Log in

goodpods headphones icon

To access all our features

Open the Goodpods app
Close icon
headphones
Stanford Legal

Stanford Legal

Stanford Law School

Law touches most aspects of life. Here to help make sense of it is the Stanford Legal podcast, where we look at the cases, questions, conflicts, and legal stories that affect us all every day. Stanford Legal launched in 2017 as a radio show on Sirius XM. We’re now a standalone podcast and we’re back after taking some time away, so don’t forget to subscribe or follow this feed. That way you’ll have access to new episodes as soon as they’re available. We know that the law can be complicated. In past episodes we discussed a broad range of topics from the legal rights of someone in a conservatorship like Britney Spears to the Supreme Court’s abortion decision to how American law firms had to untangle their Russian businesses after the invasion of Ukraine. Past episodes are still available in our back catalog of episodes. In future shows, we’ll bring on experts to help make sense of things like machine learning and developments in the regulation of artificial intelligence, how the states draw voting maps, and ways that the Supreme Court’s affirmative action ruling will change college admissions. Our co-hosts know a bit about these topics because it’s their life’s work. Pam Karlan studies and teaches what is known as the “law of democracy,”—the law that regulates voting, elections, and the political process. She served as a commissioner on the California Fair Political Practices Commission, an assistant counsel and cooperating attorney for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, and (twice) as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. She also co-directs Stanford’s Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, which represents real clients before the highest court in the country, working on important cases including representing Edith Windsor in the landmark marriage equality win and David Riley in a case where the Supreme Court held that the police generally can’t search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested unless they first get a warrant. She has argued before the Court nine times. And Rich Ford’s teaching and writing looks at the relationship between law and equality, cities and urban development, popular culture and everyday life. He teaches local government law, employment discrimination, and the often-misunderstood critical race theory. He studied with and advised governments around the world on questions of equality law, lectured at places like the Sorbonne in Paris on the relationship of law and popular culture, served as a commissioner for the San Francisco Housing Commission, and worked with cities on how to manage neighborhood change and volatile real estate markets. He writes about law and popular culture for lawyers, academics, and popular audiences. His latest book is Dress Codes: How the Laws of Fashion Made History, a legal history of the rules and laws that influence what we wear. The law is personal for all of us—and pivotal. The landmark civil rights laws of the 1960s have made discrimination illegal but the consequences of the Jim Crow laws imposed after the civil war are still with us, reflected in racially segregated schools and neighborhoods and racial imbalances in our prisons and conflict between minority communities and police. Unequal gender roles and stereotypes still keep women from achieving equality in professional status and income. Laws barring gay people from marrying meant that millions lived lives of secrecy and shame. New technologies present new legal questions: should AI decide who gets hired or how long convicted criminals go to prison? What can we do about social media’s influence on our elections? Can Chat GPT get copyright in a novel? Law matters. We hope you’ll listen to new episodes that will drop on Thursdays every two weeks. To learn more, go to https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-legal-podcast/.
profile image
profile image

2 Listeners

Share icon

All episodes

Best episodes

Top 10 Stanford Legal Episodes

Goodpods has curated a list of the 10 best Stanford Legal episodes, ranked by the number of listens and likes each episode have garnered from our listeners. If you are listening to Stanford Legal for the first time, there's no better place to start than with one of these standout episodes. If you are a fan of the show, vote for your favorite Stanford Legal episode by adding your comments to the episode page.

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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court Ruling

  • Hank 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 Decision

  • Discussion 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 Embryos

  • Hank 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 Concerns

  • Analysis 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 Reproduction

  • Show 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 Predictions

  • Hank 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.
profile image

1 Listener

bookmark
plus icon
share episode
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.
profile image

1 Listener

bookmark
plus icon
share episode

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 Website

Connect:

profile image

1 Listener

comment icon

1 Comment

1

bookmark
plus icon
share episode

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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Flaws of Originalism
Hosts 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 Intent
Rich 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 Cases
Pam 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 Presidency

Jonathan 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 Interpretation

Jonathan 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 College

Exploration 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.

profile image

1 Listener

bookmark
plus icon
share episode

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 Website

Connect:

profile image

1 Listener

bookmark
plus icon
share episode

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:

Links:

(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview

Kyrylo 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 Lab

Erik 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 Motivation

Kyrylo 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 Lab

The 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 Frameworks

The 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 Profession

The 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.

bookmark
plus icon
share episode
Stanford Legal - Suing DOGE: Musk, Trump, and an Imperial Presidency
play

02/20/25 • 28 min

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:

Connect:

(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

bookmark
plus icon
share episode
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.
bookmark
plus icon
share episode
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.
bookmark
plus icon
share episode
Stanford Legal - What How We Dress Matters and Why
play

03/15/21 • 28 min

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.
bookmark
plus icon
share episode

Show more best episodes

Toggle view more icon

FAQ

How many episodes does Stanford Legal have?

Stanford Legal currently has 159 episodes available.

What topics does Stanford Legal cover?

The podcast is about News, Elections, Supreme Court, Social Media, College Admissions, Law, Ukraine, News Commentary, Podcasts, Civil Rights, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Law School and Government.

What is the most popular episode on Stanford Legal?

The episode title 'Are Frozen Embryos Children? A Discussion of the Alabama Decision on Embryo Rights and the Future of IVF Pregnancies in the US' is the most popular.

What is the average episode length on Stanford Legal?

The average episode length on Stanford Legal is 28 minutes.

How often are episodes of Stanford Legal released?

Episodes of Stanford Legal are typically released every 14 days.

When was the first episode of Stanford Legal?

The first episode of Stanford Legal was released on Dec 9, 2017.

Show more FAQ

Toggle view more icon

Comments