Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL). "In the early days of Affirm that term did not even exist, what was used was point of sale."(32:07) - His take on the rise of crypto through a regulatory lens. "Think about functional regulation." e.g. Store of value ≠ money transmission ≠ smart contract features, etc. "It's important to articulate what function you're worried about, define the activity and figure out who has the authority to regulate that specific activity."(37:27) - His take on how some in the private sector have proposed new regulatory frameworks, e.g. Coinbase's "Digital Asset Policy Proposal" or Andreessen Horowitz's "How to Win the Future" housed in their new web3 policy hub: "I think the self-regulatory approach and proposals put forward by private actors is smart and practical." "If for no other reason it forces a conversation between the company and the regulator." "It ought to be adopted by more companies in newly emerging spaces." "It shows a modicum of good faith [and transparency] by companies."(41:39) - On the creation and purpose of UC Hastings Center for Business Law Roundtable on Financial Policy & Regulation.(43:18) - On Board Diversity (California's SB-826, AB-979), Nasdaq Boardroom Diversity Rule.(46:14) - His three favorite books:One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez (1967)The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner (1929)The Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison (1959)(46:47) - His mentors:His mom, who taught him grit.Gary Hernandez, former partner at SNR Denton (formerly Sonnenschein)Paula Boggs, musician and former GC at Starbucks.(49:08) - Quote that he thinks of often, or lives his life by: "I love mankind... it's people I can't stand." (Linus Van Pelt of Peanuts)(49:45) - An unusual or absurd habit that he loves: he wakes up at absurd hours but he relishes those early morning hours.Manny Alvarez is a financial services executive and former regulator committed to increasing access to financial literacy and technology, protecting consumers from harmful practices, and engaging under-served communities. If you like this show, please consider subscribing, leaving a review or sharing this podcast on social media. __ You can follow Evan on social media at:Twitter @evanepsteinLinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack https://evanepstein.substack.com/Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Paris Marx is joined by Veena Dubal to discuss how Proposition 22 and the contract status of gig workers is reminiscent of the United States' history of racial wage codes, which codified lower wages for Black workers. Veena Dubal is a Professor of Law at UC Hastings. Follow Veena on Twitter at @veenadubal. Go back to episode 10 (May 21, 2020) for Veena's first appearance on the podcast.

By Sasha Hupka If Your Time Is Short: In recent weeks, several California school districts have announced that students over the age of 12 will be required to receive the COVID-19 vaccine to attend school in person. Some districts, such as the Los Angeles Unified School District, will only accept medical exemptions to the shot, while others, like the Oakland Unified School District, will also offer personal belief exemptions. California for decades has required schoolchildren receive vaccines for a range of diseases from measles to mumps to chickenpox, but experts say it's unclear whether districts can individually mandate vaccines under current state law.  California law allows the state Legislature and the department of public health to set vaccination requirements for schoolchildren but does not include a process for local school boards. Legal scholars expect that the mandates will be challenged in court. When the Culver City Unified School District announced in August it would require all eligible students to be vaccinated against COVID-19, the announcement was met with overwhelming support from the surrounding Los Angeles County community. But as other schools across California have announced similar mandates in recent weeks, questions have emerged about whether individual districts can legally require public schoolchildren to receive COVID-19 shots, spurring opposition. The Los Angeles Unified School District saw protesters when its board voted to mandate COVID-19 shots for students over 12 years of age on Sept. 9. The vote led to claims online that the district did not have the legal authority to require vaccinations. Last week, a crowd of parents holding signs with slogans like “My child, my choice” gathered outside a high school in Glendale, even though the school currently has no COVID-19 vaccination mandate in place for pupils. Experts say previous legal rulings indicate that schools can generally mandate vaccinations for students and employees. But in California, where the state Legislature has already passed laws on student vaccination mandates, it's unclear how much latitude districts might have to require schoolchildren to get the shot. Legal scholars expect that the courts will have to work out the details. In the meantime, here's what we know. Constitutional Challenges Leslie Jacobs, a professor of constitutional law at McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento and director of the Capital Center for Law & Policy, said legal scholars “always” expect to see constitutional challenges to vaccine mandates. But in the case of school vaccination mandates, she said those challenges “should not be strong” and are unlikely to succeed in court given past rulings. “Religious liberty shouldn't be a winner constitutionally and bodily integrity — ‘I can't have a shot in my body' — should also not be a winner constitutionally,” Jacobs said. Government entities like schools and the U.S. Army have historically been able to require vaccinations based on legal precedent set by Jacobson v. Massachusetts in 1905. At the time, Massachusetts law empowered local health boards to enforce mandatory, free vaccinations for adults if it was deemed crucial to the health and safety of the surrounding community. Adults who refused to get vaccinated faced a $5 fine. During a smallpox outbreak in 1902, the city of Cambridge mandated the vaccination of all of its residents. One resident, Henning Jacobson, refused, sparking a case that eventually went before the U.S. Supreme Court. The court upheld the vaccination requirement. That decision firmly established the power of states and other government entities to enforce compulsory vaccinations in the interest of public health, according to legal scholars. "A community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members," Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote in the majority opinion in the case. California's Current Vaccination Laws Vaccinations for California schoolchildren are currently regulated by Senate Bill 277, which passed in June 2015. The legislation was prompted by an outbreak of measles at Disneyland in 2014 that ultimately infected more than 150 people from eight different states, Mexico and Canada. For decades, California has mandated vaccinations against measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, hepatitis B, influenza type B, polio, whooping cough, tetanus and chickenpox. But passage of the law removed personal belief exemptions, giving California one of the toughest vaccination mandates in the nation. Without a medical exemption, the only way parents could opt out of vaccinating their children was to home-school them or enroll them in an independent study program without classroom instruction.  The legislation also included several options for adding vaccinations to the mandated list. The state Legislature could pass a new statute or amend the law at any time, opting to add a new vaccination with or without a personal belief exemption. Alternatively, a clause in the law allowed the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to mandate new vaccines, taking into consideration advice from health experts. But if a vaccination is added to the schedule in this way, the legislation stipulates that personal belief exemptions must be offered to parents and students. The law raises several legal concerns for school districts currently mandating COVID-19 vaccinations for students. Dorit Reiss, a professor of law at UC Hastings in San Francisco and a member of the Vaccine Working Group on Ethics and Policy, said the law can be interpreted as a minimum standard that schools must follow and noted that one clause in the legislation gives districts “broad authority” to act in ways that do not conflict with the law. However, Reiss said legal challenges could stem from the fact that state law does not lay out any sort of formal process for individual districts to add vaccination requirements. “The argument is that because the state has extensively regulated this area, the state has occupied it, and districts cannot deviate from state law at will,” Reiss said. “The broad school immunization law covers it, and there is no room for local action.” Ultimately, it's unclear where courts will land on the issue. Jacobs said schools mandating COVID-19 vaccinations are “pushing the envelope” legally. Will More California Schools Mandate COVID-19 Vaccinations? So far, just a handful of California school districts have mandated COVID-19 shots for students.  Culver City and Los Angeles Unified are the two largest districts to do so in Southern California. Neither are currently offering personal belief exemptions. Last week, the Oakland Unified School District and Piedmont Unified School District, both in Alameda County, became the first districts to mandate the vaccination in Northern California. While Piedmont Unified is only allowing medical exemptions, Oakland Unified will accept personal belief waivers. Other school districts seem less eager to jump into new mandates. Officials with the San Francisco Unified School District and the San Diego Unified School District told CalMatters earlier this month that they did not plan to set a vaccination requirement. When Culver City Unified announced its vaccination mandate, Superintendent Quoc Tran told EdSource that he believed the requirement was legally sound. He said school officials did not ask district lawyers to look at the policy. A spokesperson for Los Angeles Unified declined to comment on the school's legal authority for this article, and a spokesperson for Oakland Unified said they could not discuss legal specifics with PolitiFact California as the school believes “there is the possibility of litigation on this topic.” If school districts get challenged in court, Jacobs, with the McGeorge School of Law, said a judge could issue an emergency order to halt vaccination requirements as the case moves through the legal system. It's also possible that districts soon won't be making the vaccination rules in classrooms across the Golden State. During a media briefing last week, California Health and Human Services Secretary Dr. Mark Ghaly said officials are considering a statewide requirement, although no definitive decision has been made. Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday said school mandates are “still on the table.” In the meantime, whether or not California school districts can independently require students to get vaccinated will likely be fought out in the courts.  That process may be repeated across the country as districts in other places confront their own state laws on vaccinations in schools. “State law controls,” Jacobs said. “It will be up to a court to look at these sources of state law to determine what's happening.” Source List:  Email interview with Dorit Reiss, a professor of law at UC Hastings and a member of the Vaccine Working Group on Ethics and Policy, Sept. 23, 2021 Zoom interview with Leslie Jacobs, a professor of constitutional law at McGeorge School of Law and director of the Capital Center for Law & Policy, Sept. 23, 2021 The Los Angeles Times, Culver City Unified to require student COVID-19 vaccinations, in what may be a first, Aug. 18, 2021 The Los Angeles Times, L.A. school officials order sweeping student vaccine mandate, a first by a major district, Sept. 9, 2021 ABC7, Parents protest vaccine mandates despite Glendale Unified not having requirement for students, Sept. 24, 2021 Cornell Law Library Legal Information Institute, Henning Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts California Legislative Information, Senate Bill No. 277 National Conference of State Legislatures, States With Religious and Philosophical Exemptions From School Immunization Requirements, April 30, 2021 The Los Angeles Times, California Legislature passes mandatory vaccination bill, June 29, 2015 SF Gate, State Assembly approves vaccine bill, June 25, 2015 Centers for Disease Control, Measles Outbreak — California, December 2014 - February 2015, Feb. 20, 2015 Culver City Unified School District, Facebook post, Aug. 17, 2021 Los Angeles Unified School District, Los Angeles Unified to Require All Students 12 and Older to be Vaccinated Against COVID-19 by January 10, 2022, Sept. 9, 2021 Los Angeles Unified School District, Safe Steps to Safe Schools: Frequently Asked Questions Piedmont Unified School District, PUSD Board Meeting Summary – September 22, 2021, Sept. 24, 2021 Oakland Unified School District, OUSD Board of Education Passes Vaccine Requirement for Students 12 Years Old and Up, Sept. 23, 2021 CalMatters, Other school districts in no rush to follow Los Angeles Unified vaccine mandate, Sept. 10, 2021 EdSource, Culver City Unified mandates Covid vaccine for students, possibly a first for California, Aug. 18, 2021 NBC Bay Area, California Considers COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate for Students 12 and Up, Sept. 23, 2021

The job market is now dominated by tech monopolies that are using their power to lower wages and squeeze workers. Luckily, the workers are finally fighting back. This week, UC Hastings professor Veena Dubal joins Adam to detail the future of workers' rights in the gig economy.

Jonathan Guyer of The American Prospect joins Suzi to discuss his August 26 piece called, "The Unheeded Dissent Cable." This is a knockout—a devastating memo, all the more so because it was sent to the State Department on July 13, and was then buried, never reaching the White House and National Security Council. We get Jonathan's understanding of how this memo could have been ignored, and what it says about the Biden administration's national security team.Veena Dubal, Law Professor at UC Hastings, explains the August 20 decision [PDF: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21046832/castellanos-order.pdf] ruling Prop. 22 unconstitutional and “unenforceable in its entirety.” Written and funded by Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates, Prop 22 rewrote labor law in favor of the app-based transportation and delivery network companies, allowing their workers to be classified as independent contractors not employees. Prop 22 deprives workers of overtime pay, unemployment and workers' compensation coverage, and the right to unionize. And the gig companies that authored Prop 22 made it nearly impossible to change, requiring a seven-eighths vote by the California legislature to modify it. But now Judge Roesch has declared Proposition 22 unconstitutional and unenforceable, and Veena Dubal explains the ruling, the grounds for the Judge's decision, the response of the companies, and what is likely to happen next.

Jonathan Guyer of The American Prospect joins Suzi to discuss his August 26 piece called, "The Unheeded Dissent Cable." This is a knockout—a devastating memo, all the more so because it was sent to the State Department on July 13, and was then buried, never reaching the White House and National Security Council. We get Jonathan's understanding of how this memo could have been ignored, and what it says about the Biden administration's national security team. Veena Dubal, Law Professor at UC Hastings, explains the August 20 decision [PDF: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21046832/castellanos-order.pdf] ruling Prop. 22 unconstitutional and “unenforceable in its entirety.” Written and funded by Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Postmates, Prop 22 rewrote labor law in favor of the app-based transportation and delivery network companies, allowing their workers to be classified as independent contractors not employees. Prop 22 deprives workers of overtime pay, unemployment and workers' compensation coverage, and the right to unionize. And the gig companies that authored Prop 22 made it nearly impossible to change, requiring a seven-eighths vote by the California legislature to modify it. But now Judge Roesch has declared Proposition 22 unconstitutional and unenforceable, and Veena Dubal explains the ruling, the grounds for the Judge's decision, the response of the companies, and what is likely to happen next.

Prof. Joan Williams of UC Hastings discusses her book "The White Working Class - Overcoming Class Cluelessness in America" with Forum Fellow Nicolas Wittstock. In the book, Williams argues that arrogance and inability to understand the lives of working class Americans on the part of well-educated Liberal elites, is driving working class Americans towards rightwing Populists. This podcast is produced by Matthew Dagele, Morgan Wack, and Nicolas Wittstock. Our theme music was created by Ted Long. Any questions or feedback, please contact uwpoliticaleconomy@gmail.com

With the delta variant, coronavirus infections are on a sharp increase again in the Bay Area. California recently announced that health care workers and state employees must be vaccinated or get tested weekly and wear masks on the job. There have already been attempts to challenge the legality of similar mandates around the nation. Dorit Reiss, a law professor at UC Hastings who researches the law around vaccines and vaccine mandates, lays out what considerations employers and governments must weigh when it comes to requiring vaccination.

Techniktest und Vorgeschichte in einem. Läuft das Mikro schon? Was bringt ein LL.M.? Wo liegt eigentlich die UC Hastings? Braucht man ein Konzept für einen Podcast, für einen Umzug, für alles? Sind 20 Minuten ganz schön lang oder ganz schön kurz, und wie steht's mit 10 Monaten? Sollte man Partys feiern? Und wieso dieser Titel? All diese Fragen werden hier zwar nicht unbedingt beantwortet, aber wenigstens teilweise gestellt. Und ab Episode 1 wird das dann auch seriös, vielleicht.

Heather is also a project manager at Amstar Construction Services, a service-disabled veteran-owned general contracting firm specializing in government and agency projects.Prior to her current role at Tankersley Construction, Heather managed complex electrical projects for some of the largest electrical contractors in the United States.Her prior project experience includes new student housing at Sacramento State University, new six story classrooms for UC Hastings, medical facility expansion at Folsom State Prison, and multiple VA and healthcare projects throughout Northern California.Sponsors:Sub-Zero, Wolf, & Cove Pella Windows & DoorsTopics Discussed: [01:48] How Heather's commercial background informs her current residential projects[04:16] Heather and Steve's history and why they started their own company[08:14] Building the pipeline[11:41] Tankersley's pre-construction process[16:41] Creating project timeframes and setting client expectations[19:57] Working with trade partners[20:53] Tankersley's Personal Service Agreements (PSA)[24:09] Creating the first budget and how it transforms over the course of the project[30:55] How often Tankersley's clients use the owner portal[33:13] How Tankersley chooses its designers[35:55] Staying on the same page with trade partners throughout the project[37:41] Setting up the job site binders and what they entail [38:34] Tankersley's management process and dealing with scope changes[43:28] Managing Work In Progress (WIP)[47:12] Conducting an audit with the project manager[48:23] Lump sum versus cost plus and dealing with unknowns[51:26] Tankersley's approach to deposits[55:46] What's next for Tankersley?Connect with Guest:Website InstagramFacebookHouzz Connect with Brad Leavitt: Website InstagramFacebookHouzz PinterestYouTube Key Quotes from Episode:We've really built a network in our area with local designers just by asking what's a pain point for them and what's a pain point for us.Hats off to you if you do cost plus. I did it back in my day and you never can capture all the time. It's inevitable. Give me the lump sum all day.

Ariane Hegewisch is Program Director of Employment and Earnings at IWPR and Scholar in Residence at American University; prior to that she spent two years at IWPR as a scholar-in-residence. She came to IWPR from the Center for WorkLife Law at UC Hastings. In this podcast, Ariane talks about: - Gender Wage gap - Diversity - Impact of Covid-19 on women's jobs - Impact of automation on women's jobs - Future of work for women --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/shobhana-viswanathan/support

What is precarious work and how does it impact the psychology of labor? How might platforms like Uber and Lyft be negatively impacting their workers? How do gig economy apps control the lives of those who use them for work?   To answer these questions and more we welcome Dr. Veena Dubal to the show.   Veena is a professor of Law at UC Hastings. Veena received her J.D. and PhD from UC Berkeley, where she conducted an ethnography of the San Francisco taxi industry. Veena's research focuses on the intersection of law, technology, and precarious work.    Full show notes for this episode can be found at Radicalai.org.    If you enjoy this episode please make sure to subscribe, submit a rating and review, and connect with us on twitter at twitter.com/radicalaipod

Flyer for “Day of Rage” demonstrations planned in cities worldwide against Israel's plans to illegally annex occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank On this show: 0:08 – Jamaal Bowman and Mondaire Jones appear to emerge successful in their races for Congress in New York. Charles Booker nearly defeated Amy McGrath in Kentucky's Senate primary. What does the Democratic establishment need to learn from successful insurgent Black and Brown candidates running on progressive platforms? We talk with Steve Phillips, host of the podcast Democracy In Color with Steve Phillips and founder of Democracy in Color. 0:34 – Young Jewish activists held a “wake up” demonstration outside House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's residence in San Francisco this morning, rallying and playing traditional Jewish instruments to urge her to oppose Israel's illegal plans for annexation of Palestinian land in the West Bank, slated to begin as early as today. We hear an on-the-ground update from Gabriel Kahn, organizer with IfNotNow (@IfNotNowOrg). 0:37 – Oakland activists successfully pressured members of the city council to reopen the city's budget to consider deeper cuts to the Oakland Police Department. We hear a recap from last night's meeting from liz suk, policy director for Oakland Rising. 0:45 – On May 6, 2012, Oakland police officer Miguel Masso shot and killed 18-year old Alan Blueford, a student at Skyline High School. Alan is survived by his parents, Jeralynn and Adam Blueford, who spoke to KPFA for our continued series on remembering people whose lives were taken by police violence. This piece was recorded and reported by KPFA's Wren Farrell and edited and produced by Lucy Kang. 0:53 – 23-year-old Miles Hall was killed by Walnut Creek police on June 2, 2019 when he was at his most vulnerable point in the throes of a mental health crisis. His mother, Taun Hall, talks about their ongoing pursuit of justice and announces an event for Miles Hall at 6:30PM tonight in Walnut Creek. Details here.  1:08 – Israel could start annexing parts of the West Bank from Palestinians as early as today. It's illegal under international law, and protests are planned across the world today against Israeli annexation. We're joined by Palestinian-American scholar George Bisharat, blues musician and law professor at UC Hastings, who writes about the politics of the Middle East, and Yousef Munayyer, non-resident fellow at the Arab Center Washington, D.C. 1:34 – More than 1,100 incarcerated men at San Quentin State Prison now have tested positive for Covid-19. Stefano Bertozzi is dean emeritus of the UC Berkeley School of Public Health, and part of a team that inspected San Quentin on June 13th, wrote a memo warning the outbreak there could overwhelm the region's hospitals. The team recommended decarcerating at least half the men in San Quentin.  1:51 – Tenants in Berkeley are rallying against a planned eviction by the University of California, Berkeley, which wants to demolish affordable city housing to make way for a new student housing project. Danielle Kaye reports. The post Protests erupt worldwide against Israel's planned annexation of West Bank; Public health experts decry Gavin Newsom for inaction on San Quentin Covid outbreak appeared first on KPFA.

UC Hastings law professor emeritus and former Interior Department Solicitor John Leshy talks about the Antiquities Act and a strange ruling from the U.S. Court of Claims The post Law professor John Leshy on the Antiquities Act and the Trump Administration appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.