A coalition of privacy defenders led by Lex Lumina and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit on February 11 asking a federal court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from disclosing millions of Americans’ private, sensitive information to Elon Musk and his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE). As the federal government is the nation’s largest employer, the records held by OPM represent one of the largest collections of sensitive personal data in the country.Is this a big deal? Should we care? Joining Pam today is Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley, an expert in intellectual property, patent law, trademark law, antitrust, the law of robotics and AI, video game law, and remedies. Lemley is of counsel with the law firm Lex Lumina and closely involved in the DOGE case. In this episode, Lemley overviews urgent privacy concerns that led to this lawsuit, laws such as the Privacy Act, and legal next steps for this case. The conversation shifts to the current political landscape, highlighting the unprecedented influence of Silicon Valley, particularly under the Musk administration. Lemley contrasts the agile, authoritative management style of Silicon Valley billionaires with the traditionally slow-moving federal bureaucracy, raising concerns about legality and procedural adherence. The conversation also touches on the demise of the Chevron doctrine and the possible rise of an imperial presidency, drawing parallels between the Supreme Court's and the executive branch's power grabs—and how Lemley's 2022 paper, "The Imperial Supreme Court," predicted the Court's trend towards consolidating power. This episode offers a compelling examination of how technological and corporate ideologies are influencing American law.Links:Mark Lemley >>> Stanford Law page“The Imperial Supreme Court” >>> Stanford Law publication 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) The Rise of Executive Power(00:07:22) Concerns About Data Handling and Privacy(00:08:41) The Impact of Silicon Valley's Ethos on Government(00:14:01) The Musk Administration's Approach(00:18:01) The Role of the Supreme Court(00:24:43) Silicon Valley's Influence on Washington

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

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.

In the early hours of January 14, 2024 the Department of Justice released its long-awaited election interference report against President-elect Donald Trump. It was a long and winding road to that moment—and one marked, ultimately, by justice delayed. In November 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as special counsel to oversee criminal investigations by the Justice Department into former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents. The two cases were brought in different jurisdictions—with charges for the classified documents case filed in Florida and the elections case in Washington, D.C. After false starts, the blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on July 1, 2024 that former President Trump is entitled to some immunity from criminal prosecution for actions taken to overturn the results of the 2020 election, and the subsequent re-election of Trump in November, Smith and the DOJ dropped both cases. (Publication of Smith’s report regarding the documents case is delayed due to pending charges against co-conspirators.) 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: Introduction and the Role of Special ProsecutorsPam Karlan and David Sklansky discuss the history and purpose of special prosecutors, their use in politically sensitive cases, and the implications of their reports. Sklansky explains the transition from independent counsels to special counsels and highlights examples like the Mueller Report and investigations into Hunter Biden.(00:05:01) Chapter 2: Insights from Jack Smith’s ReportThe conversation shifts to Jack Smith's report on Donald Trump. Karlan and Sklansky explore the evidence presented, its connection to the January 6th events, and the debates around releasing such reports. Karlan questions the timing of appointing a special counsel, given much was already public knowledge.(00:08:25) Chapter 3: Prosecution Outcomes and Future ImplicationsKarlan and Sklansky discuss the slow progress of Trump’s investigation compared to other January 6th prosecutions. They also cover Trump’s promise to pardon convicted January 6th defendants, the fate of unnamed co-conspirators, and the ethical questions surrounding Todd Blanche’s involvement at the DOJ. (00:12:16) Chapter 4: Decisions and Legal Strategies in Trump’s ProsecutionKarlan and Sklansky discuss the decision not to charge Donald Trump with insurrection, focusing instead on charges like fraud and voter suppression. They analyze why the special counsel avoided certain charges and the challenges of applying existing statutes to unprecedented events.(00:16:30) Chapter 5: The Supreme Court’s Role and the Impact on ProsecutionThe conversation explores delays caused by the Supreme Court, including its handling of presidential immunity. Karlan and Sklansky explain how these rulings affected timelines and created legal ambiguities that could influence appeals and the overall process.(00:19:00) Chapter 6: Restoring Trust in Criminal Justice and DemocracyKarlan and Sklansky shift focus to broader implications for democracy, discussing how Trump’s prosecutions might deepen distrust in institutions. They consider paths to reform, including bipartisan efforts to reinforce the rule of law and community policing. The episode concludes with reflections on lessons from past legal leaders and the enduring relevance of Robert Jackson’s warnings about prosecutorial overreach.

The fires in Los Angeles, fueled by drought and the notorious Santa Ana winds, have wreaked devastation on the largest county in the United States, taking at least 10 lives and destroying thousands of structures as of January 10—with much of the Los Angeles metropolis, suburban neighborhoods like Pasadena and Pacific Palisades engulfed in smoke, and tens of thousands of residents without homes. In this episode, environmental law expert Deborah Sivas joins Pam Karlan for a discussion of California's fire crisis, examining how climate change and urban development are making residents more susceptible to the dangers of fires. They also look at air quality, rebuilding challenges, insurance strains, and the broader implications for urban planning, labor, and environmental recovery, highlighting the urgent need for sustainable solutions in an era of intensifying climate impacts.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:Deborah A. Sivas >>> Stanford Law page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction, the Santa Ana Winds, and Fire DynamicsHost Pam Karlan introduces environmental expert Deborah Sivas. The two discuss the Santa Ana winds, their origins, and their role in fueling wildfires. They explore the interaction of high winds, parched landscapes, and the growing impact of climate change on fire frequency and intensity.(00:06:49) Chapter 2: Urban Fires and the Wildland-Urban InterfaceThe conversation shifts to the challenges of wildfires in urban and suburban areas. Sivas explains fire ignition sources, the difficulty of containment, and the need for defensible spaces. She highlights the vulnerability of areas at the wildland-urban interface and discusses practical steps to reduce fire risk, including vegetation management and retrofitting structures.(00:12:37) Chapter 3: Air Quality and the Broader Impacts of FiresSivas and Karlan examine the devastating effects of wildfire smoke on air quality, especially in densely populated regions like Los Angeles. They discuss how urban fires release toxic pollutants and disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. The chapter emphasizes the broader environmental and health consequences of wildfires in an era of climate change.(00:16:46) Chapter 4: Climate Change, Insurance Challenges, and Recovery EffortsThe conversation shifts to the economic challenges posed by climate disasters, focusing on California’s wildfire insurance crisis. Sivas explains private insurance limitations, the state's FAIR program, and rebuilding challenges, including rising construction costs and environmental cleanup.(00:23:17) Chapter 5: Firefighting, Displacement, and Economic ImpactKarlan and Sivas explore the complexities of wildfire response, including the reliance on inmate labor and firefighting logistics. They also discuss displacement, long-term housing issues, and the socioeconomic toll on affected communities and businesses.

Just weeks before he was elected president of the United States, during a conversation at the Economic Club of Chicago, Donald Trump declared, “The most beautiful word in the dictionary is ‘tariff.’ And it’s my favorite word.” As the president-elect takes to the bully pulpit, leaders of nations threatened with new tariffs are calling Trump or even flying down to Mar-a-Lago, as Canadian President Trudeau did recently, to argue their case.  Stanford Law Professor Alan O. Sykes joins Pam and Rich for this episode to help make sense of the fascinating world of trade, tariffs, and the global economy. Al is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems whose most recent scholarship is focused on international economic relations. His writing and teaching have encompassed international trade, torts, contracts, insurance, antitrust, international investment law and economic analysis of law. He is the author most recently of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements. 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:Alan O. Sykes >>> Stanford Law page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Explanation of Tariffs Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce Professor Alan Sykes, a leading expert in international trade law, to explore the basics of tariffs. They discuss what tariffs are, how they function like a tax on imports, and who ultimately bears the cost. Sykes explains the economic complexities, such as elasticity of demand and supply, and highlights how tariffs impact U.S. consumers and foreign producers.They discuss how tariffs often fail to significantly increase manufacturing jobs and the potential downsides of retaliation and supply chain disruptions.(00:08:36) Chapter 2: Policy Implications and Optimal Tariff Strategies Alan Sykes unpacks the policy decisions behind tariffs, such as balancing national security concerns and economic efficiency. Sykes explains the concept of "optimal tariffs" and critiques proposals like 100% tariffs, arguing for targeted approaches such as subsidies for sensitive industries. The hosts highlight the distinction between product-specific measures and country-focused tariffs in maintaining supply chain resilience. (00:12:28) Chapter 3: The Evolution of U.S. Free Trade Policy The group explores the post-World War II consensus around free trade and how it has shifted in recent years. Alan Sykes outlines bipartisan changes to U.S. trade policy, the impact of the "China shock," and the shift towards an "America First" approach under both Trump and Biden administrations.(00:16:43) Chapter 4: Tariffs, Trade Wars, and Public Misunderstandings The discussion delves into the politics of tariffs and their economic implications. Alan Sykes explains why tariffs remain politically popular despite their economic inefficiency, the mechanics of trade wars, and the historical example of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff. They also discuss how tariffs and retaliation, such as restrictions on rare earth elements, could affect U.S. industries.(00:23:26) Chapter 5: Multilateral Trade Agreements and National Security Alan Sykes traces the history of multilateral trade institutions, focusing on the GATT, WTO, and USMCA. Sykes explains the U.S.’s recent retreat from WTO commitments, the renegotiation of NAFTA, and the controversial use of national security clauses to justify tariffs and sanctions. The conversation closes with insights on the implications of these shifts for allies and adversaries alike.

Presidential pardons are in the headlines again after President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son Hunter. But the vast majority of presidents have used this awesome power, which was enshrined in the Constitution at the founding of the country and dates back to 7th Century English monarchs. What are the issues at play with modern presidential pardons? What does history tell us about this practice? Our guest this week is Stanford Law Professor Bernie Meyler, a scholar of British and American constitutional law and of law and the humanities and author of the book Theaters of Pardoning. She joins Pam and Rich for a discussion of high-profile pardons like Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s allies to broader issues of mercy, justice reform, the implications of pardons in polarized politics, their historical roots, and ideas for reform. 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:Bernadette Meyler >>> Stanford Law page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins and Evolution of the Pardoning PowerHosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford welcome guest Bernie Meyler. The discussion opens with a look at the historical roots of the pardoning power, tracing its lineage from the divine rights of kings in England to its adaptation in American democracy. Key examples include early English judicial pardons, debates at the U.S. Constitutional Convention, and George Washington's use during the Whiskey Rebellion. The chapter closes with insights into President Trump's controversial approach to pardons, likened to monarchical practices of wielding power above the law.(00:05:04) Chapter 2: Legal Boundaries and Contemporary Issues in PardoningThis chapter examines the legal limits of the president's pardoning power, such as the inability to pardon state crimes, and the various forms pardons can take. The conversation pivots to notable recent pardons, including Hunter Biden's, sparking a discussion about blanket pardons versus specific ones and their implications on guilt and historical accountability.(00:14:24) Chapter 3: Pardons, Polarization, and Public Perception The discussion shifts to the broader context of pardons, their declining use, and the influence of public opinion. The hosts analyze the risks of granting pardons and compare historical uses of the power, such as Washington’s Whiskey Rebellion pardons, to modern examples like January 6th.(00:21:02) Chapter 4: Reforming the Pardon Process in a Divided Society The group explores potential reforms to the pardon process, suggesting ways to make it more democratic and transparent. Meyler discusses citizen panels and their role in ensuring fairness, while reflecting on the challenges of polarized politics.

Artificial Intelligence holds the potential to transform much of our lives and healthcare professions are embracing it for everything from cost savings to diagnostics. But who is to blame when AI assisted healthcare goes wrong? How is the law developing to balance the benefits and risks? In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. They examine AI’s potential to enhance diagnostics and streamline workflows while addressing the ethical, legal, and safety challenges this new technology can bring. The conversation highlights the urgency of adapting regulatory frameworks, the complexities of liability among hospitals, developers, and practitioners, and the need for rigorous testing to ensure patient safety as AI integration in healthcare advances.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:Michelle Mello >>> Stanford Law page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Understanding AI in MedicineThe episode begins with a broad introduction to AI's applications in medicine. Neel Guha explains generative AI systems and their rapid advancement, including practical applications like chatbots, imaging, and decision-making tools. Michelle Mello highlights AI's widespread integration, from diagnostic tools like radiological imaging and predictive algorithms to administrative uses that aim to reduce physician burnout.(00:07:04) Chapter 2: The Benefits and Risks of AI in HealthcareThe group explores the advantages of AI in medicine, such as enhanced diagnostic precision, reduced administrative burdens, and improved patient outcomes. Michelle Mello identifies potential risks, like automation bias, where reliance on AI might lead to unchecked errors, highlighting the tension between time-saving tools and maintaining human oversight.(00:08:22) Chapter 3: Legal Challenges and Liability in AI-Driven MedicineThe conversation turns to the legal implications of AI in healthcare. Neel Guha outlines scenarios where AI contributes to patient harm, discussing negligence claims, product liability, and the complexity of determining accountability. Michelle Mello and the hosts analyze how liability standards might evolve, comparing AI's systematic errors to human fallibility and addressing the interplay of human-AI collaboration in preventing mistakes.(00:14:47) Chapter 4: The Challenges of AI and Transparency in Decision-MakingThe group explores parallels between medical and anti-discrimination fields in understanding machine learning's opaque decision-making. Neel Guha delves into the evolution of AI systems from rule-based programming to complex machine learning, emphasizing challenges in identifying points of failure across stakeholders like hospitals, physicians, and developers.(00:17:35) Chapter 5: Regulation and Liability of AI in HealthcareMichelle Mello discusses the regulatory framework for AI as a medical device, comparing outdated 1976-era regulations to modern challenges. The conversation shifts to gaps in tort liability and the risks of developers limiting their liability through contracts. Proposals for redistributing liability to incentivize better private governance are examined alongside the need for robust AI quality assurance akin to crash tests or clinical trials.(00:23:13) Chapter 6: The Road Ahead: Balancing Innovation and SafetyThe speakers analyze the distinct challenges of regulating AI across diverse healthcare environments. Neel Guha and Michelle Mello discuss adapting evaluation practices to align with AI's real-world complexities. Optimism prevails as Michelle highlights AI’s potential to address critical issues like diagnostic delays, advocating for guardrails to ensure safety without stifling innovation. The episode concludes with reflections on Stanford's interdisciplinary approach to these pressing issues.

Matt Platkin, who was the youngest-ever AG in the country when he was appointed in 2022, discusses some of his public safety initiatives such as the ARRIVE Together program, which pairs mental health professionals with law enforcement to improve responses to mental health crises. Among other pressing issues facing New Jersey, Platkin also addresses his state's comprehensive approach to gun violence, which focuses on data-driven crime enforcement, community violence prevention, and legal accountability for firearm manufacturers.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:Matt Platkin >>> State of New Jersey Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Role and Challenges of State Attorneys General Show Notes: Host Rich Ford introduces Matt Platkin, Attorney General of New Jersey, and dives into the multifaceted role and responsibilities of state attorneys general, especially in enforcing public safety and overseeing large-scale law enforcement. Platkin shares insights on the expectations and hurdles faced by AGs, highlighting the critical role they play in protecting communities.(00:03:42) Chapter 2: Innovative Crisis Intervention Programs The discussion shifts to the "ARRIVE Together" program, a pioneering mental health and law enforcement collaboration aimed at de-escalating crisis situations. Platkin explains how pairing officers with mental health professionals in crisis response has drastically reduced force incidents and arrests in New Jersey. He also touches on the broader need for mental health resources, noting how training and interdisciplinary cooperation contribute to more effective, compassionate responses.(00:09:10) Chapter 3: Public Health Approaches to Opioid and Gun Crises Platkin outlines New Jersey's proactive strategies to tackle the opioid and gun violence epidemics, focusing on diversion programs, community partnerships, and civil enforcement. He discusses the impactful results of addressing these issues as public health crises, noting the state’s success in reducing both opioid fatalities and gun-related violence through data-driven enforcement, community engagement, and targeted litigation against non-compliant businesses.(00:17:34) Chapter 4: Interstate Coordination and the Role of AGs in Federal LitigationAttorney General Matt Platkin explains the importance of collaboration among state attorneys general, including bipartisan efforts in federal litigation. He shares examples of major joint cases, such as those against Meta and Apple, and discusses how AGs coordinate on issues that transcend state lines, often through bipartisan associations.(00:20:14) Chapter 5: The Evolution and Influence of the New Jersey Supreme CourtPam Karlan asks Platkin about New Jersey’s innovative Supreme Court. Platkin delves into the unique aspects of New Jersey’s government structure, including the influential role of the state Supreme Court in affordable housing and school funding cases. He shares insights on recent judicial reforms and the impact of balanced partisan representation on the court.(00:25:08) Chapter 6: Path to Public Service and Career ReflectionsPlatkin recounts his journey from law school to Attorney General, sharing pivotal moments like working on Cory Booker’s campaign and volunteering in San Antonio. He reflects on how early career risks and public service aspirations shaped his path, highlighting the impact of his experiences on his leadership in New Jersey’s government.

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.

Is the president above the law? Is the Electoral College democratic? In this episode, historian Jonathan Gienapp critiques the mainstream use of originalism, arguing that it often neglects crucial historical context, overlooking the complexities of original public understanding. The conversation dives into recent court cases, highlighting tensions between historical interpretation and contemporary judicial practices. This is clearly illustrated in Gienapp’s discussion of the Electoral College—a uniquely American invention. He explains the historical roots of the Electoral College, the Framers' intentions, and the criticisms it faces today. He also sheds light on how the Electoral College emerged as a compromise among less desirable options and the historical context surrounding its establishment, including issues of accountability and regional interests. The conversation also touches on ongoing debates about potential reforms, public sentiment toward a national popular vote, and the challenges of amending the Constitution in today's contentious political landscape. Join us for an enlightening discussion that bridges history with contemporary constitutional debates.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:Jonathan Gienapp >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Flaws of OriginalismHosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss the key issues with modern originalism, focusing on how originalists often overlook the historical context necessary to truly capture the Constitution’s original meaning with historian Jonathan Gienapp. Gienapp critiques the flexibility of originalist interpretations, especially when applied to complex constitutional concepts like freedom of speech and executive power.(00:04:33) Chapter 2: Public Meaning vs. Original IntentRich Ford explores the tension between public meaning and original intent in originalist theory. Gienapp explains how, despite attempts to distinguish them, the two often overlap in practice. The discussion highlights the inconsistency in how originalists pick and choose historical evidence to support their interpretations.(00:07:47) Chapter 3: Judicial Interpretation in Practice: Rahimi and Trump CasesPam Karlan brings up recent court cases, including United States v. Rahimi and Trump v. United States, where originalist judges either struggled with historical evidence or avoided it altogether. Gienapp notes the irony of originalists relying on minimal historical analysis when it contradicts their desired outcomes.(00:12:04) Chapter 4: The Framers' Vision of the PresidencyJonathan Gienapp discusses the historical foundations of the American presidency, emphasizing the founding generation's rejection of monarchy and the importance of presidential accountability. He highlights the debate at the Constitutional Convention regarding the balance between a strong executive and ensuring that executive power remains accountable to the people.(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Originalism and Constitutional InterpretationJonathan Gienapp delves into the complexities of originalism as a judicial philosophy. He explains the tension between the rhetoric of originalism and its inconsistent application in Supreme Court decisions. He argues for either a more serious commitment to originalism or a recognition of constitutional pluralism, where history is used alongside other interpretative methods.(00:21:39) Chapter 6: The Origins and Challenges of the Electoral CollegeExploration of the creation of the Electoral College, discussing how it emerged not as a perfect solution but as a compromise to address competing concerns about legislative selection, popular votes, and regional interests. Gienapp examines past and present efforts to reform the Electoral College and explains why it persists despite criticism.

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, Nate Persily forecasts complications along with it.Persily, a Stanford law professor and a leading expert in election law and administration, says the coming election cycle could pose unprecedented challenges for voters and election officials alike. “We are at a stage right now where there's a lot of anxiety about election administration,” he says. “There's a significant share of the population that's completely lost confidence in our system of elections.”With nearly every state having altered its election laws since 2020 and a significant turnover in election administrators, Persily says the stage is set for a potentially bumpy ride this November. As voter confusion and AI-powered disinformation loom overhead, Persily says the integrity of our democracy may well depend on our collective ability to weather this less-than-perfect storm.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:Nate Persily >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Challenges Ahead for the November Election Nate Persily outlines the primary concerns for the upcoming election, including voter confusion, changes in election laws, and the pressures faced by election officials.(00:03:27) Chapter 2: Decentralization and Election Administration The panel discusses the challenges of managing a national election run by numerous local jurisdictions, including issues with certification and varying local procedures.(00:05:44)  Chapter 3: The Evolving Election Timeline Persily, Karlan, and Ford explore how election day has expanded into an extended voting period, covering early and mail-in voting, and the implications for counting and certification.(00:17:41) Chapter 4: Technology, Disinformation, and Media Influence Examines the impact of technology and disinformation, including deep fakes and misinformation about voting procedures, and their effects on public trust.(00:23:37) Chapter 5: Building Confidence in the Electoral Process Persily discusses strategies to bolster confidence in the election process, emphasizing support for election officials and the role of local leaders in maintaining trust.

The Supreme Court's latest term was marked by decisions of enormous consequence. However, the way the Court has communicated about these rulings far undersells the gravity they carry.While “expressing itself in extremely modest terms,” Professor Jeffrey Fisher says, the current Supreme Court has “[handed] down decisions that have enormously consequential effects for our democracy, people's rights, and everything in between.” He and Assistant Professor Easha Anand, co-directors of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, agree that these recent decisions could reshape American law and politics for years to come.In this episode of Stanford Legal with host Pam Karlan, Fisher, and Anand take a critical look at recent Supreme Court rulings on abortion, gun rights, tech platforms, and the power of federal agencies, examining the Court's evolving approach and considering the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and 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:Jeff Fisher >>> Stanford Law School PageEasha Anand >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Supreme Court Term and Key CasesPam Karlan is joined by Professors Jeff Fisher and Easha Anand to discuss the past term at the Supreme Court, constitutional law and Supreme Court practice, highlighting key cases and themes from the term. They explore how the court's conservative majority shapes the docket and the role of Justices Barrett and Jackson in developing their judicial voices.(00:06:56) Chapter 2: High-Profile Cases: Guns, Abortion, and Administrative LawExamine major cases, including gun rights in Rahimi v. United States and Cargill v. Garland, abortion-related cases, and the pivotal Loper Bright decision affecting the administrative state. They analyze the court's reasoning and the broader implications of these rulings.(00:15:28) Chapter 3: The Court's Evolving Role and MethodologyDiscussion of the broader implications of the Supreme Court's evolving approach to its docket and decision-making processes, particularly in relation to the administrative state and the impact of recent rulings on future cases.(00:19:14) Chapter 4: The Supreme Court and Technology CasesThey delve into the significant technology cases that were brought before the Supreme Court this term. They discuss how the Court addressed state laws from Florida and Texas aimed at restricting content moderation by big tech companies, marking the first time the First Amendment was applied to social media platforms. The discussion highlights the tension between traditional legal frameworks and the evolving digital landscape, with a focus on the implications of these rulings for the future of free speech online.(00:24:10) Chapter 5: Trump and the Supreme Court: Balancing Power and ImmunityThe group explores the complex legal landscape surrounding former President Donald Trump's involvement in Supreme Court cases. Easha Anand provides an in-depth analysis of the Trump v. United States case, where the Court examined the extent of presidential immunity concerning acts related to the 2020 election. The discussion also touches on the broader implications of the Court's rulings on Trump’s legal challenges, including how these decisions might shape future presidential conduct and accountability.(00:29:27) Chapter 6: Supreme Court’s Role in Protecting DemocracyPam Karlan and Jeff Fisher discuss the Supreme Court's role in safeguarding democratic processes. They analyze the Court's reluctance to engage deeply in political matters, such as the January 6th prosecution and political gerrymandering, highlighting the tension between judicial restraint and the need to protect democratic values. The chapter concludes with reflections on the broader implications of these decisions for the future of U.S. democracy, particularly in the context of voting rights and election integrity.

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.

Do courts have the expertise to decide on important environmental law issues? Pam Karlan and Rich Ford speak with environmental law expert Debbie Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford, about recent Supreme Court decisions affecting environmental and administrative law--including the Court's decision to overturn decades of settled law by overturning Chevron. What are the implications of the Court's recent blockbuster environmental decisions--the impact on the Clean Air Act, and broader consequences for regulatory agencies and environmental policies. Tune in to explore how these legal shifts could reshape the landscape of environmental regulation in the United States.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:Deborah Sivas >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00)  Chapter 1: Introduction and OverviewPam and Rich welcome Professor Debbie Sivas from Stanford's Environmental Law Clinic. They provide an overview of significant Supreme Court cases impacting environmental and administrative law, highlighting the pivotal Loeb or Wright decision that ended Chevron deference.(00:02:06) Chapter 2: Chevron Deference and Its Implications Explained Discussion on the historical context and implications of Chevron deference, with Debbie Sivas explaining its significance and how its removal might affect future legal interpretations and administrative agency power.(00:09:12) Chapter 3: Expert Opinions vs. Judicial InterpretationsExamination of the Supreme Court's approach to statutory interpretation versus agency expertise, highlighting cases like Ohio against EPA and the challenges posed by the court's stance on scientific and technical matters.(00:16:12) Chapter 4: The Role of the Major Questions Doctrine and Non-Delegation DoctrineAnalysis of the Major Questions Doctrine's impact on regulatory power and the potential resurgence of the Non-Delegation Doctrine, focusing on how these legal principles shape environmental policy and agency authority.(00:18:57) Chapter 5: The Ohio Against EPA Case and Its Broader ImplicationsDetailed discussion on the Ohio against EPA case, its current status, and the implications of the Supreme Court's emergency stay decision on future regulatory actions and environmental protections.

Will the three remaining cases against former president Donald Trump ever get to trial? After Judge Cannon's controversial dismissal of charges in the classified documents case—and the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision—the question is not so obvious. In this episode, criminal law expert David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss these two earthquake decisions, Special Prosecutor Jake Smith's appeal of Judge Cannon's decision, and the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump.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:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Sklansky’s Book >>> A Pattern of Violence: How the Law Classifies Crimes and What It Means for Justice (00:00:00) Introduction and OverviewIntroduction to the podcast, Professor David Sklansky, and overview of the topics: Judge Cannon's decision, special master appointment, and Supreme Court's recent decision on immunity.(00:01:43) Judge Cannon's Decision and RationaleDiscussion on Judge Cannon's rationale for dismissing the classified documents case, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and the extraordinary nature of her decision.(00:04:12) Special Counsel Appointment and Historical ContextExamination of the reasoning behind appointing a special counsel, Judge Cannon's strained statutory interpretations, and the long history of appointing special counsels.(00:07:23) Analysis of Previous Controversial RulingsReview of Judge Cannon's earlier controversial ruling about appointing a special master, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and consistency in historical interpretations.(00:13:42) Unitary Executive Theory and AccountabilityDiscussion on the unitary executive theory, potential motivations behind Judge Cannon's rulings, and whether the case is about presidential accountability or diffusing responsibility.(00:21:05) Supreme Court's Immunity Decision and Future ImplicationsAnalysis of the Supreme Court's decision to remand the election interference case, challenges and potential outcomes, and the impact on the Manhattan case involving official acts.

Control of the border and illegal immigration are again in the headlines and the centerpiece of a divisive presidential campaign. Here to help make sense of recent legal successes and failures is immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón, the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law at Stanford. The author of the new book, Legal Phantoms: Executive Action and Haunting Failures of Immigration Law, which offers insights into the human stories and governmental challenges shaping contemporary immigration debates, Chacon discusses the complexities of immigration policy,  its intersection with constitutional law, criminal law, and societal perceptions of identity and belonging.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:Jennifer Chacón >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Background Pam Karlan introduces the show and today’s guest, Jennifer Chacón, highlighting her research and recent book on immigration law, Legal Phantoms.( 00:02:26) Chapter 2: The Stalemate of Immigration Reform Rich Ford addresses the lack of progress in comprehensive immigration reform. Jennifer Chacón details the initial aim of her research project to study the implementation of Senate Bill 744.The shift in focus to executive actions by President Obama after the bill’s failure, including the Deferred Action for Parents and DACA expansion programs.(00:07:05) Chapter 3: Understanding Deferred ActionJennifer Chacón explains deferred action and its implications for individuals lacking legal status, plus the significance of work authorization and the temporary nature of deferred action programs.(00:10:38) Chapter 4: Personal Stories and Community Impact Jennifer Chacón shares insights from her interviews with long-term residents about their perceptions of border policy and local enforcement and the varied perspectives of immigrants on the issues of border control and local government actions.(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Future of Immigration Reform Rich Ford inquires about potential reforms, and Jennifer Chacón emphasizes the interconnectedness of border policy and long-term resident solutions. They discuss the Biden administration’s recent announcements and their implications. Jennifer Chacón shares her view on the political challenges and ideal legislative changes for addressing immigration issues.

Should presidents be immune from prosecution? If yes, under what circumstances? Stanford Professor Michael McConnell, a former federal judge, joins Pam Karlan for a discussion on presidential immunity, the Constitution, and former president Trump's cases. In this insightful episode, they discuss the implications of the Supreme Court's stance on criminal versus civil liabilities for presidents, the political ramifications of prosecutorial actions, and the historical context of executive power under the U.S. Constitution.

Is legal representation in the U.S. only for the rich and corporations? That's a question that we'll explore in this episode of Stanford Legal with guests David and Nora Freeman Engstrom, two leading authorities on access to justice and the legal profession. They'll explain the roots of the challenge, how unauthorized practice of law rules contribute to the problem, and how to address them. The Engstroms co-direct Stanford Law School's Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession, an academic center working to shape the future of legal services and access to the legal system. This episode delves into some alarming statistics, including the fact that in three-quarters of civil cases in state courts, at least one party is without a lawyer. This alone often leads to unjust outcomes in cases involving debt collection, evictions, family law, and other areas. And that is just part of the problem, as the Engstroms explain.   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:Nora Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageChapter 1: The Access to Justice Crisis in the U.S.(00:00:00) Pam Karlan introduces the episode, discussing the work of David and Nora Freeman Engstrom at Stanford Law School's Deborah Rhode Center on the Legal Profession. This section provides an overview of the access to justice crisis, highlighting the high percentage of cases where individuals lack legal representation and a look at the types of cases predominantly at issue, including debt collection, evictions, mortgage foreclosures, and family law cases.Chapter 2: Understanding the Consequences and Causes of Legal Inaccessibility(00:7:06)  David and Nora Freeman Engstrom explore the broader implications of the lack of legal representation, including the cascade of related legal and financial issues that arise from initial problems like wage garnishment and eviction. They also touch on the hidden legal issues that never make it to court due to individuals' inability to seek legal help.Chapter 3: Exploring Solutions and Technological Impacts on Access to Justice(00:10:07) David and Nora Freeman Engstrom  delve into potential solutions to the access to justice crisis, including the role of technology in both exacerbating and potentially alleviating the problem. They discuss the efficiency of technological tools used by the debt collection industry and the implications for legal access.Chapter 4: The Technology Asymmetry in Debt Collection(00:14:19 )  Pam Karlan and David Freeman Engstrom discuss how debt collectors use automation to exploit legal processes against unrepresented individuals. They highlight the stark disparity between technological access for debt collectors and individual defendants. Engstrom points out the restrictive rules that limit software-driven legal services, exacerbating the access to justice crisis.Chapter 5: The Historical Context and Current Restrictions on Legal Services(00:15:55)  Nora Freeman Engstrom delves into the history of legal service restrictions in the U.S., contrasting it with medical professions. She introduces her research on auto clubs and their provision of legal services in the early 20th century, showing how organized bar associations shut down these alternatives to preserve their monopoly.Chapter 6: Modern Innovations and Future Prospects in Legal Services(00:24:13)  The host and guests discuss recent efforts to relax unauthorized practice of law rules in states like Utah and Arizona. They explore innovative legal service models emerging from these reforms, including tiered services and AI-driven solutions, and their potential to democratize access to legal assistance. The discussion highlights how entities like LegalZoom are now able to hire lawyers and provide more comprehensive services. They also touch on the potential of generative AI to bridge the gap between legal jargon and plain language, making legal assistance more accessible to the public. The chapter concludes with reflections on the promise and challenges of these technological advancements.

In this episode, Rich and Pam discuss the successes and failures of Brown v. Board of Education with their colleague, Rick Banks. Marking the 70th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, they look at its impact on Jim Crow segregation and the ongoing challenges in achieving educational equality in the U.S. Banks offers a critical analysis of the effectiveness of Brown in integrating American primary and secondary education and explores alternative approaches to further racial and socioeconomic integration in schools.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:Ralph Richard Banks >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Lawyer online feature >>> Brown v. Board: Success or Failure?(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Significance of Brown vs. Board of EducationIntroduction to the podcast and the topic of Brown vs. Board of Education. Discussion on the transformative impact of Brown on American society and its less effective impact on primary and secondary education.(00:02:36) Chapter 2: Initial Impact and Challenges of BrownExploration of the immediate aftermath of the Brown decision, including the decade of minimal desegregation and the eventual legislative push in the 1960s. Mention of personal anecdotes highlighting the slow progress.(00:06:35) Chapter 3: Massive Resistance and Supreme Court’s RoleDiscussion on the era of massive resistance to desegregation, the role of the Southern Manifesto, and the Supreme Court's strategic avoidance of direct intervention. Examination of the lingering effects of this period on the present educational landscape.(00:10:16) Chapter 4: Socioeconomic Disparities and School SegregationAnalysis of the ongoing economic inequality and its impact on school segregation. Comparison between Northern and Southern school desegregation efforts, with specific examples from Detroit and Charlotte.(00:14:45) Chapter 5: Legal and Structural Barriers to IntegrationExamination of legal decisions such as Milliken and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez that reinforced segregation and funding disparities. Discussion on the narrow scope of Brown and its consequences.(00:18:58) Chapter 6: Integration vs. Educational QualityDebate on the merits of integration versus focusing on educational quality through alternative methods such as charter schools and vouchers. Consideration of the mixed outcomes of these approaches.(00:22:19) Chapter 7: Parental Responsibility and Systemic SolutionsReflection on the burden placed on parents to seek better education through choice programs. Comparison to historical figures who fought for desegregation. Discussion on the need for systemic solutions rather than relying solely on choice.(00:25:02) Chapter 8: Future Directions and Pragmatic SolutionsCall for a mix of approaches to improve education, combining integration efforts with initiatives focused on educational quality. Emphasis on the importance of experimentation, evidence collection, and open-minded evaluation of educational policies.

Criminal law expert and former federal prosecutor David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss the New York trial and other cases against former president Trump. From state prosecutions to federal cases, they analyze the defense and prosecution strategies and implications of each trial, shedding light on the legal challenges facing Trump, the first current or former president in U.S. history to face criminal charges.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:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School Page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Progress and Impact of the New York TrialDiscussion of Donald Trump’s ongoing trial in New York related to hush money payments.Focus on the efficiency of jury selection and trial progress.Analysis of the impact of trial pace on prosecution's case.The role of trial speed in influencing juror perceptions.[00:04:48] Chapter 2: Trump's Response and Gag OrderTrump's response to the trial and constraints of the gag order.Effectiveness of the gag order in curbing Trump's behavior.Discussion on Trump's criminal contempt and its implications.Analysis of potential consequences and judicial response.[00:08:58] Chapter 3: Case Strength/Strategy and Jury Perception Evaluation of the strength of the case and potential challenges.Impact of jury perception on the trial outcome.Insight into trial strategy regarding witness sequencing.Discussion on the prosecution's approach to witness testimony.[00:19:45] Chapter 4: Supreme Court's Role and Case ComplexityDiscussion on the Supreme Court's involvement in pending cases.Analysis of case complexity and its impact on trial timelines.[00:22:56] Chapter 5: Challenges in the Mar-a-Lago Case Examination of challenges and delays in the Mar-a-Lago case.Analysis of trial judge's management and potential trial outcomes.[00:25:49] Chapter 6: Potential Trial Outcomes and Implications Discussion on potential trial outcomes and their implications.Overview of civil cases against Trump and their significance.

Joining Pam and Rich for this discussion are Professor Daniel Ho and RegLab Fellow Christie Lawrence, JD ’24 (MPP, Harvard Kennedy School of Government).Dan is the founding director of Stanford’s RegLab (Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab), which builds high-impact partnerships for data science and responsible AI in the public sector. The RegLab has an extensive track record partnering with government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Department of Labor, and Santa Clara County on prototyping and evaluating AI tools to make government more fair, efficient, and transparent. Building on this work, the RegLab also helps agencies strengthen AI governance and operationalize trustworthy AI principles.Christie, a third-year JD student, worked with RegLab and Stanford’s Innovation Clinic on projects to advise DOL on responsible AI and development practices and to support the work with Prof. Ho on the National AI Advisory Committee, which advises the White House on AI policy. In this interview, we’ll learn about several RegLab projects—and the importance of helping government develop smart AI policy and solutions.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:Dan Ho >>> Stanford Law School web page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Setting the StageMention of the rapid acceleration of technology and the release of ChatGPT.Highlighting the risks associated with AI, such as bias and privacy concerns.Discussion on the relationship between AI and governance, including recent developments in AI policy and governance.Mention of the Biden administration's executive order on AI and its implications.[00:03:04] Chapter 2: The Role of Reg Lab and Collaboration with the IRSExplanation of the Reg Lab and its purpose.Discussion on the need for government agencies to modernize their technology infrastructure.Overview of the collaboration with the IRS to improve tax evasion detection using machine learning.Discovery of disparities in auditing rates and subsequent IRS reforms.Highlighting the intersection of AI, social justice, and government practices.[00:09:12] Chapter 3: Student PerspectiveChristie Lawrence shares her experience working on AI policy at Stanford Law School.Discussion on bridging the gap between policy, law, and technology.Impactful work done by students in collaboration with government agencies.[00:11:38] Chapter 4: AI and Social JusticePam Karlan's experience with AI issues in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.Examples of algorithmic discrimination and its implications for social justice.Discussion on the challenges of addressing AI-related issues in government practices.[00:23:55] Chapter 5: Future DirectionsOptimism about the future of AI governance and the recent executive order's impact.Anticipation of legislative proposals and state-level initiatives in AI regulation.Importance of maintaining an open innovation ecosystem and addressing talent gaps in government agencies.[00:25:55] Chapter 6: Audience Questions

Professor Easha Anand, co-director of the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, joins Professors Pam Karlan and Richard Thompson Ford, along with Gareth Fowler, JD '24, for a discussion about three cases that she argued before the Court this term, the people behind the case titles, and what it takes to represent them at the highest court in the land. 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:Easha Anand >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Setting the StageEasha Anand shares the story of Mr. Ciavarini and the impact of the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic on restoring his reputation. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the episode and guests Professor Easha Anand and Gareth Fowler, discussing their work with the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.(00:01:52) Chapter 2: Joining the Clinic and the Clinic's Unique ApproachGareth Fowler describes his experience joining the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic and the process of working on cases as a student. Easha Anand explains the distinctive features of the clinic's model, emphasizing the significant role of students in producing legal work.(00:05:38) Chapter 3: Working on Cases and the Sarbanes-Oxley CaseGareth Fowler discusses the specific cases he worked on during his time at the clinic, including Mendez-Colleen and United States v. Jackson. Easha Anand recounts her experience arguing the case of Murray v. UBS before the Supreme Court and the significance of the outcome for whistleblower protection.(00:15:52) Chapter 4: Insights from Oral ArgumentsEasha Anand reflects on the differences between arguing cases at lower courts versus the Supreme Court, emphasizing the unique challenges and opportunities of Supreme Court advocacy.(00:18:16) Chapter 5: Clinic's Trip to D.C.Gareth Fowler shares his experience attending Supreme Court oral arguments in Washington, D.C., providing insights into the courtroom dynamics and the significance of the proceedings.(00:20:27) Chapter 6: Preparing for Future Cases and Impactful MomentsEasha Anand discusses the upcoming case of Chiavarini and the journey of preparing for oral arguments, highlighting the client's story and the clinic's commitment to justice. Pam Karlan and Easha Anand reflect on the profound impact of their work with clients and the meaningful experiences shared during their collaboration with the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic.[00:24:23] Chapter 7: Audience Question and Answer

Dive into the complex history of America's drug war with George Fisher, former Massachusetts Attorney General and acclaimed scholar of criminal law. In his latest book, "Beware Euphoria," Fisher explores the moral and racial dimensions of drug prohibition, challenging conventional narratives. Join the conversation on Stanford Legal as Fisher discusses the impact of racial justice movements on drug policy, including the legalization of cannabis, offering profound insights into a contentious issue shaping legal and social discourse.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:George Fisher >>> Stanford Law School PageBeware Euphoria: The Moral Roots and Racial Myths of America's War on Drugs(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins of Drug Prohibition Podcast guest, George Fisher, traces the history of drug prohibition, highlighting the departure of cannabis use from medical preservation. He also discusses the 19th-century roots of drug prohibition, particularly the moral concerns driving the anti-drug laws.(00:11:42) Chapter 2: Racial Narratives and Mass IncarcerationRich Ford discusses the common narrative linking mass incarceration to the war on drugs and its alleged racial motivations. Fisher challenges this narrative, arguing that early drug laws were about protecting whites' moral purity rather than targeting people of color. The conversation explores the racial dynamics of early drug laws, emphasizing the racism of indifference rather than explicit targeting.(00:20:20) Chapter 3: Moral Valence of Mind-Altering Drugs Fisher delves into the historical moral perceptions of mind-altering drugs, tracing back to Early Christian notions of reason and morality.He explains why certain drugs, like opium and later marijuana, were seen as threats to moral character, while alcohol was treated differently due to its varied uses.(00:26:15) Chapter 4: Legalization of Marijuana and Racial Justice The conversation shifts to the legalization of marijuana, highlighting its historical bans and recent movements towards legalization. Concerns about the increasing potency of marijuana and its potential backlash are explored, suggesting a need for careful regulation and messaging.(00:30:19) Conclusion: Closing RemarksRich Ford wraps up the conversation with George Fisher discussing insights and emphasizing the importance of discussing the ongoing struggle with drugs and intoxicants.

Pam Karlan and labor law expert and former NLRB chair William Gould IV explore the quickly changing arena of college athletics including the push for student-athlete unionization, the debate over compensation, and other issues at the intersection of sports and academia. From the Dartmouth College men's basketball team's union election to the broader challenges facing university athletics, they discuss the complex issues shaping the law and the future of collegiate sports.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:William Gould IV >>> Stanford Law School PageRecent Q&A with Gould >>> Stanford's Bill Gould on the Dartmouth College Basketball  Union Vote (00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Intersection of Sports and Labor LawPam Karlan introduces the topic of sports law and labor law, highlighting the recent developments in the field and the significance of the intersection between the two areas. Bill and Pam look at an overview of the Dartmouth College men's basketball team unionization case and its implications for the traditional understanding of student-athlete status.(00:02:03) Chapter 2: The Evolving Definition of Student-AthleteWilliam B. Gould IV delves into the historical context of the student-athlete designation, tracing its origins and evolution over time. He discusses the complexities of defining student-athletes within the framework of labor law and examines the factors that have contributed to the recent challenges to this classification.(00:06:49) Chapter 3: Labor Law Considerations in Collegiate AthleticsGould explores the key principles of labor law as they apply to collegiate athletics, emphasizing the factors that determine employee status and the obligations of universities as employers. The chapter addresses issues such as control over athletes, compensation, and the role of collective bargaining in shaping the future of collegiate sports.(00:10:00) Chapter 4: Implications for Intercollegiate SportsKarlan and Gould discuss the broader implications of the Dartmouth case and similar unionization efforts for intercollegiate sports as a whole. They examine the challenges posed by conference realignment, Title IX considerations, and the evolving landscape of athlete compensation, including name, image, and likeness rights.(00:14:23) Chapter 5: Legal and Policy PerspectivesThe conversation shifts to a discussion of the legal and policy considerations surrounding student-athlete rights and the role of the courts in shaping future outcomes. Gould offers insights into the potential impact of Supreme Court decisions and judicial attitudes towards higher education institutions and their treatment of athletes.(00:21:08) Chapter 6: Looking AheadIn the final chapter, Karlan and Gould reflect on the future of collegiate athletics in light of ongoing legal battles and shifting societal norms. They explore potential scenarios for reform and address lingering questions about the balance between academic and athletic pursuits, the role of unions in protecting athlete rights, and the broader implications for labor relations in the sports industry.

When does life begin? In this episode of Stanford Legal, co-hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan dig into the recent decision by the Alabama Supreme Court that has sent shockwaves through the fertility treatment community. The ruling, which considers frozen embryos as children under state law, has wide-ranging implications for in vitro fertilization (IVF) practices. Bioethics and law expert Hank Greely joins the discussion, providing insights into the background of the case, its legal implications, and the potential ramifications for IVF clinics and patients in Alabama—and throughout the country. The conversation highlights the intersection of law, medicine, and ethics, revealing the complex challenges surrounding embryo rights and reproductive freedoms.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:Hank Greely >>> Stanford Law School Page | Twitter/X(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court RulingHank Greely, discussing the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision regarding frozen embryos. He provides background on the Alabama Supreme Court decision and the implications for fertility treatment in the state along with explaining the legal basis of the ruling and the claims brought forth by the plaintiffs.(00:03:43) Chapter 2: Wrongful Death Act & Implications of the DecisionDiscussion on the Alabama Wrongful Death Act and its application to unborn children, including frozen embryos. Exploration of the broader implications of the decision, including ethical and legal concerns.(00:08:21) Chapter 3: Understanding Frozen EmbryosHank Greely explains the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and the concept of frozen embryos, including the harvesting of eggs and the reasons for freezing embryos.(00:14:05) Chapter 4: Legal and Ethical ConcernsAnalysis of the legal and ethical implications of the Alabama decision for IVF clinics and patients. Greely, Karlan, and Ford then discuss the political and legislative responses to the Alabama decision, including potential future actions(00:26:49) Chapter 5: Gender and Control Over ReproductionShow Notes: Discussion on the gender dynamics and control over reproduction highlighted by the Alabama Supreme Court ruling.(00:33:29) Chapter 6: Political Ramifications and PredictionsHank Greely offers his perspective on potential legislative responses and the broader implications for reproductive rights. From congressional bills to grassroots activism, we explore the evolving landscape of reproductive justice. They also explore the political ramifications and the future outlook for fertility treatment.

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

Important questions regarding Trump: can he be prosecuted for criminal wrongdoing when he was serving as president, whether the two impeachment trials matter, and if Colorado’s decision to disqualify him from the state’s primary ballots is constitutional. Pulitzer Prize winning historian Jack Rakove joins Pam and Rich for a discussion on the U.S. Constitution, originalism, charges against former president Donald Trump, and the role of historians in constitutional litigation.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:Jack Rakove >>> Stanford University Page

Drinkable water is a precious commodity. But as population growth, aging infrastructure, drought, and climate change pose challenges to freshwater quality and quantity in America, the safety and amount of water in parts of the U.S. is in question. With more than 140,000 separate public water systems in the country, how can federal, state, and local governments, along with the various water authorities, take on this challenge alone? In this episode we hear from global water and natural resources expert Barton “Buzz” Thompson, about this new book Liquid Asset: How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis —and his recommendations for how to solve the freshwater crisis in the U.S.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:Buzz Thompson >>> Stanford Law School PageLiquid Assets: How Business and Government Can Partner to Solve the Freshwater Crisis.Paul Milgrom & Auction TheoryChapter Timestamps:(00:00:00) Introduction & Water's Scarcity Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce guest, Buzz Thompson, an expert in water law and author of Liquid Assets(00:01:18) Water Challenges TodayThe scarcity of fresh water globally, and the multiple crises facing water resources: uneven distribution, climate change and the depletion of groundwater resources.(00:04:30) Water Infrastructure What is water infrastructure in the United States, the current state of it, and the repairs and upgrades required and being undertaken.(00:07:14) Updating Infrastructure & 21st-Century Technology Examples of modern wastewater treatment methods, advocating for resource recovery centers and outlining their potential benefits by adopting 21st century technology.(00:09:08) Fragmented Water Systems The complexity of water systems, & the challenges created by small water systems (00:12:00) Water Rights & Legal Structures The current legal structure of water rights in the USA,and defining the goals of both protecting water as a public resource, and a private commodity.(00:16:25) Private Sector's Role & Future Solutions Buzz discusses water markets internationally, and the private sector's role in innovation, technology, and financing to bridge the gap in water management. (00:18:59) Challenges with Outdated Water Rights Rich & Buzz  discuss the challenges created by the current water rights model, and the necessity, possibilities, and challenges for legal reform.(00:21:18) Proposal for Tradeable Water Rights The concept of converting existing water rights into more easily transferable ones similar to real property, in order to eliminate the current challenges.(00:25:49) Changing a System of Water RightsAustralia's successful reform in the Murray-Darling Basin, where water rights were revamped for better tradeability and how they safeguarded the environment.(00:27:31) Conclusion

Women and minorities continue to be underrepresented in patent issuing and less often are granted credit for their innovations. We examine why this is, the impacts it has, and what can be done about it. Patents, and the protection of inventor rights, was deemed important enough that when the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788 it included what is now known as the intellectual property clause: Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, which reads “[The Congress shall have Power . . . ] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” Our guest in this episode is Lisa Larrimore Ouellette, whose latest research looks at inequality in the patent system and how that impacts innovation. Her paper “Improving Equity in Patent Inventorship” was recently published in Science.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLisa Ouellette >>>  Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) Introduction and Patent System OverviewThe significance of patents and their historical context. Intro of guest Lisa Ouellette’s research on inequity in the patent system (00:01:47) Understanding Patents and their Benefits The purpose of patents, their duration, and their impact on inventors' rights. Discussion on how patents apply across various industries like pharmaceuticals, software, and AI.(00:04:10) Inequities in the Patent SystemDisparities within the patent system, and discussion on the lower representation of women and minorities in obtaining patents.(00:07:15) The Innovator-Inventor GapExploring the gap between authorship on scientific papers and recognition as patent inventors & potential mechanisms causing it.(00:11:15)  Impact of Patent RecognitionThe significance of being listed as a patent inventor: impact on career, earnings, and professional reputation. (00:13:33) Innovation Type with Diverse InventorshipInsights into the potential shift in innovation focus due to diversity within inventor teams. (00:14:54) Addressing Inequity: Policy ReformsChallenges faced by underrepresented groups in persisting through the patent application process, suggestions for change and the impact of real-world programs to address these challenges(00:18:37) AI's Influence and ChallengesSpeculations on AI's impact on patent accessibility and equity. Challenges and potential exacerbation of disparities due to AI-generated patent claims.(00:21:11) Conclusion

In June, 2022 the U.S. Supreme Court delivered an historic and far reaching decision overturning Roe v. Wade and turning abortion law to the states. Less than two years on, we are seeing just how that decision is playing out as women navigate a divided country with a patchwork of reproductive rights.  The recent example of Kate Cox, a Dallas-area mother of two who sought to have a medical exemption from Texas’ strict abortion laws and was forced to leave the state to receive the care she needed when her request was denied, brought the consequences of the Court’s decision to the headlines. In this episode we hear from the show’s co-host Pam Karlan, an expert in reproductive law, about the Texas case and reproductive rights in the US after Roe was overturned.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionRich Ford introduces the episode and highlights the significant changes in abortion laws over recent years. (00:01:08) Current Legal ContextPam Karlan provides an overview of the legal landscape since the Dobbs case decision and summarizes the changes and confusion it has led to.(00:05:00) Texas Abortion Controversy: Kate Cox CaseFocus on the case of Kate Cox, a woman in Texas seeking abortion due to fetal health complications. Analysis of the legal, political, and ethical implications of the verdict.(00:10:02) Impact of Returning Abortion Laws to StatesThe misconception that returning abortion decisions to states would reduce controversy. Analysis of attempts to to restrict travel for abortion services.(00:12:20) Legal Ramifications and Political ScenariosDiscussion on potential legal consequences for aiding abortion travel and comparisons with state laws regarding child-related travel. Contemplation of federal abortion bans utilizing the Commerce Clause and the potential scenarios for imposing such bans.(00:14:48) Medical Abortions and Legal ChallengesInsights into the rise of medical abortions and the controversy surrounding the approval and distribution of drugs, and subsequent legal battles.(00:20:20) State Politics, Abortion Laws & State Referendum DynamicsExploration of the shifting dynamics in state politics, including red states' stances on protecting abortion rights, and measures in California & Ohio.(00:22:56) Shifting Political NarrativesDiscussion on the evolving focus of the abortion debate, and examination of how abortion politics are playing out in national and state elections, influencing political strategies.(00:24:59) Federal Legislation Prospects and Responsive ActivismThe potential for federal legislation protecting or banning abortion rights & insights into citizen activism  both aiding and impeding abortion access. (00:28:18) Abortion in Unlikely ArenasExamples showcasing how abortion politics infiltrate seemingly unrelated areas, affecting military promotions and governmental functionality.

In this episode, Pam Karlan and Rich Ford explore recent 2nd Amendment Supreme Court cases, the evolution of gun laws, and the implications of increased gun accessibility in the U.S. Joined by John Donohue, an empirical researcher who is an expert on firearms and the law, they discuss the proliferation of guns and automatic weapons, which make the US an outlier among Western countries for its mass killings, and the ways in which gun laws have made the U.S. more deadly—including for law enforcement. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XJohn Donahue >>> Twitter/XChapters:(00:00:00) Introduction Pam Karlan introduces the episode, highlighting the recent surge in mass shootings in the US, and introduces this week’s guest, John Donahue, one of the nation’s leading experts on firearms and the law.(00:01:16) Proliferation & Access to Assault Weapons in AmericaThe impact of the termination of the federal assault weapon ban in 2004 on mass shootings and a comparison to other nations restrictions on these weapons.(00:05:07) Supreme Court and the Rahimi CaseAnalyzing the Rahimi case and its implications regarding the possession of weapons under restraining orders and the Supreme Court's evolving stance on gun rights.(00:06:37) The Gun Lobby & the Republican PartyExploring the relationship between the gun lobby, manufacturers, and republicans and the effects this evolving relationship has had since the mid nineties.(00:13:10) Constitutional Shifts The transformation in Second Amendment interpretations from the 1930s to the recent Bruen case, exploring the Supreme Court's methodology and its implications for gun regulations and the Rahimi decision before them now.(00:15:40) Frozen Interpretations The historical context of the Second Amendment, the oddity of freezing it, and how the current context challenges the applicability of historical Second Amendment interpretations.(00:19:05) Broader Implications The broader spectrum of issues stemming from the proliferation of access to firearms and the growing lethality of weaponry, including rising firearm-related suicides and homicides.(00:24:05) Bruen & Gun Laws The effect of the Bruen case on laws like restraining immediate access to weapons, and safe storage laws(00:26:08) Law Enforcement & Gun ProliferationJohn explains how the proliferation and of firearms has affected the polices ability to clear violent crimes, and increases police involved shootings(00:28:31) Conclusion

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

After a hiatus, Stanford Legal returns to your podcast feed. Start with our first episode back, where hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford sit down with criminal law expert David Sklansky to unpack the numerous indictments against Donald Trump. But that's not all: our upcoming episodes will explore a range of pressing legal topics from AI to the Supreme Court’s latest decisions. Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode! And "hit the bell" in Spotify.Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X

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.

Join us this Thursday for the return of Stanford Legal, with a new episode featuring criminal law expert David Sklansky, who will break down some of the most serious charges against former president--and 2024 presidential hopeful-- Donald Trump. Sklansky, a former prosecutor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, lends his expertise to help us understand the complexities of these unprecedented legal proceedings. Be sure to subscribe for a front-row seat to this enlightening legal discourse.Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode!Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X

After a hiatus, Stanford Legal returns to your podcast feed. In our first episode relaunching November 9th, join hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford as they sit down with criminal law expert David Sklansky to unpack the numerous indictments against Donald Trump. But that's not all: our upcoming episodes will explore a range of pressing legal topics from AI to the Supreme Court’s latest decisions. Make sure you're following Stanford Legal, so you don't miss an episode!Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteConnect:Stanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/X

Criminal law expert David A. Sklansky discusses the August 8 search by the FBI of Donald J. Trump’s Florida residence and the legal implications of news reports that the former president took more than 700 pages of classified documents, including some related to the nation’s most covert intelligence operations, to his private club.

Pam Karlan, one of the nation’s leading experts on law and voting and the political process, discusses the new conservative-majority Supreme Court—and the potential consequences of its blockbuster term, including the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Urban law expert Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her new book, The Fight to Save the Town: Reimagining Discarded America, which looks at how local leaders are confronting government collapse in four blue-collar American communities—and the progress they are making against some of the seemingly intractable problems of poverty.

What have we learned from the Congressional hearings into the January 6 storming of the Capitol and then-President Donald Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election? Join Stanford criminal law expert Professor Robert Weisberg for a discussion of the hearings—what we learned and who might face criminal charges.

While polls of Republican voters still show strong support for former president Trump, some of the most powerful testimony against him during the January 6 Congressional hearings have been by members of his administration and party. In this episode we hear from Stanford Law Professor Michael W. McConnell, a former judge on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit nominated by President George W. Bush, about a new report he co-authored, Lost, Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election, which examined every count of every case of election irregularities brought by Trump’s team in six battleground states—and concluded that “Donald Trump and his supporters had their day in court and failed to produce substantive evidence to make their case.”

Nearly ten years after the massacre of 26 students and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, the world has been shocked by another American school shooting—this one at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas where 19 students and two teachers were gunned down on May 24. That came barely a week after the racially motivated massacre of ten shoppers at a Tops Friendly Market in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York. And these are only the most lethal mass shootings—hundreds more have already occurred in cities across the United States. In this episode, Professor John Donohue, an expert on gun law, joins Rich and Joe to discuss can be done to meet this uniquely American challenge of mass shootings.

In an unusual leak from the U.S. Supreme Court, a draft memo shows the Court has decided to overrule Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal throughout the U.S. What does this mean for women seeking abortions in the U.S.? Are other rights, like same-sex marriage under threat? And what does this say about the politicization of the Court? Constitutional law expert Bernadette Meyler joins this episode to discuss these questions and more.

Since Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, hundreds of the world’s leading companies, from investment banks to consumer goods, have shuttered their Russian operations. But Law firms have been slower to respond. Join us for a discussion with business law expert Robert Daines who has been leading an effort to expose leading American and British law firms about their status of work for Russian interests.

Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic issues come in all sizes and shapes, from arguing successfully before the Ninth Circuit on their Endangered Species Act/NEPA case against the Forest Service, which implicated forest management issues in the face of drought and wildfire, to going before the Eastern District of California in a wildlife trafficking case. Join co-hosts Joe Bankman and Rich Ford for a discussion with founding director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic Debbie Sivas and 3L students Chris Meyer and SidniFrederick about critical environmental cases—and why they matter.

Shareholders and investors alike are pressuring companies to improve their environmental, social, and governance performance. And an increasing number of funds are designated as ESG. But how do we measure—and verify—ESG? Who performs the audits and do the ratings matter? Join co-hosts Joe Bankman and Rich Ford for a discussion with Professors Paul Brest and Colleen Honigsberg, co-authors of the Measuring Corporate Virtue and Vice: Making ESG Metrics Trustworthy (book chapter of the recently published Frontiers in Social Innovation.

The Legacy of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is discussed by Stanford Law School Dean Jenny Martinez, who clerked for Breyer.

Teacher burnout—and resignations—may be leading to a crisis in education. Join Laura Juran, Chief Counsel and Associate Executive Director of the California Teachers Association, for a discussion about the challenges the nation's teachers have faced during the pandemic, when they have been on the frontline during an unprecedented health crisis.

Over 30 state legislatures across the country have introduced bills to limit the discussion of racial history in a wave prompted by the emergence of critical race theory as a subject of political fear-mongering. In this episode, Rich and Joe are joined by Professor Ralph Richard Banks, an expert in race and law, for a discussion about the politicization of critical race theory, book banning, and more

Matt Haney, San Francisco Board Supervisor, joins Stanford Legal for a discussion about the challenges of homelessness and crime in cities, particularly since the start of the Covid pandemic.

Just as pandemic fatigue is setting in and the Omicron variant is sweeping across the nation—putting a tremendous strain on America’s healthcare infrastructure—the Supreme Court heard arguments in challenges to the Biden administration’s authority to combat the COVID-19. Labor law expert Professor William B. Gould IV joins Joe and Rich to discuss challenges to the administration’s efforts to impose vaccine mandates—and trends in the American labor market during the pandemic.

When AG Garland put out a call to lawyers, law students, and law schools generally to suit up to deal with the "eviction tsunami" that many are predicting in the coming months, Juliet Brodie , director of the Stanford Community Law Clinic and an expert in tenants’ rights answered the call. In this episode, Joe and Rich discuss evictions, the challenges lower income Americans face in staying in their homes, and how the law has been innovating during Covid-19. Juliet is joined by Lauren Zack, a teaching and litigation fellow working on the eviction projects with the clinic. In this episode, Joe and Rick discuss evictions, the challenges lower income Americans face in staying in their homes, and how the law has been innovating during Covid-19. Juliet is joined by Lauren Zack, a teaching and litigation fellow working on the eviction projects with the clinic.

It was the stuff of Silicon Valley dreams. Elizabeth Holmes dropped out of Stanford University to launch the blood testing disruptor Theranos and built it to a $9 billion valuation. But the tech adage “fake it until you make it” didn’t quite work for this medical device startup, and charges that the devices didn’t work mounted. Holmes and Ramesh Balwani, her onetime business and romantic partner, were indicted with 12 counts of wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. In this episode, Stanford Law School Professor Robert Weisberg, a criminal law expert, discusses the trial, which began in September, the prosecution, the defense, and the larger implications of the case.

In 2007, Erik Jensen, helped launch the Afghanistan Legal Education Project, a collaboration with with Stanford Law School and the American University in Afghanistan to build a high quality legal program for Afghan law students. Today, dozens of Afghan men and women count themselves as graduates—lawyers critical to building the legal infrastructure so badly needed in Afghanistan. But what will happen to the country—and those dedicated to law and civil society—under the new Taliban regime? In this episode, Jensen discusses the abrupt withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan and the prospects of the still struggling country.

Western states are once again in severe drought with water in short supply. And California’s fire season is starting earlier and causing more devastation, with the Dixie fire, the second largest in the state’s history, still growing after destroying almost 750,000 acres. In this episode, a leading national water law expert Buzz Thompson joins us to discuss fires, water, and climate change.

Legal issues surrounding the elderly and mentally incapacitated have been making headlines lately, particularly the conservatorship for popstar Britney Spears. But why are these legal tools used? What are the alternatives? And what rights do people like Britney have? In this episode of Stanford Legal, Michael Gilfix , a leading authority in the field of law, aging, and estate planning, answers these questions and more.

We complain about paying taxes, but appreciate the roads, bridges, safety net, and more that they pay for. But is the U.S. tax system fair? Should the rich pay more, and the poor pay less?

The 2020 Election continues to have an unprecedented impact on the country, the “big lie” about fraud spread by some media outlets and used by at least 14 states as justification to undo key election laws. Yet since Trump was banned from popular social media platforms, his voice is less prevalent in mainstream America. In this episode, we hear from election law expert Nate Persily about Facebook’s oversight board and its decision to continue the ban on Trump for another two years. Nate also discusses efforts by state legislators to curtail voting laws and why he is sounding the alarm bells for a threatened American democracy.

While calls to "defund the police" have made headlines, a new Stanford Law report "Safety Beyond Policing: Promoting Care Over Criminalization" explores alternatives to the use of police in sensitive situations such as mental health crises and in schools. Two of the report's co-authors, Professor Robert Weisberg and Stanford Law student Michelle Portillo discuss key questions about policing, shedding light on promising alternatives that have been piloted in a variety of places around the country—alternatives that deploy mental health professionals, saving lives, police resources, and funds.

Imagine serving a life sentence in prison for stealing a floor jack from a tow truck? Many of the clients our guest today, Michael Romano, has represented were drug addicts or homeless when they got caught up in California’s Three Strikes law that forced minimum sentences and locked up thousands of nonviolent offenders for 20, 30 years and more. Romano, the founder of Stanford's Three Strikes and Justice Advocacy Project, has become a leading voice in criminal reform in California and the nation—shining a light on the high cost to both the imprisoned and the taxpayer, who foots the bill. Romano, who was recently appointed to chair the state’s new criminal law and policy reform committee, the California Committee on the Revision of the Penal Code, joins Stanford Legal to talk about the criminal justice crisis in American and efforts in California to release nonviolent offenders through reform of the Three Strikes law and other legal reforms.

In this episode David Sklansky, a criminal law expert and former federal prosecutor, discusses his new book A Pattern of Violence: How the Law Classifies Crime and What It Means for Justice, which traces central failures of criminal justice, including mass incarceration and high rates of police violence, to legal ideas about violence—its definition, its causes, and its moral significance. David also discusses the criminal investigations of former president Donald Trump in New York and Georgia.

Modern day fashion says a lot about who we are and the image we project. Join Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford for this episode for a discussion about his new book, Dress Codes, and the history of fashion and its social and political implications.

As deaths from COVID-19 surge to the half million mark, health law expert and Stanford Professor Michelle Mello joins Pam and Joe to discuss the many challenges facing the new Biden administration in getting control of the pandemic in the U.S.

After the siege of the Capitol building on January 6, Americans have been left stunned by the breach of security and concerned about new threats from hate groups and the angry mob. National security law expert Shirin Sinnar joins Pam and Joe to discuss critical legal questions about homegrown terrorism—and those accountable for the insurrection.

President Trump lost the November, 2020 election but has refused to concede, instead stoking the flames of anger in his supporters by spreading false claims of a stolen election. In this episode, voting law expert Nate Persily joins Pam and Joe to discuss the 2020 election—and why it is considered by experts and government officials alike to have been fair and free of fraud.

President Trump has repeatedly refused to state clearly that he will accept the results of the November election. In so doing, he raises critical questions for American democracy—particularly if the election is close. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan, one of the nation’s leading experts on the law of democracy discusses critical issues in this important election for the next American president.

The Electoral College is a uniquely American system, with electors in each state choosing our president rather than the popular vote. After two recent presidents lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College (Bush and Trump), is it outdated and unfair? In this episode, Stanford historian Jack Rakove joins Pam and Joe to discuss the history and present-day relevance of the Electoral College.

Revelations about President Trump’s tax returns, and news about how much or how little he has paid to the federal government, have made headlines in recent weeks. In this episode, Stanford Legal co-host Joe Bankman, himself a tax law expert, breaks down the important takeaways from what we know about the President and his taxes.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the legal icon known as the architect of the legal fight for women’s rights in the 1970s, is remembered in this episode of Stanford Legal by her former SCOTUS clerk Lisa Beattie Frelinghuysen. Join Pam, Joe, and Lisa for this discussion about RBG’s legacy, key cases, and recollections of the notorious justice.

With Covid-19 still spreading in the U.S., and November fast approaching, more Americans are looking to mail-in voting. How can the presidential election be held safely? Voting law expert Nate Persily and law student Chelsey Davidson join Pam and Joe to discuss challenges for voting this year and possible solutions.

In the heat of war, the legality of the U.S. bombing of Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagsaki in August, 1945 wasn’t questioned. But the devastation of those nuclear bombs, with hundreds of thousands of mostly civilians dead, spurred the international community to look for ways to prevent it from ever happening again. But today, 75 years later, the nuclear threat is more real than ever. In this episode, international law expert Allen Weiner joins Pam and Joe to discuss the law of war and the threat of nuclear weapons after Hiroshima.

The Supreme Court recently decided several important First Amendment cases—ones that asked big questions about the rights of religious intuitions to receive federal aid for education, to be held to federal employment discrimination protections, and to cover all employee medical expenses. Join constitutional law expert Michael McConnell for a discussion about religious liberty in the U.S. and these SCOTUS decisions.

Some residents of Tulsa, Oklahoma may be surprised to discover that they live on Native American land. What does that mean legally—for tribal people and others? Join Professor Greg Ablavsky, an expert on American legal history including issues of sovereignty, territory, and property in the early American West, for a discussion of the Supreme Court’s recent decision McGirt v. Oklahoma and important legal issues of Native American lands and governance.

As Covid-19 resurges across the country, it is hitting prisons hard and courts are more backed up than ever. Is the American criminal justice system, already stressed, now at a breaking point? Join Stanford criminal justice expert Robert Weisberg for a discussion of prisons, the courts, and criminal justice during a pandemic.

Join health law expert Professor David Studdert for a discussion of his extensive study of handgun ownership and suicides in California. David will also weigh in on the politicization of the Center for Disease Control particularly during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Landmark Supreme Court ruling protects gay and transgender workers by federal law from employment discrimination.

The recent killings of unarmed black men in police custody, including George Floyd in Minnesota, have once again sparked outrage and protests across the country and world. In this episode, David Owens, an attorney who has represented clients in several high profile police brutality cases, joins us to talk about the challenges that victims, their families, and their attorneys face when bringing cases against the police. David is a partner at Loevy & Loevy. His practice is national, representing clients from Washington and California, Wisconsin and Illinois, and throughout the South. He is dedicated to zealous, client-centered advocacy on behalf of those seeking vindication for the violation of their civil rights and focuses on cases involving wrongful convictions, police shootings and other excessive force, false arrests, free speech rights, race discrimination, and other violations of the U.S. Constitution. David is also a Lecturer in Law at the University of Chicago, where he co-teaches in the school’s world-famous pro bono wrongful conviction clinic, The Exoneration Project.

Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky, the Faculty Co-Director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, is a former federal prosecutor who served as special counsel to the independent review panel appointed to investigate the Los Angeles Police Department’s Rampart Division scandal that formed in the wake of the Rodney King case. In this episode, Sklansky discusses race and policing in America and how we can reform policing to prevent another George Floyd death in police custody.

As one of the first municipalities in the nation to declare a shelter in place order, San Francisco has been on the frontline as a public policy leader during the COVID-19 crisis. Join us for a discussion with Board Supervisor Matt Haney about the challenges facing the City by the Bay, from the decision to shut down, to controlling the disease for all citizens including the growing homeless population, to how to open up schools and businesses safely. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 30, 2020.

On May 4, J.Crew became the first major American retailer to file for bankruptcy, with Neiman Marcus and Gold’s Gym quickly following. With unemployment at record levels and a wave of bankruptcies expected, the COVID-19 health crisis is quickly turning into an economic crisis—despite the CARES Act passed by Congress in April. In this episode of Stanford Legal, bankruptcy law expert and Stanford Law Professor George Triantis explains how current U.S. bankruptcy laws can help us through this crisis and offers his recommendations on what more the government can do.

Early in May, tech competitors Google and Apple shared sample code for their new contact tracing technology. Hopes are high that apps developed with partnership's technology will help to slow the spread of COVID-19 by using Bluetooth technology in cell phones to contact trace infection. Consulting Director of Privacy at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society joins Pam and Joe to discuss the new tools and privacy concerns surrounding tech in contact tracing

As the number of COVID-19 cases across the U.S. continues to rise, with shelter in place orders in place throughout most of the country, America’s preparedness for a pandemic has been thrown into question. What went wrong with testing and protective gear, and why are we still behind? Can tech help the country safely open up again? And who is in charge—the president or the governors? Health law expert Michelle Mello joins the show today to discuss these developing issues.

Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman discuss the ramifications of the the COVID-19 pandemic, both on mental health issues and procedural issues faced by the Supreme Court during this time. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020.

With a vaccine and effective treatment still months away, it is increasingly likely that the COVID-19 pandemic will fundamentally change the 2020 presidential election. After the Wisconsin primary in April reportedly to low turnout and, as recently was reported, the spread of the virus, can in-person voting happen safely? Is mail-in balloting the answer? Here to help us understand how a secure November election can be planned is election law expert Nate Persily. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 25, 2020.

From the groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education case to voting rights and education, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund (LDF) has been the nation’s premier civil rights law organization fighting for racial justice and equality since its founding in 1940 by legendary civil rights lawyer (and later Supreme Court justice) Thurgood Marshall. Sherrilyn Ifill, LDF’s President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), will discuss important NAACP cases and issues. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 28, 2020.

The ACLU has been the nation’s premier defender of civil liberties since its founding 100 years ago. David Cole, the ACLU’s national legal director who oversees its entire legal docket, will discuss key civil liberties issues facing the country today including two LGBTQ rights cases that he recently argued before the Supreme Court in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

The open secret of Supreme Court advocacy in a digital era is that there is a new way to argue to the Justices. In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman sit down with co-director of the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, Jeff Fisher, to discuss his recent article, Virtual Briefing. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/

In the wake of the first wave of primary voting, former judge and Constitutional Law Professor Michael McConnell will discuss how we elect the President in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. What are the caucus, primary, and convention systems? Why do we have an electoral college? Is there a good system for resolving disputed elections? For more episodes visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/

Equality for women in the U.S. is still an uphill battle, the wage and leadership gap a challenge 100 years after passage of the19th Amendment. But can gender equality be regulated with law and quotas? California is trying in one narrow area—the boards of public companies—with a new law mandating gender diversity on those boards. Joe Grundfest, a former SEC commissioner and expert on corporate governance, and Gail Harris, who serves as lead director of investment banking advisory firm Evercore Inc., discuss the law, possible challenges to it, and why it matters in this episode of "Stanford Legal." For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/

In December, the U.S. House of Representatives passed articles of impeachment against the president focusing on abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Only three U.S. presidents have been formally impeached by the House, including Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton and now Donald Trump. So far, not one has been removed from office. In this episode, we are joined by former prosecutor and Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky to look at impeachment through the lens of the prosecutor. Did the House make a good case? What are the legal procedural questions?

Pam and Joe welcome John Donohue, Stanford Law Professor, who talks about his new research looking at concealed carry gun laws and the Assault Weapons Ban. Originally aired on November 22, 2019

While women make up 50+ percent of the population, they are still a minority at most tech companies—and even more so at venture capital firms, where most have no women partners. Julian Guthrie, author of Alpha Girls: The Women Upstarts Who Took on Silicon Valley's Male Culture and Made the Deals of a Lifetime, and Stanford GSB alumna M. J. Elmore, a partner at IVP venture capital and a subject of the book, join Stanford Legal co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman to discuss VC culture and the challenges M. J. and other women had to overcome to achieve success. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

Turnover and use of acting officials in the Trump administration is more prevalent than previous administrations, but churn in the White House is not unique to this president. Stanford Law Professor Anne Joseph O’Connell shares her recent research into vacancies in the executive branch and the law.Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 26, 2019.

The U.S. president’s power of pardon dates back to the British monarchy and the “godly” rights of kings, but has the pardon stood the test of time? Listen in as Constitutional Law expert Bernadette Meyler and author of the recent book, “Theaters of Pardoning,” discusses modern-day pardons and the evolution of the law. Originally aired on SiriusXM on October 12, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Law School alum Cary McClelland’s book “Silicon City” was mailed to 1,700 incoming Stanford freshmen over the summer as part of the Three Books program, which this year invited students to think about the ways cities shape experiences and social relationships. Listen as McClelland shares what he’s learned interviewing San Francisco residents whose lives have been transformed by Silicon Valley. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 28, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Taxes help to pave our roads and even change our behavior. Can they also help to decrease extreme wealth inequality in the U.S.? Listen in as tax law experts Jacob Goldin and Joe Bankman discuss some of the latest taxation plans. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 14, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Access to quality education is important to everyone. But what does that mean if you live in the wrong zip code or have a disability? How do we define a quality education? How is the law developing in this area? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Bill Koski discusses this vital right in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 31, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

What is driving the challenges at America’s southern border, with a surge in the number of asylum-seekers waiting to file claims? And how is the law developing for illegal immigrants already here? Immigration law expert Lucas Guttentag joins Stanford Law student Julia Neusner to discuss the situation at the border and legal issues surrounding immigration. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 17, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Companies like Apple, Google and Walmart report earnings each year. They also report on social justice issues, like carbon emissions and child labor. These are important reports, with important implications for shareholders and the public. But how do we know they're accurate? Listen in as Stanford Law’s Colleen Honigsberg discusses auditing. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Women’s reproductive rights are in the news again, but what exactly are these rights—and what guarantees are they granted under the U.S. Constitution? Constitutional law expert Professor Jane Schacter joins Stanford physicians Jenn Conti and Erica Cahill. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 3, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Professor Pamela Karlan and Brian Fletcher discuss gerrymandering, the 2020 census, and two of the most important decisions from the Supreme Court’s recent term. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

About 6.5 million people in the U.S. have an intellectual or developmental disability that affects their day-to-day functioning. While there are laws and policies designed to help them access the same core rights and protections that other individuals enjoy, there are still big gaps in important services. How is the law developing in this critical and often-overlooked area? Stanford Law Professor Alison Morantz, co-founder of the newly-launched Stanford Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Law and Policy Project, and Peter Vogel, JD ’19, who worked with Morantz on newly-published research, discuss their findings and more in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses his Stanford research practicum that looks at critical issues in creating a social media oversight board for content decisions. Stanford Law student Madeline Magnuson joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 6, 2019. Recorded at Stanford Video.

How do we regulate online hate/terrorist speech? Daphne Keller, an expert in platform regulation and Internet users' rights, discusses how the law is developing particularly in the European Union, during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

In 2016, Russia attacked the United States. As the Special Counsel report stated, “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in a sweeping and systematic fashion.” In this episode of Stanford Legal, Stanford Professor Nate Persily, election law and free speech expert, discusses a new Stanford report that looks at the vulnerabilities of our election systems and ways to secure it.

Mental health care is going digital, with new apps designed to offer personalized intervention and instruction right when a client might need them. Can a robot be a good therapist? Who is liable when things go wrong? Joe Ruzek, a psychologist who specializes in web- and phone-based psychological interventions, Zach Harned, a third-year student at Stanford Law, and Alison Darcy, CEO and founder of Woebot, discuss in a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 25, 2019.

Cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. But fuel economy standards intended to limit their impact have been challenged by the current administration, setting the stage for a legal battle. Tune in to a live taping of the Stanford Legal podcast as environmental law expert Professor Deborah Sivas and student Ben DeGolia discuss. For more Stanford Radio and past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

Professor David Engstrom and law student Cristina Ceballos discuss artificial intelligence and whether it can help or hinder important decision making by the federal government?

Professor David Sklansky, a former federal prosecutor, discusses what we know about the investigation, what we have learned from the report, and what may come next.

Why and when do people choose to hand over their personal information in exchange for online services? Jennifer King, of Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society, discusses power dynamics and privacy.

Law Professor Rick Banks, author of the forthcoming book Meritocracy in an Age of Inequality, discusses college admissions, race, and class in the wake of the college admissions scandal and Harvard bias case.

How has China managed to grow in the world economy? Comparative corporate governance expert Curtis Milhaupt discusses Chinese state-owned enterprises and their implications for the authoritarian nation's domestic economy and policy makers abroad during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

Hank Greely, an expert in ethical, legal, and social implications of new biomedical technologies, discusses gene-edited babies and DNA testing. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

Katrina Eiland, JD ’10, serves as a staff attorney with the ACLU's with the Immigrants’ Rights Project. She discusses the Trump administration's termination of DACA, family separation and more during a live taping of the “Stanford Legal” podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanfordradio.stanford.edu

Voting law expert Nate Persily discusses gerrymandering, the 2018 midterms and the 2020 census during a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://stanford.io/2SqmNob

In this episode of Stanford Legal, Pam and Joe are joined by Tom Heller, faculty director of the new Sustainable Finance Initiative at Stanford and professor emeritus at Stanford Law School. An expert in climate policies, law, and economic development, Heller has spent much of his career focusing on the legal and financial challenges of solving climate change—particularly in developing economies. He was part of the network of experts who made up the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that shared the 2008 Nobel Prize prize with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

To what extent is climate change to blame for recent natural disasters like California’s Camp Fire, and how will law and policy respond? Buzz Thompson, an expert in water and natural resources law, discusses in a live taping of the "Stanford Legal" podcast. For past episodes, visit: https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-on-siriusxm/ Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 19, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Religious Liberty in the Workplace with guests Jim Sonne and Liz Klein" Jim Sonne, professor of law and founding director of the Religious Liberty Clinic at Stanford, and law student Liz Klein discuss the constitutional right of religious liberty and how that sometimes clashes with workplace rules. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Voting Rights for Felons and the Disabled with guest Rabia Belt" During each election, people with disabilities across the country face hurdles to casting their votes while thousands of formerly-incarcerated citizens are barred completely from this essential democratic act. Assistant Professor of Law Rabia Belt discusses voting rights for people with disabilities and the formerly incarcerated. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 8, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 2) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: The Supreme Court after Kennedy (part 1) with guest Dahlia Lithwick Dahlia Lithwick, JD ’96, senior editor for Slate, joins co-hosts Pam Karlan and Joe Bankman for a lively discussion about reporting on the Supreme Court and changes to it after Justice Kennedy’s retirement. Originally aired on SiriusXM on November 10, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video.

Free speech advocate and FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff, discusses issues of conformity and self-censorship on college campuses, and his recently-published book, “The Coddling of the American Mind,” co-written with Jonathan Haidt.

John Carreyrou, author of best-selling book “Bad Blood,” joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about Silicon Valley excesses, the downfall of VC darling Theranos, and its charismatic founder Elizabeth Holmes.

Kathryne Young, assistant professor of sociology at Amherst and author of "How to Be (Sort Of) Happy in Law School,” joins Pam and Joe to discuss the mental health challenges of high-pressure careers like law and shares tips that law students and others can use to improve their mental well being in school, on the job, and in life.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "FIghting Opioids/Addiction in the Courts w/ guests Nora Freeman Engstrom & Michelle Mello" An estimated 510,000 people will die over the next decade from opioid-related causes. Should the companies that make and distribute the drugs be held liable? Professors Michelle Mello and Nora Freeman Engstrom share their thoughts on an issue that is increasingly ending up in our courts. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Regulating Cryptocurrencies w/ guests Brad Garlinghouse & Joe Grundfest" What are cryptocurrencies? Should they be regulated? How much? Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Professor Joe Grundfest answer these questions and more in this episode of Stanford Legal. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 15, 2018. Recorded by Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Legal Advice for Temperamental CEOs w/ guests Joe Grundfest & Michael Callahan" Stanford Law Professor Joe Grundfest and Michael Callahan, former GC of Yahoo! and LinkedIn, discuss the legal issues arising from America’s changing corporate culture where it is easier for CEO’s to speak off the cuff and take to social media without the knowledge of their lawyers-- sometimes to the detriment of their companies. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Dress Codes, Style, and the Law with guest Richard Thompson Ford" Can an employer force women to wear makeup and tell them what to wear? Do we have the right to style our hair as we pleased for work? Stanford Law Professor Richard Thompson Ford explains the relationship between dress codes, style, law, and bias-- and whether the courts are ready to address the issue. Originally aired on SiriusXM on September 1, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Eroding union rights with guest William B. Gould IV" Stanford Law Professor Emeritus William B. Gould IV talks about the recent Supreme Court decision that hinders the ability of unions to collect dues from their members. Originally aired on SiriusXM on August 4, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Legacy of Justice Anthony Kennedy with guest Jeff Fisher" Stanford law professor and co-director of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeff Fisher discusses the career of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, his legacy, and the potential for many of his centrist decisions to be undone by the next court. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Cities for Workers with guest Michelle Wilde Anderson" Stanford Law School Professor Michelle Wilde Anderson discusses her research into concentrated rural and urban poverty, which has taken her across the country to the many “dying” communities that no longer have a base of middle-class jobs. Here, she shares her view of our nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the impact on urban areas, and families and how we as a nation might help to solve this growing challenge. Originally aired on SiriusXM on July 21, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Purging Voter Rolls with guest Nathaniel Persily" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily discusses important recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights including one that allows Ohio to take the names of certain voters off its roles. Will this and other decisions impact one party’s voters disproportionately? Originally aired on SiriusXm on July 7, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Working on Peace with North Korea w/ guests Allen Weiner & Scott Sagan" Allen Weiner, Director of the Stanford Program on International and Comparative Law, and Scott Sagan, Political Science Professor at Stanford and Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation, talk about the nuclear summit between President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and whether the agreement they hashed out will lead to a decline in tensions on the Korean peninsula. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Controversial Wedding Cakes with guest Pam Karlan" Stanford Law Professor and Stanford Legal co-host Pam Karlan discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to side with a Colorado cake shop owner who denied service to a gay couple who wanted him to bake a cake for their wedding. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 23, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Making sense of tribal sovereignty w/ guests Gregory Ablavsky & Jared Crum" Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, an instructor with Stanford’s Native American Amicus Brief Project and law student Jared Crum, president of Stanford’s Native American Law Student Association; discuss their work with tribal court systems, legal issues related to tribal sovereignty, and why that sovereignty exists. Originally aired on SiriusXM on June 9, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The legality of Truth Detection w/ guests Hank Greely & Bob Weisberg" Stanford Law professors Hank Greely and Bob Weisberg discuss advances in truth detecting technology and how those technologies intersect with the legal system and societal ethics now and in the not too distant future. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The First Amendment on Campus with guest Michael McConnell" Law professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, Michael McConnell talks about the First Amendment and where it begins and ends on different types of college campuses. Originally aired on SiriusXM on May 26, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Coming to America with guests Matt Ball & Qismat Amin" Stanford Law School student and Afghanistan War Veteran Matt Ball developed a friendship with Afghan native and translator Qismat Amin. The two describe meeting and working together in Afghanistan and how Qismat overcame legal obstacles and ISIS threats before finally arriving safely in the United States. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Artificial Intelligence & the Law w/ guests Mark Lemley & Michelle Lee" Stanford law professor and Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, Mark Lemley and visiting law professor Michelle Lee join Pam and Joe for a discussion on some of the legal issues that are likely to arise as Artificial intelligence becomes an integral part of our daily lives. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 28, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "States Rights w/ guests Ed Dumont, Debbie Sivas, & David Freeman Engstrom" California Solicitor General Ed Dumont talks about the rise in blue state federalism and California’s role in defending the values of its citizens in the face of an increasingly difficult to work with federal government. Law professor and director of Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic, Debbie Sivas shares her expertise on what could be a federal-state standoff over California’s auto emissions standards. Stanford law professor and associate dean for strategic planning, David Freeman Engstrom talks about the extent at which states can create their own foreign policy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trade wars with guest Alan Sykes" Stanford Law professor and Director of the Masters Program in International Economic Law, Business and Policy Alan Sykes discusses the benefits and drawbacks of a trade war and what it would look like if President Trump decides to engage in one. Originally aired on SiriusXM on April 14, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Building the Legal Foundation f/ Democracy w/ guests Erik Jensen & Sean Rosenberg" Erik Jensen, director of Stanford’s Rule of Law program, is joined by Sean Rosenberg, JD/MBA student and West Point grad who served in Afghanistan, who works with Jensen in the Afghanistan Legal Ed Project designed to help nations deal with the challenges of building a new democratic system of government after experiencing periods of upheaval. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Figuring out what voters want with guest John Krosnick" Jon Krosnick is a Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences, Communication, and Political Science at Stanford. Jon shares his work on what voters say they want in a politician and how they expect their elected officials to vote and behave while in office. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Pushing Back Against Sexual Harassment w/ guests Emily Murphy & Deborah Rhode" Emily Murphy, Stanford Law graduate and Associate Law Professor at UC Hastings, shares her story of harassment at the hands of former U.S. 9th Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski. She also discusses what little protections law clerks have if they are harassed. Stanford Law professor and director of the Center on the Legal Profession, Deborah Rhode joins the conversation to discuss the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations and what people can do if they are harassed at work. Originally aired on SiriusXM on March 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Talking about guns with guest John Donohue III" Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III joins us for a conversation about gun violence in America, and how the law is developing in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Nevada and five years after the Sandy Hook Elementary School killings in Newtown, Connecticut Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Privacy and Body Cameras with guest Robert Weisberg" Stanford Law Professor and co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center Robert Weisberg discusses how technology is changing the laws designed to protect you from police searches and the use of police body cameras. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Fake news w/ guests Nathaniel Persily & Deepa Seetharaman" Stanford Law Professor Nathaniel Persily shares his expertise on American election law and what can be done to combat the Fake News problem. Reporter Deepa Seetharaman covers Facebook and other social media sites for The Wall Street Journal. She discusses some of her insights on how fabricated news stories are created and spread over online platforms. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 17, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Enforcing Immigration Laws w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Kavita Narayan" Founding Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic and Professor of Law Jayashri Srikantiah joins Pam and Joe for a discussion about federal immigration enforcement and issues surrounding undocumented immigrants targeted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Kavita Narayan also shares her experiences working with the federal government as lead deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County, one of the nation's many sanctuary counties. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Helping Our Veterans w/ guests Stephen Manley & Joe Reed" Should veterans who come home from combat and find themselves caught in the criminal justice system be offered special help? In this episode, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley, who has launched special treatment courts for veterans and the mentally ill, discuss the need for special courts that offer treatment options to veterans and the mentally ill, including help for substance abuse, trauma, and PTSD, with the aim of keeping them out of prison. Stanford Law student Joe Reed, himself a Marine who served two tours in Afghanistan and has studied Veterans Courts, joins the conversation. Originally aired on SiriusXM on February 3, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Untangling the New Tax Bill with guest Joe Bankman" Pam and Joe talk about the recently passed GOP tax law. Joe reveals who he thinks are the big winners and losers are and how individuals, corporations, and states are looking to reap maximum benefits. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 20, 2018. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Power of the Prosecutor with guest David Sklansky" David Sklansky, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, discusses how prosecutors make decisions about which cases to pursue and what changes can be implemented for a more just criminal justice system. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "The Sharing Economy with guests Nora Freeman Engstrom and Steve Siger" Stanford Law Professor and Associate Dean of Curriculum, Nora Freeman Engstrom shares her expertise on tort law as it relates to the gig economy. Steve Siger, managing counsel at Thumbtack and a former attorney for Uber, talks about how companies are navigating the emerging sharing economy. Originally aired on SiriusXM on January 6. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Trump's Travel Ban w/ guests Jayashri Srikantiah & Shirin Sinnar" Law professor and founding director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, Jayashri Srikantiah and Associate Professor Shirin Sinnar discuss the legal issues surrounding the Trump administrations multiple attempts at restricting travel from several mostly Muslim majority nations to the U.S. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman : "Arguing Before the Supreme Court with guest Jeffrey Fisher" Law professor and co-director of Stanford's Supreme Court Litigation Clinic Jeffrey Fisher, shares his extensive experience arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, including what it is like to prepare for and present a case. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 23, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Web extra: Net neutrality with guest Barbara van Schewick" Law School professor Barbara van Schewick discusses net neutrality as the FCC plans to vote on changing those rules. Recorded at Stanford Video.

Stanford Legal with Pam Karlan & Joe Bankman: "Commercializing marijuana w/ guests Robert MacCoun & Hadley Ford" Stanford Law Professor Robert MacCoun describes the legal future for recreational marijuana. Hadley Ford, CEO of iAnthus Capital, discusses the barriers to financing marijuana business ventures and bringing pot to market. Originally aired on SiriusXM on December 9, 2017. Recorded at Stanford Video.