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.