Print Settings
 

LAW 201: Civil Procedure I

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. This course is a study of the process of civil litigation from the commencement of a lawsuit through final judgment under modern statutes and rules of court, with emphasis on the federal rules of civil procedure. May include class participation, written assignments, or other elements. Your instructor will advise you of the basis for grading.
Terms: Aut | Units: 5

LAW 205: Contracts

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It provides exposure to basic contract law. The course will identify the scope and purpose of the legal protection accorded to interests predicated on contract and will focus on problems of contract formation, interpretation, performance, and remedies for breach.
Terms: Aut | Units: 5

LAW 219: Legal Writing

This course introduces students to the ways lawyers write to persuade. In a hypothetical criminal case in state court, students draw on the useful facts from the record, synthesize rules from cases, and analogize and distinguish cases in a closed universe. Students receive feedback from the instructor on multiple drafts before submission. Students then submit one persuasive brief on a motion in the conventions of the Bluebook. This course depends on participation; attendance is mandatory. Grading reflects written work, class preparedness and participation, and professionalism. This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 223: Torts

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It considers issues involved in determining whether the law should require a person to compensate for harm intentionally or unintentionally caused. These problems arise in situations as diverse as automobile collisions, operations of nuclear facilities, and consumption of defective food products. Among other considerations, the course explores various resolutions in terms of their social, economic, and political implications.
Terms: Aut | Units: 5

LAW 240D: Discussion (1L): Criminal Legal Histories

This seminar will trace the roots of four critical aspects of the American criminal justice system: jury independence and the power of jurors to render verdicts according to conscience; plea bargaining and the marginalization of juries; penitentiaries and the displacement of other forms of punishment; and the criminalization of recreational drugs. Though modern criminal justice policy will inform our conversation, the readings will be historical with an emphasis on primary source documents. We will examine the forces driving legal evolution and the historian's tools in mapping those forces, always with an eye on the impact of those forces on marginalized groups. Class meets 6:30 PM-8:30 PM on Sept. 13, Sept. 27, Oct. 11, Oct. 25. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation..
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Fisher, G. (PI)

LAW 240J: Discussion (1L): Religion and the Profession of Law

This seminar will focus on the dynamic interplay between religious identity, community, and worldview, and the study, practice, and profession of law. As a defining force for so many across the globe, and in the norms through which human beings recognize their rights and arrange their affairs, religion has a unique and abiding impact on the work and life of aspiring and practicing lawyers -- for believers and nonbelievers alike. Whether as first-year law students or seasoned practitioners, the need to anticipate, appreciate, and reconcile religious perspectives is both a vital professional skill and an illuminating resource for self-understanding and mutual respect. The class will meet across three on-campus sessions and a closing offsite dinner, and will include a collaborative exploration of primary and secondary sources, as well as custom conversational frameworks. Topics will include religion and cross-cultural lawyering, religion and legal systems, the role of faith in judicial decision-making, and law as a vocation (with attendant self-care dynamics). Befitting the overarching goals of diversity and inclusion in the discussion series generally, and the central importance of particularized themes of bridge building, this seminar is warmly and equally open to students of any religious tradition and those of no religion at all. Class meets 4:30 PM-6:30 PM on Sept. 28, Oct. 12, Oct. 26, Nov. 16. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Sonne, J. (PI)

LAW 240K: Discussion (1L): Representations of Criminal Lawyers in Popular Culture Through the Lens of Bias

This seminar will explore the portrayal of criminal lawyers in popular films and will engage in critical analysis of how misconceptions about the criminal justice system and biases against women, people of color and the poor are amplified on the big screen. Source materials will include numerous mass-market films juxtaposed against authoritative law review and other commentary to afford in-depth discussion. Class meets 6:00 PM-8:00 PM on Sept. 20, Oct. 4, Oct. 18, Nov. 1. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Tyler, R. (PI)

LAW 240Q: Discussion (1L): Human Reproduction in the 21st Century: Legal and Ethical Issues

This seminar will discuss issues around human reproduction in the years to come. We will talk about abortion in light of the Dobbs case, and the problems of when life or rights begin, eugenics, embryo selection, embryo editing (also known as "designer babies"), skin-cell derived eggs and sperm, the (long term) prospects for artificial uteruses, and maybe more. An underlying theme will be how "we" -- a culture, as a legal system, as legal systems -- decide what should and shouldn't be done. Class meets 6:30 PM-8:30 PM on Sept. 26, Oct. 10, Oct. 24, Nov. 14. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Greely, H. (PI)

LAW 240T: Discussion (1L): Race and Technology

People like to think of technology as value neutral, as essentially objective tools that can be used for good or evil, particularly when questions of race and racial justice are involved. But the technologies we develop and deploy are frequently shaped by historical prejudices, biases, and inequalities and thus may be no less biased and racist than the underlying society in which they exist. In this discussion group, we will consider whether and how racial and other biases are present in a wide range of technologies, particularly artificial intelligence tools like risk assessment algorithms for bail, sentencing, predictive policing, and other decisions in the criminal justice system; algorithms for medical diagnosis and treatment decisions; AI that screens tenant or credit applications or job applications; facial recognition systems; surveillance tools; and many more. Building on these various case studies, we will seek to articulate a framework for recognizing both explicit and subtle anti-black and other biases in technology and understanding them in the broader context of racism and inequality in our society. Finally, we will discuss how these problems might be addressed, including by regulators, legislators, and courts as well as by significant changes in mindset and practical engagement by technology developers, companies, and educators. Class meets 4:30 PM-6:30 PM on Sept. 21, Oct. 5, Oct. 19, Nov. 2, 2023. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Malone, P. (PI)

LAW 240V: Discussion (1L): Abolish or Reform? Prisons, Police, and the Death Penalty

This seminar will focus on the abolitionist agenda for prisons and policing, and on the competing calls to reform those institutions. We will also consider the comparison case of the death penalty, where efforts at reform have often, but not always, been seen as stepping stones on the path toward abolition. We will read arguments for and against abolition, and for and against reform. Our main goal will not be to decide who we think is right, or which arguments we find most congenial. Instead, we will try to understand the thinking on both sides of these debates, and to see what value, if any, we can find even in the arguments we disagree with. We will also be asking whether the authors fairly characterize, and productively engage with, positions contrary to their own. In other words, we will be studying the debates between abolitionists and reformers in criminal justice not just to learn something about prisons, policing, and the death penalty, but also to reflect on the possibilities and prerequisites for constructive discussion of contentious issues in a splintered society. Class meets 5:00 PM-7:00 PM on Sept. 28, Oct. 12, Nov. 2, Nov. 16. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Sklansky, D. (PI)

LAW 241P: Discussion (1L): In Search of Climate Justice

Our rapidly changing climate demands that we act quickly and robustly to decarbonize the economy. But how do we create a just transition that does not merely replicate, or worse yet exacerbate, the inequities of the past? In this discussion seminar, we will explore the tensions, challenges, and opportunities that society faces as it navigates the path forward to an ecologically sustainable future. We will discuss some of the most pressing climate justice controversies at the local, state, national, and international level. Class meets 6:00 PM-8:00 PM on Sept. 21, Oct. 5, Oct. 17, Nov. 2. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Sivas, D. (PI)

LAW 241S: Discussion (1L): Academic Freedom, Free Expression, Diversity, and Inclusion

This seminar will explore how to accommodate efforts to promote inclusion and belonging for students with diverse identities and viewpoints and academic freedom and freedom of expression. We will test the hypothesis that it is possible to serve these important interests without compromising any of them. Our substantive goal is to contribute to the solution of actual contemporary problems in American universities. Our procedural goal is for the seminar to model productive critical discourse about difficult issues. Needless to say, the seminar will address controversial topics involving participants' identities and ideological beliefs, and calls for active listening, empathy, humility, and charity on everyone's part. We will begin by examining the purpose of the university, the differences between faculty members' academic freedom and students' rights to free expression, and the limits of both. With respect to academic freedom, we'll consider proceedings by the University of Pennsylvania Law School to discipline a faculty member for "intentional and incessant racist, sexist, xenophobic, and homophobic actions and statements." One of the major reasons for protecting students' free expression is to create an environment in which they can engage in the core educational practices of critical inquiry and discourse. Critical discourse requires that students feel free to express ideas without fear of being ostracized. We will ask how to create such an environment without infringing on faculty's academic freedom (e.g., by mandating trigger warnings) or students free expression (e.g., by mandating the Chatham House rule, which prohibits attributing statements made in class to particular students). We will then address a selection of other issues, all with a problem-solving attitude: How can universities support the inclusion and participation of socially marginalized students and students with views across ideological and political spectrums in ways that avoid institutional orthodoxy and encourage open discourse?; How can universities prevent and remedy harmful attacks on community members' identities and beliefs in ways that are consistent with academic freedom, free expression, privacy, and due process?; How, consistent with principles of academic freedom, can a university ascertain whether a candidate for promotion or for a faculty position will engage in behaviors that promote inclusion? The seminar will be held over four dinners at the home of Paul and Iris Brest on the Stanford campus. Meets 6:00 PM-8:00 PM on Oct. 4, Oct. 18, Nov. 1, and Nov. 15. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Brest, P. (PI)

LAW 241T: Discussion (1L): Orwell's 1984

George Orwell's great work contains reflections on thought control in authoritarian societies, including use of pervasive surveillance, policing of language, organized hate, and the big lie. The group will gather in my home for dinner followed by discussion of current relevance of the book, supplemented by several other essays by and about Orwell. Class meets 6:30 PM-9:00 PM on Sept. 14, Oct. 10, Nov. 2, Nov. 16. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; McConnell, M. (PI)

LAW 241U: Discussion (1L): Topics in Election Law

This seminar will cover selected topics in election law and the law of democracy. It will cover landmark cases concerning the right to vote, ballot access, redistricting, and campaign finance. Students will be assigned one or two long cases per week. Each week will include a one hour lecture or war story followed by a one hour dinner discussion. Class meets 4:00 PM-6:00 PM on Oct. 3, Oct. 17, Oct. 31, Nov. 7. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Persily, N. (PI)

LAW 241V: Discussion (1L): Legal Education in History: Conflicts Over Law and Its Teaching

This seminar explores debates over the nature and purposes of law and legal education in the United States from the late nineteenth century to the present--with a particular focus on the role of law schools in managing the line between law and politics. We will begin by examining the formation of modern legal education at Harvard, exploring the turn to legal formalism and its interconnections with the rise of modern capitalism (including the emergence of the defense bar) and anti-immigrant sentiment (including the rise of the plaintiffs' bar). The formalist approach--and its deployment by a conservative U.S. Supreme Court eager to strike down welfare legislation in the Progressive era--would in turn give rise to sociolegal jurisprudence and later legal realism. Centered first and foremost at Columbia and Yale, these approaches would profoundly transform American law schools, all but definitively separating American legal education from its counterparts across the globe. In the wake of the Second World War, as Americans increasingly turned to positivist social science and its promise of law beyond politics, American legal education embraced a new philosophy--that of the process school--which highlighted (American) institutions and procedure as the key to avoiding the pitfalls of both formalism and realism. We will conclude by examining the current landscape of American legal education. Even as the promise of the process school has faltered, the present-day American law school is indelibly marked by its history--including the case method (inherited from late nineteenth-century formalism), a realist commitment to studying law in action, and the process school¿s obsession with (American) institutions and procedure (as exemplified by the study of federal courts). At the same time, we see a turn to interdisciplinarity and to legal clinics--representing the polar extremes of law as science and law as professional practice. But as the perennial question of the relationship between law and politics has become increasingly urgent in the present moment, what has become of the role of legal education in managing the line between law and politics--long the focal point of debates over law and its teaching? Class meets 5:30 PM-7:30 PM on Sept. 21, Oct. 4, Oct. 19, Nov. 16. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1

LAW 241W: Discussion (1L): Legal Institutions and/or Utopian Futures

People generally come to law school because they believe that law and legal institutions matter. Many think that the study of law will enable them to more effectively influence important social institutions. Some also come to law school hoping to use their law degrees to make the world better -- whatever that means to them. Contemporary left social movements offer a range of visions for what might make the world better, including (but certainly not limited to): abolishing police and prisons; developing a decarbonized economy; restructuring the economic order more generally; implementing systems for reparations and repair for racialized enslavement and dispossession; and opening borders. These visions exist alongside other, sometimes competing, ideas for how to make the world better. This seminar will interrogate the connection between law and hopeful visions for the future. We will engage in some critique of existing institutions, and of the limits of law, but the focus of the conversation will be creative envisioning, not critique. We'll explore the questions of whether and how it is possible to design legal frameworks that move toward more hopeful futures. Class meets 4:30 PM-6:30 PM on Oct. 4, Oct. 18, Nov. 1, Nov. 15. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Chacon, J. (PI)

LAW 241X: Discussion (1L): Rebuilding Civil Society from the Ground Up

Since America's founding, local political engagement (through participation, leadership, and organizing in local politics) has been a linchpin of our democratic order and adult education. That engagement is deeply challenged today by economic segregation, technological and media changes, the downsizing of local journalism, and the loss of institutions that forge local social networks (such as small businesses, churches, and neighborhood-based nonprofits). Yet meanwhile, poor and working class communities need local solutions and activism to face severe challenges such as environmental disasters, low wages, drug addiction, family dissolution, and disinvestment in basic services, schools, and infrastructure. This reading group will sit with stories and strategies of local democratic reengagement. Through a range of readings (from memoir to academic commentary) as well as films and podcasts, we'll discuss a deliberately diverse set of voices, from environmental justice activists to conservative thought leaders. We'll situate our discussions in a diverse set of urban and rural places, including California's agricultural interior, rural Alabama, Oregon's timber counties, post-industrial Massachusetts, and urban Mississippi. My hope is that our group of students--like the authors and protagonists of our discussions--will be racially, politically, economically, and geographically heterogeneous, allowing us to envision and teach each other to become better actors in the project of local political engagement for the public good. Class meets 5:00 PM-7:00 PM on Sept. 28, Oct. 12, Oct. 26, Nov. 16. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Anderson, M. (PI)

LAW 241Y: Discussion (1L): Democracy and Algorithmic Governance

In this discussion seminar we will examine the growth of 'artificial intelligence' (natural language processing, machine learning, and predictive analytics) from an interdisciplinary perspective. The principal objects of focus will be theories of innovation, the proliferation of algorithmic systems that subject human behavior and judgment to algorithmic control, the dependence of algorithmic systems on data surveillance, problems of error, 'leakage,' and bias (including racial bias), the promise of automation, the displacement of ordinary law and professional expertise by algorithmic code, and the tensions between liberal democratic concepts of the rule of law and the operation of code as law. No computer science training or previous training in critical theory is necessary. Class meets 6:00 PM-8:00 PM on Tuesdays (Specific dates are TBA, but we will most likely hold one session in September, two in October, and one in early November). Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Spaulding, N. (PI)

LAW 241Z: Discussion (1L): Exit, Voice, and Loyalty for Lawyers

The eminent economist Albert O. Hirschman is especially famous for his book Exit, Voice, Loyalty (1970). The subtitle of the book--Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States--may give you a little sense of the argument: that people who are dissatisfied with an institution to which they are attached have three choices. They can leave (switch to another product; quit; emigrate); they can try to change the institution through protest; or they can remain a customer, member, or citizen who goes along with (and perhaps even continues to support) the institution's choices. In this reading group, we will talk about how, as lawyers, we should think about these options. We'll start with a brief overview of Hirschman's argument and an essay by Hannah Arendt about lawyers and bureaucrats in Nazi Germany. We'll then look at some contemporary case studies involving U.S. lawyers who wrestled with whether to serve, or remain in, administrations with which they had serious disagreements and about law firms and their clients. Finally, we'll turn to two examples from outside the law--Ursula LeGuin's famous short story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas and a speech by C.S. Lewis about The Inner Circle--and what they tell us about how to think about our career choices. Class meets 5:30 PM-7:30 PM on Sept. 13, Sept. 27, Oct. 17, Nov. 14. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Karlan, P. (PI)

LAW 242A: Discussion (1L): What Makes a Great Judicial Opinion?

In law school, you will be reading a lot of judicial opinions. Most of the time, you'll be reading them with an eye to their legal holding. In this seminar, you'll be reading them with a different question in mind: What makes one judicial opinion better than another? What is it about certain opinions that leads them to be considered particularly effective or important? When is a judicial opinion "great"? You will read a variety of opinions from different judges and justices, subject areas, perspectives, and time periods, as well as some academic articles about judicial opinions and legal writing. Spoilers: There is no one answer to the title of this seminar. The goal will be to complicate the question and think about the different tools and objectives judges have when they write. Class meets 5:00 PM-7:00 PM on Sept. 19, Oct. 3, Oct. 17, Oct. 31. Elements used in grading: Full attendance, reading of assigned materials, and active participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 1
Instructors: ; Douek, E. (PI)

LAW 400: Directed Research

Directed Research is an extraordinary opportunity for students beyond the first-year to research problems in any field of law. Directed research credit may not be awarded for work that duplicates the work of a course, clinic, or externship for which the student has registered. Directed research credit may be awarded for work that expands on work initially assigned in, or conceived during, a course, clinic, or externship, but only if the continued work represents a meaningful and substantial contribution to the already existing project, significantly beyond mere editing or polishing. If a student seeks to continue or expand on work that the student initiated previously (whether for a course, clinic, externship, or otherwise) a student must (1) share the initial work with the professor supervising the directed research, to the extent that work is non-privileged, and (2) obtain permission for the expansion from the instructor or supervisor who supervised the initial project. The final product must be embodied in a paper or other form of written work involving a substantial independent effort on the part of the student. A student must submit a detailed petition of at least 250 words, approved by the sponsoring faculty member, outlining his or her proposed project and demonstrating that the research is likely to result in a significant scholarly contribution. A student may petition for "Directed Research: Curricular Development" when the work involves assisting a Law School faculty member in developing concepts or materials for new and innovative law school courses. Both the supervising faculty member and the Associate Dean for Curriculum must approve petition for "Directed Research: Curricular Development." Students must meet with the instructor frequently for the purposes of report and guidance. Unit credit is by arrangement. Students whose projects warrant more than four units should consider a Senior Thesis or the Research Track (See SLS Student Handbook for requirements and limitations). With the approval of the instructor, successful completion of a directed research project of two units or more may satisfy the JD writing requirement to the extent of one research writing course (R course). See Directed Research under Curricular Options in the SLS Student Handbook for requirements and limitations. Directed Research petitions are available on the Law School Registrar's Office website (see Forms and Petitions). Elements used in grading: Paper and as agreed to by instructor.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-4 | Repeatable 8 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 403: Senior Thesis

An opportunity for third-year students to engage in original research and to prepare a substantial written-work product on the scale of a law review article. The thesis topic should be chosen no later than two weeks after the beginning of the seventh term of law study and may be chosen during the sixth term. The topic is subject to the approval of the thesis supervisor, who may be any member of the Law School faculty under whose direction the student wishes to write the thesis and who is willing to assume the responsibility therefor. An oral defense of the thesis before members of the faculty, including the thesis supervisor, will be conducted late in the student's ninth academic term. Acceptance of the thesis for credit requires the approval of the thesis supervisor and one or more other members of the faculty who will be selected by the supervisor. Satisfactory completion of the senior thesis will satisfy graduation requirements to the extent of (a) 5 - 8 units of credit and (b) two research courses. The exact requirements for a senior thesis are in the discretion of the supervising faculty member. Special Instructions: Two Research credits are possible. Elements used in grading: Paper and as agreed to by instructor.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-8 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 9 units total)

LAW 406: Research Track

The Research Track is for students who wish to carry out a research project of a scope larger than that contemplated for a Senior Thesis. Research Track projects are to be supervised by two or more professors, at least one of whom must be a member of the Law School faculty. At least one faculty member in addition to the supervisors must read the written product of the research, and the student must defend the written work orally before the readers. Students will be admitted to Research Track only if they have a demonstrated capability for substantial independent research, and propose a significant and well-formulated project at the time of application. Special Instructions: Two Research credits are possible. Elements used in grading: Paper and as agreed to by instructor.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 9-12 | Repeatable for credit
Instructors: ; Honigsberg, C. (PI)

LAW 411: Directed Professional Writing

Directed professional writing projects involve professional writing, such as motions, briefs, proposed legislation, and congressional testimony, undertaken with the assistance of --- and in collaboration with --- a faculty member. Directed professional writing credit is designed to allow a student, or a small group of students working together, to receive academic credit for their work tackling real-world problems. Only projects supervised by a member of the faculty (tenured, tenure-track, senior lecturer, or professor from practice) may qualify for Directed Professional Writing credit. It will not necessarily be appropriate to require each member of the team to write the number of pages that would be required for an individual directed research project earning the number of units that each team member will earn for the team project. The page length guidelines applicable to individual papers may be considered in determining the appropriate page length, but the faculty supervisor has discretion to make the final page-length determination. Students must meet with the instructor frequently for the purposes of report and guidance. Unit credit is by arrangement. A petition will not be approved for work assigned or performed in a course, clinic, or externship for which the student has or will receive credit. Directed Professional Writing petitions are available on the Law School Registrar's Office website (see Forms and Petitions). Elements used in grading: As agreed to by instructor.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-4 | Repeatable 8 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 808D: Policy Practicum: Smoke: Wildfire Science and Policy Lab

Clients: California Native American Tribes, prescribed burn associations, federal legislative and executive branch decision makers. Wildfire has emerged as one of the most pressing biodiversity, air pollution and public health threats in the Western United States. Advancing land stewardship at sufficient scale to substantially improve the resilience of western forests to fire is critical to reducing wildfire risks and air pollution exposure for the tens of millions that live downwind. Communities are under threat as never before from catastrophic wildfire. Electric utilities face enormous challenges even as they strive to decarbonize their systems. In short, solving for wildfire resilience is an enormous technical and regulatory challenge. In this course, students will learn the basics of the wildfire policy debate in the west with a focus on California. Lectures will focus on both scientific and legal aspects of the challenge. In addition, students will work in groups on legal and regulatory analysis aimed at supporting better decision making on wildfire at the state and federal level. Students will work in partnership with postdocs and legal fellows on their group projects and may have the opportunity to present the results of their work to both clients and policymakers. The course is intended for students interested in multi-disciplinary approaches to public policy problems. No background in either the Clean Air Act, federal land management or wildfire policy is required. Students will engage in weekly lectures and discussions of wildfire science and policy, including student presentations and guest lectures by scientists, practitioners and policymakers. Students will also meet each week with Professors Sivas and Wara, and other members of the teaching team, in working sessions to discuss progress on team projects. Students may present the results of their research to California legislative and executive branch staff engaged in developing new approaches to wildfire policy. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Students enrolled in Section 02 (with instructor consent) will be required to meet the Law School's R paper requirements. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form. In answering the application questions, "what skills do you bring to this class" and "what skills do you want to develop," students should also answer the following questions: What is your program of study at Stanford? What experiences and interests do you have relating to smoke or wildfire (including those that might relate to public health, community resilience, insurance, and tribal approaches to wildfire management)? Have you taken other wildfire related coursework? What interests you about policy in this field? What topics relating to smoke and wildfire would you like to learn (more) about? What type of work would you like to be involved in (e.g., drafting white papers/policy briefs, technical or scientific reports, etc.)? Do you have any specific technical skills (Machine learning based methods, GIS, legal research) that may be applicable to project based work? The Consent Application Form can be found at: SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. See Consent Application Form for additional instructions and submission deadline. We will be accepting applicants past the registrar's deadline. All interested applicants can register on the course offerings webpage or e-mail the course instructors if the deadline has passed. This course is cross-listed with the Doerr School of Sustainability (SUSTAIN 329).
Terms: Aut | Units: 3 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 9 units total)
Instructors: ; Sivas, D. (PI); Wara, M. (PI)

LAW 809C: Policy Practicum: Corporate Performance Standards on Racial and Economic Equity

This policy lab practicum focuses on corporations and racial and economic equity. Students will work closely with the instructor and a client called PolicyLink (https://www.policylink.org/), which co-founded the Corporate Racial Equity Alliance (https://corporateracialequityalliance.org/). Corporations have a critical and essential role to play in advancing racial and economic equity given their tremendous influence over economic, political, social, and cultural dimensions. Additionally, there is significant stakeholder demand for companies to stop perpetuating racial and economic inequalities. Establishing a common language and framework for businesses to advance racial and economic equity is a critical and urgently needed component of the transformation toward a just, equitable, and healthy society for all of us. Current corporate standards do not offer a clear or sufficiently comprehensive path on how to approach, measure, report, and motivate the achievement of racial and economic equity. PolicyLink and others in the Corporate Racial Equity Alliance are developing new corporate performance standards to address this gap. These standards are on track for publication in early 2024. Students will research the current reporting landscape (e.g., SEC disclosure rules) and map them to the standards. The results of their research will be reflected in the published corporate standards. This policy lab will give students an opportunity to learn about corporate governance, public disclosure rules, business practices, and the role of corporations in advancing racial and economic equity. Prior experience with business or corporate law is welcome but not necessary. Students will meet weekly to discuss research progress as well as related topics (e.g., ESG). This policy lab seeks students from law school and is also available for cross-registration from students in graduate and professional degree programs in business, economics, finance, and management science. Elements used in grading: Attendance, performance, class participation, written assignments. Consent Application: To access the consent application for this course, go to link SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/ and then click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Sonu, M. (PI)

LAW 809D: Policy Practicum: "What's Next? After Students for Fair Admissions"

Policy Client: Stanford Center for Racial Justice, https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-center-for-racial-justice/. The Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions has upended nearly a half century of precedent. Universities that had long relied on race-based affirmative action in their admissions policies will no longer be permitted to do so. This policy lab will take up the question with which universities across the country must now grapple: What next? The orientation of the lab will be forward-looking and inclined toward innovation. New principles. New goals. New ideas. Rather than merely try to accomplish indirectly what the Supreme Court has prohibited universities from doing overtly, the practicum aims to treat the Supreme Court's prohibition of race-based affirmative action as an opportunity to reconsider more broadly the goals of selective college admissions and the ways in which America's leading educational institutions may reform admissions and associated practices in order to improve higher education broadly. Advanced education is crucially important both to national well-being and to racial justice. There is no path to racial justice that does not entail an educational system that works better for people of all backgrounds. The recent Supreme Court decisions regarding race preferences in admissions, and also student loan forgiveness, create an uncommon opportunity to fairly radically rethink how universities make good on their implicit bargain with the American people: to receive public patronage in exchange for enhancing educational opportunity and social mobility. Two understandings of the issues inform the scope of work. One is that race-based affirmative action is far from the only aspect of university activity that has been or will be subject to criticism. Thus, we will not limit our focus to the one practice the Supreme Court has already prohibited. Rather, the entire array of marketing, recruitment, admissions and outreach practices and principles should be up for re-examination. The other important point to understand is that a school's admissions practices are connected to broader questions about the role of prestigious colleges and universities in American society. Only through engaging those broader questions can one think clearly about the normative aims that selective colleges and universities should seek to further, through admissions, financial aid and otherwise. In considering the issues, the lab will squarely confront a salient feature of American higher education that has received too little attention: the extraordinary stratification of American colleges and universities. The institutions at the apex of the hierarchy are the envy of the world; they are wealthier, more influential, and more sought after than ever before in our history. Yet, they educate a minuscule percentage of all students, most of whom struggle at less well-resourced institutions, which themselves struggle financially among other operational and educational challenges. The lab will consider the extent to which this extreme stratification is incompatible with the educational needs of our nation and will explore and develop strategies to counter it. The work product of the lab will be a guidance document for universities, policymakers, and stakeholders across the country that serves as a road map for how to promote learning and advance racial justice after Students for Fair Admissions. The report will synthesize and evaluate the most successful higher education reforms and offer robust analysis, innovative policy development and recommendations for how to forge better systems of learning for all students. Accomplishing this goal will require the participants in the lab to understand and assess a wide array of issues concerning the structure and goals of higher education, and to take arguments that emanate from conservatives as seriously as those that emanate from liberals. Students in this policy lab will research, identify, and design strategies and policy solutions to entrenched racial inequities within our higher education system, particularly at our most elite universities. Students will take a multidisciplinary approach to problem solving in the lab, researching and interacting with a wide range of experts and relevant fields, including but not limited to government, law, business, education, psychology, sociology, health, and technology. This class is open to Stanford Law School students, and available for cross-registration for undergraduate and graduate students from across campus. We highly encourage students from outside the Law School to apply, particularly students from the Graduate School of Education, the Graduate School of Business, and those interested in developing their design-thinking skills. Students will be working together in small teams. Grading will be based on presentations, class participation, group work, and written assignments, including a final paper. The long-term client for this policy lab is the Stanford Center for Racial Justice. Please note this lab is a fall quarter 3-unit commitment with the option for a winter quarter extension. The winter quarter extension is a variable 1-3 units. For winter term, this policy practicum is open only to students who are continuing in the project from the fall term. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete a Consent Application Form available at SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Additionally, students must submit a resume, transcript, and brief policy exercise via email to Dionna Rangel at drangel@law.stanford.edu. Applications are due by Sunday, September 17 at 11:59 pm. Directions for the policy exercise are below. POLICY EXERCISE: You are a senior advisor to the president of a small university that has relied on using race as a factor in their admissions process. The president has expressed major concerns about the implications for the school after the Supreme Court's decision to strike down affirmative action in Students for Fair Admissions. They have asked you to draft a policy memo to help them navigate the uncertainty brought on by this landmark decision, specifically: 1. Briefly summarize Students for Fair Admissions, including what the decision says is prohibited and what is permitted. 2. Identify potential avenues for the university to respond to the decision that might be worthy of further investigation, including innovative policy ideas and reforms but also anything the administration should be thinking about more broadly as a higher education institution. 3. Include a short bibliography of select readings that can help the president stay informed about the issues, ideas, and responses post-affirmative action. The memo should be no longer than two pages, single-spaced, and use 12-point font. SKILLS TRAINING: Students who enroll in a Law and Policy Lab practicum for the first time are asked to participate in the full-day methods boot camp typically held on the first Saturday of the term. If you wish to earn course credit for developing your policy analysis skills, you may formally enroll in "Elements of Policy Analysis" (Law 7846) for one unit of additional credit. As you will see from the course description, credit for Law 7846 requires your attendance at the full-day methods boot camp plus at least two additional lunch-hour workshops. If you enroll in a practicum but prefer to audit the supplemental skills class -- rather than receive formal credit -- please let Policy Lab Program Director Luciana Herman (lherman@law.stanford.edu) know and she will contact you with more details. Only students who participated in the prior quarter's project will be admitted to the spring quarter practicum. Elements used in grading: Attendance, performance, class participation, written assignments, and final paper.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-3 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 6 units total)

LAW 809E: Policy Practicum: AI For Legal Help

The policy client for this project is the Legal Services Corporation (https://www.lsc.gov/): This project works closely with the Legal Services Corporation's Technology Information Grant Program (https://www.lsc.gov/grants/technology-initiative-grant-program) to research how the public interacts with AI platforms to seek legal assistance, and to develop a strategy around how to mitigate risks, ensure quality, and enhance access to justice on these AI platforms. AI increase access to justice, by helping people resolve their legal problems in more accessible, equitable, and effective ways? What are the risks that AI poses for people seeking legal guidance, that technical and policy guardrails should mitigate? In this course, students will conduct research to identify key opportunities and risks around AI's use by the public to deal with common legal problems like bad living conditions, possible evictions, debt collection, divorce, or domestic violence. Especially with the launch of new AI platforms like ChatGPT, Google Bard, and Bing Chat, more people may turn to generative AI platforms for guidance on their legal rights, options, and procedures. How can technology companies, legal institutions, and community groups responsibly advance AI solutions to benefit people in need? Students will explore these questions about AI and access to justice through hands-on interviews, fieldwork, and design workshops with different stakeholders throughout the justice system. They will run interview sessions online and on-site at courts, to hear from various community members about whether they would use AI for legal help and to brainstorm how the ideal AI system would behave. Students will also observe how participants use AI to respond to a fictional legal problem, to assess how the AI performs and understand how people regard the AI's guidance. Students will be required to complete ethical training for human subjects research, which takes approximately 2 hours through the CITI program online. They will then conduct community interviews according to an approved IRB research protocol. Students will synthesize what they learn in these community interviews, observations, and brainstorm sessions, in a presentation to legal and technical experts. They will hold a multi-stakeholder workshop at to explore how their findings may contribute to technical and legal projects to develop responsible, human-centered AI in the legal domain. Students will develop skills in facilitating interdisciplinary policy discussions about how technology and regulation can be developed alongside each other. The students¿ final report will contribute to policy and technology discussions about the principles, benchmarks, and risk typologies that can guide the ethical development of AI platforms for access to justice. Students are asked to enroll in both Fall and Winter quarters of the class. The class may be extended to Spring quarter, depending on the issues raised. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, and Written Assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available at SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 9 units total)

LAW 809F: Policy Practicum: Regilla Project: Women Incarcerated for Killing their Abusers

Nearly 1200 people are incarcerated in female correctional facilities in California and are serving lengthy sentences for murder and manslaughter convictions. It is not known in California (or in any other state) how many of these individuals are incarcerated for crimes that directly relate to histories of intimate partner violence. The Stanford Criminal Justice Center, through its Regilla Project, is attempting to assess this frequency. During Summer 2023, the Stanford Criminal Justice Center undertook data collection at the larger of the two women's prisons in California. The surveys were completed by individuals who have murder and manslaughter convictions to assess how their convictions were related to intimate partner violence. Nearly 500 individuals completed the survey during July 2023. Students enrolled in the policy lab will code the narrative portions of the survey responses (not everyone who participated in the surveys completed a narrative portion), analyze the quantitative data collected through the surveys, and assist in drafting a report for researchers, policymakers and practitioners aimed to better understand the nature of who is incarcerated and what their needs are, and to suggest front-end policy reforms. Application process: Interested students should submit a Consent of Instructor form (see Policy Lab Practicums webpage or https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/) with a copy of their resume, transcript, and statement of interest to Debbie Mukamal (dmukamal@law.stanford.edu) by September 11, 2023 at 5:00 pm. Only students who participated in the prior quarter's project will be admitted to the winter quarter practicum. The statement of interest should indicate relevant expertise, including whether the student has any data analysis experience (quantitative and/or qualitative) as well as the type of software the student has used in such data analysis. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Important note: Admitted students may enroll for three units. Four units is limited to one or two students with consent of the instructors.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3-4 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 8 units total)

LAW 809G: Policy Practicum: Supporting the San Quentin Transformation Advisory Council

Policy Client: Governor Newsom's San Quentin Transformation Advisory Council (https://www.gov.ca.gov/2023/05/05/san-quentin-transformation-advisory-council/ ). California Governor Newsom created an advisory council in Spring 2023 with the mission to transform San Quentin Prison into a rehabilitation facility. The advisory council has been meeting in Summer 2024 and will be putting forward preliminary ideas to the Governor's office in September 2024, for ultimate inclusion in the Governor's 2024 State Budget in January 2024. Students enrolled in the policy lab will assist the advisory council by providing academic, legal, and empirical research in support of the council's final recommendations to Governor Newsom. Students will also have a chance to meet and consult with advisory council members; tour San Quentin prison, including areas targeted for major renovation; and meet with incarcerated individuals who hope to benefit from the reforms. Application process: Interested students should submit a Consent of Instructor form (see Policy Lab Practicums webpage and https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/) with a copy of their resume, transcript, and statement of interest to Debbie Mukamal (dmukamal@law.stanford.edu) by September 11, 2023 at 5:00 pm. The statement of interest should indicate relevant expertise. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3

LAW 809H: Policy Practicum: Evaluating Law Schools and Mental Health Disability

This policy lab maps the law school experience for students with psychiatric or mental health disabilities. It identifies barriers for people with psychiatric disabilities to envision themselves as lawyers, navigating the admissions process, flourishing in law school, and becoming successful licensed lawyers. Law school is a demanding experience, and lawyering is a challenging -- and inspiring -- profession. People with psychiatric disabilities face typical issues that many aspiring and actual lawyers may encounter. However, they also may experience obstacles of bias, unintended bureaucratic hurdles, absent accommodation structures or policies, or challenges due to their disability. Practicum students will conduct a literature review, legal research, and interviews to identify current best practices and needed missing resources. Students will look at the work of advocacy groups for disability, substance use disorder, and formerly incarcerated people, associations for law students and lawyers, programs and policies at ABA member law schools, and innovative programs on mental disability and academia across Stanford's campus. The practicum aims to delineate the law school process, its pinch points, and opportunities for change for people with psychiatric disabilities. The fall term is an initial step to map out difficulties with the current law school process. The ultimate goal of the practicum is policy recommendations for law schools and other key stakeholders to improve the process and successfully integrate people with psychiatric disabilities into the legal profession. The class is open to Stanford law students and available for cross-registration for other Stanford students. Students with personal experience of psychiatric disability are encouraged to apply, but personal experience is not a requirement. It is intended for those interested in the intersectional and multi-disciplinary investigation of the legal profession and disability. Students will work in teams to produce an initial draft and an oral presentation to the class on a designated portion of the overall project. Additionally, the class will meet weekly to consider assigned reading material, meet interested parties, and discuss progress on team projects. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments. This policy lab will be offered in future terms. We encourage students to participate in subsequent quarters if they can do so. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must submit a Consent Application Form at SLS Registrar https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. See the Consent Application Form for instructions and the submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 6 units total)
Instructors: ; Belt, R. (PI)

LAW 881: Externship Companion Seminar

The practice of public interest law -- whether in the criminal or civil context, or a government or non-profit setting -- requires an attorney to consider a host of issues distinct from one in private practice. How should decisions be made about priorities with limited resources? Where an organization has a broad social justice mission, where does litigation on behalf of individual clients or a group of clients fit in? Prior to initiating litigation or advancing a defense, what quantum of evidence should an attorney require? What role, if any, should an attorney's personal beliefs play in a course of representation? Through directed supervision of their externships, as well as participation in weekly seminars, students will evaluate such questions in the context of their practical experience. Students are required to write weekly reflection papers of 2 to 3 pages. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, weekly reflection papers and final reflection paper.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Winn, M. (PI)

LAW 882: Externship, Civil Law

Following approval of a student's application, the Civil Standard Externship Program (SEP) allows second and third year students to obtain academic credit for externing with select non-profit public interest, public policy, and government agencies for one quarter. The Civil SEP allows students to (a) gain experience in a field where a clinical course is not offered, or (b) pursue advanced work in an area of prior clinical practice. Students may extern for 20, 24, 30, or 34 hours per week. For a complete description of the Civil SEP, students should read the Externship Handbook, which is available from the Levin Center for Public Service and Public Interest Law or online at: http://www.law.stanford.edu/organizations/programs-and-centers/john-and-terry-levin-center-for-public-service-and-public-interest-law/externship-program-0 . Students wishing to enroll in an externship must meet various requirements that are set out in the Handbook. Students participating in the Civil SEP must also concurrently enroll in the Externship Companion Seminar (Law 881). An externship that otherwise meets the criteria for obtaining EL credit will be approved for EL credit when the field placement provides specialized experience complementary to a student's intended career path and comparable benefits cannot be obtained through other EL coursework at Stanford. Grading Elements used: Full participation and attendance, satisfactory evaluation by field placement supervisor, weekly reflection papers of two to three pages. .
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-12
Instructors: ; Winn, M. (PI)

LAW 883: Externship, Criminal Law

Following approval of a student's application, the Criminal Standard Externship Program (SEP) allows second and third year students to work for credit in criminal prosecutors' and defenders' offices for one quarter. Students may extern for 20, 24, 30, or 34 hours per week. For a complete description of the Criminal SEP, students should read the Externship Handbook, which is available from the Levin Center for Public Service and Public Interest Law or online at: http://www.law.stanford.edu/organizations/programs-and-centers/john-and-terry-levin-center-for-public-service-and-public-interest-law/externship-program-0 . Students wishing to enroll in an externship must meet various requirements that are set out in the Handbook. Students participating in the Criminal SEP must also concurrently enroll in the Externship Companion Seminar. An externship that otherwise meets the criteria for obtaining EL credit will be approved for EL credit when the field placement provides specialized experience complementary to a student's intended career path and comparable benefits cannot be obtained through other EL coursework at Stanford. Grading Elements used: Full participation and attendance, satisfactory evaluation by field placement supervisor, weekly reflection papers of two to three pages.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-12
Instructors: ; Winn, M. (PI)

LAW 884: Externship, Special Circumstances

Following approval of a student's application, the Special Circumstances Externship Program (SCEP) allows second and third year students to work for credit for one quarter in non-profit public interest, public policy, and government agencies outside of the Bay Area. Standards for approval of a SCEP placement are similar to those for Directed Research proposals, although they are higher. Because there is a preference for local civil and criminal SEP placements (see Law 882 and Law 883), your SCEP proposal must explain (a) how it meets the goals of the externship program; and (b) why a similar project cannot be accomplished in one of the placements offered in the Bay Area. SCEP placements outside the Bay Area must be full-time. Students wishing to undertake a SCEP placement obtain the supervision of a faculty member who will oversee their externship and an accompanying tutorial. For a full description of the SCEP, students should read the Externship Handbook, which is available from the Levin Center for Public Service and Public Interest Law or online at: http://www.law.stanford.edu/organizations/programs-and-centers/john-and-terry-levin-center-for-public-service-and-public-interest-law/externship-program-0. Students wishing to enroll in an externship must meet the various requirements that are set out in the Handbook. An externship that otherwise meets the criteria for obtaining EL credit will be approved for EL credit when the field placement provides specialized experience complementary to a student's intended career path and comparable benefits cannot be obtained through other EL coursework at Stanford. Grading Elements used: Full participation and attendance, satisfactory evaluation by field placement supervisor, weekly reflection papers of three to five pages, and a final reflection paper of a length to be determined by your faculty supervisor.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 12

LAW 902: Advanced Community Law Clinic

The Advanced Community Law Clinic offers law students who already have some significant civil clinical experience the opportunity to work under supervision on more advanced projects and cases being handled by the Stanford Community Law Clinic, including litigation and other matters. Advanced Clinic students will also work with Clinical Supervising Attorneys to provide direction and guidance to those enrolled in the Community Law Clinic for the first time, in areas in which Advanced Clinic students have already acquired some expertise. In addition, Advanced Clinic students may function as team leaders on larger projects in which the Clinic is engaged. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical credits, however, during the course of the student's law school career. Special Instructions: Completion of the Community Law Clinic (Law 902A,B,C) or its equivalent is a prerequisite for the advanced clinic. Elements used in grading: Participation, reflective paper and project.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 904: Advanced Criminal Defense Clinic

Advanced clinic allows students who have taken the Criminal Defense Clinic to continue working on cases. Participation in case rounds is required. Advanced clinic may be taken for 2-7 units. Students may not enroll in any clinic (basic or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. Students must have taken Criminal Defense Clinic (Law 904A,B,C). Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and case work. Instructor permission required.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)
Instructors: ; Horne, C. (PI); Tyler, R. (PI)

LAW 908: Advanced Environmental Law Clinic

The Advanced Environmental Law Clinic provides students who have already taken the Environmental Law Clinic the opportunity to continue intense individual project work. Advanced students often work on matters they worked on as full-time students, but they also have the chance to work on new matters and develop new skills. Advanced students work closely with supervising faculty on their designated projects and are expected to take increasing responsibility for managing their work and representing clients. In addition, advanced students often serve as mentors to less experienced full-time students and thereby receive training in basic team building and supervision. Advanced students may arrange to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 total clinical units during the course of the student's law school career. Elements used in grading: TBA.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 908A: Environmental Law Clinic: Clinical Practice

Students enrolled in the Clinic provide legal assistance to national, regional and grassroots non-profit organizations on a variety of environmental issues, with a focus on complex natural resource conservation and biodiversity matters at the interface of law, science and policy. Working under the direct supervision of practicing environmental attorneys, Clinic students help screen new matters and potential clients; formulate strategies; research and develop factual and legal issues; and prosecute administrative and litigation proceedings. During the term, students may meet with clients, opposing counsel or agency decision-makers; review and prepare administrative records; develop expert testimony; draft comment letters, petitions, pleading or briefs; and/or attend and present arguments in administrative and court hearings. In regular one-on-one meetings with supervising faculty, there is a heavy emphasis on learning how to write persuasively and present oral arguments. Indeed, in any given quarter, our students typically prepare a mix of state and federal, and trial and appellate, court pleadings, and because all of our hearings during the academic year are conducted by students, many students also have the opportunity to present oral argument in front of one or more judges. In addition, students participate in a regular seminar where we examine strategic, ethical and substantive issues arising out of the Clinic's work. The Clinic is a particularly good place to learn how to conduct effective legal research, marshal facts in support of legal arguments, and, above all, write well. We practice at all levels of state and federal court and before many local, state and federal administrative agencies. Our work involves extensive motions practice and brief writing, and often involves administrative petitions and policy papers. Our work is inherently cross-disciplinary. No prior environmental experience or background is necessary, but an interest in learning about environmental and natural resources law is important. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, professionalism, timeliness, initiative, and follow-through on project work and other class requirements.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 4

LAW 908B: Environmental Law Clinic: Clinical Methods

Students enrolled in the Clinic provide legal assistance to national, regional and grassroots non-profit organizations on a variety of environmental issues, with a focus on complex natural resource conservation and biodiversity matters at the interface of law, science and policy. Working under the direct supervision of practicing environmental attorneys, Clinic students help screen new matters and potential clients; formulate strategies; research and develop factual and legal issues; and prosecute administrative and litigation proceedings. During the term, students may meet with clients, opposing counsel or agency decision-makers; review and prepare administrative records; develop expert testimony; draft comment letters, petitions, pleading or briefs; and/or attend and present arguments in administrative and court hearings. In regular one-on-one meetings with supervising faculty, there is a heavy emphasis on learning how to write persuasively and present oral arguments. Indeed, in any given quarter, our students typically prepare a mix of state and federal, and trial and appellate, court pleadings, and because all of our hearings during the academic year are conducted by students, many students also have the opportunity to present oral argument in front of one or more judges. In addition, students participate in a regular seminar where we examine strategic, ethical and substantive issues arising out of the Clinic's work. The Clinic is a particularly good place to learn how to conduct effective legal research, marshal facts in support of legal arguments, and, above all, write well. We practice at all levels of state and federal court and before many local, state and federal administrative agencies. Our work involves extensive motions practice and brief writing, and often involves administrative petitions and policy papers. Our work is inherently cross-disciplinary. No prior environmental experience or background is necessary, but an interest in learning about environmental and natural resources law is important. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, professionalism, timeliness, initiative, and follow-through on project work and other class requirements.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 4

LAW 908C: Environmental Law Clinic: Clinical Coursework

Students enrolled in the Clinic provide legal assistance to national, regional and grassroots non-profit organizations on a variety of environmental issues, with a focus on complex natural resource conservation and biodiversity matters at the interface of law, science and policy. Working under the direct supervision of practicing environmental attorneys, Clinic students help screen new matters and potential clients; formulate strategies; research and develop factual and legal issues; and prosecute administrative and litigation proceedings. During the term, students may meet with clients, opposing counsel or agency decision-makers; review and prepare administrative records; develop expert testimony; draft comment letters, petitions, pleading or briefs; and/or attend and present arguments in administrative and court hearings. In regular one-on-one meetings with supervising faculty, there is a heavy emphasis on learning how to write persuasively and present oral arguments. Indeed, in any given quarter, our students typically prepare a mix of state and federal, and trial and appellate, court pleadings, and because all of our hearings during the academic year are conducted by students, many students also have the opportunity to present oral argument in front of one or more judges. In addition, students participate in a regular seminar where we examine strategic, ethical and substantive issues arising out of the Clinic's work. The Clinic is a particularly good place to learn how to conduct effective legal research, marshal facts in support of legal arguments, and, above all, write well. We practice at all levels of state and federal court and before many local, state and federal administrative agencies. Our work involves extensive motions practice and brief writing, and often involves administrative petitions and policy papers. Our work is inherently cross-disciplinary. No prior environmental experience or background is necessary, but an interest in learning about environmental and natural resources law is important. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 credits. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four credits. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical credits during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, professionalism, timeliness, initiative, and follow-through on project work and other class requirements.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 4

LAW 910: Advanced Immigrants' Rights Clinic

The Immigrants' Rights Advanced Clinic offers the opportunity for students who have already successfully completed the Immigrants' Rights Clinic to pursue: a specific immigrants' rights advocacy project; advanced individual client representation; and/or working with the clinic director to provide direction/guidance to those enrolled in the Clinic for the first time. All advanced Clinic projects will be jointly designed by the director and the advanced student. Advanced students providing guidance/direction to first-time students will receive additional training on providing supervision. Special instructions: Advanced students are expected to attend the case-rounds portion of the weekly seminar, and to participate as needed in the lecture/discussion portion of the seminar. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical units, however, during the course of the student's law school career. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, project work, writing assignments, and case preparation.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 910A: Immigrants' Rights Clinic: Clinical Practice

The Immigrants' Rights Clinic offers students the opportunity to represent immigrants before the San Francisco Immigration Court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the federal district courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Students in the clinic conduct mini-trials in immigration court, write motions and appellate briefs, interview clients and witnesses, investigate facts, develop case strategy, and argue cases. The Clinic represents immigrants with past criminal convictions, asylum seekers, and survivors of domestic violence. All clinic students also work on a variety of impact litigation and advocacy projects to address federal government immigration enforcement practices at the national and local levels, including impact litigation to challenge prolonged immigration detention, local and state advocacy to limit enforcement activity by police, the creation of model pleadings and know your rights materials for immigrant detainees, and advocacy with the federal agencies that regulate immigration. No prior substantive experience or background in immigration or immigrants' rights work is necessary. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, case and project work and writing assignments. There are no prerequisites.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 910B: Immigrants' Rights Clinic: Clinical Methods

The Immigrants' Rights Clinic offers students the opportunity to represent immigrants before the San Francisco Immigration Court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the federal district courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Students in the clinic conduct mini-trials in immigration court, write motions and appellate briefs, interview clients and witnesses, investigate facts, develop case strategy, and argue cases. The Clinic represents immigrants with past criminal convictions, asylum seekers, and survivors of domestic violence. All clinic students also work on a variety of impact litigation and advocacy projects to address federal government immigration enforcement practices at the national and local levels, including impact litigation to challenge prolonged immigration detention, local and state advocacy to limit enforcement activity by police, the creation of model pleadings and know your rights materials for immigrant detainees, and advocacy with the federal agencies that regulate immigration. No prior substantive experience or background in immigration or immigrants' rights work is necessary. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, case and project work and writing assignments. There are no prerequisites.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 910C: Immigrants' Rights Clinic: Clinical Coursework

The Immigrants' Rights Clinic offers students the opportunity to represent immigrants before the San Francisco Immigration Court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the federal district courts and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Students in the clinic conduct mini-trials in immigration court, write motions and appellate briefs, interview clients and witnesses, investigate facts, develop case strategy, and argue cases. The Clinic represents immigrants with past criminal convictions, asylum seekers, and survivors of domestic violence. All clinic students also work on a variety of impact litigation and advocacy projects to address federal government immigration enforcement practices at the national and local levels, including impact litigation to challenge prolonged immigration detention, local and state advocacy to limit enforcement activity by police, the creation of model pleadings and know your rights materials for immigrant detainees, and advocacy with the federal agencies that regulate immigration. No prior substantive experience or background in immigration or immigrants' rights work is necessary. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Attendance and participation in class, case and project work and writing assignments. There are no prerequisites.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 912: Advanced International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic

Advanced Clinic allows students that have already successfully completed the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic to work on ongoing Clinic projects. All Advanced Clinic work plans will be jointly designed by the Clinic supervisor and the advanced student. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and four units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical units, however, during the course of the student's law school career. There is no seminar component to Advanced Clinic and students in Advanced Clinic will not travel as part of Clinic project work. Elements used in grading: TBA.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 912A: International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic: Clinical Practice

In the past half-century, human rights advocates have transformed a marginal utopian ideal into a central element of global discourse and practice. This Clinic gives students the opportunity to work directly with the actors and organizations behind this remarkable development as they navigate the vast challenges faced by human rights advocates and victims. In addition to operating within the human rights framework, students will also have occasion to study and contribute to efforts to resolve situations of tension and ongoing conflict using tools of transitional justice and conflict mitigation. The course aims to help students develop a broad range of multidisciplinary human rights advocacy skills--including factual documentation; litigation before national, regional, and international institutions; community empowerment strategies; and client enfranchisement and representation--through in-class sessions, role play exercises, and engagement in, and critical assessment of, clinical projects in human rights. This Clinic involves both a weekly seminar as well as work directly with clients and partner organizations (i.e. Clinic Projects). Together, these experiences give students the chance to reflect upon a number of foundational questions including: What are the origins of the human rights movement and where is it headed? What does it mean to be a human rights activist? What are the main challenges and dilemmas facing those engaged in rights promotion and defense? How is conflict resolution consistent with human rights advocacy? When and where are these approaches in tension? Students will also be confronted with the ethical and strategic issues that arise in the course of doing human rights work and balancing the often differing agendas of western international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and their counterparts in the (frequently non-western) developing world. In some sessions, part of the class will be devoted to presentations by students and clinical rounds in line with greater Mills Legal Clinic model. These presentations will consider one or more issues that arise in the course of students' own engagement in advocacy projects through the Clinic. During the course of the quarter, in addition to their work for their clients and partners, students will also be required to write several short, critical reflection papers or thought pieces (2-4 pages, double-spaced, or 500-1,000 words) on the readings, their Clinic Project(s), and/or human rights events on campus. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses. The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. As a general rule, students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work/projects (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical work product (i.e., the students' substantive contributions); clinical methods (which includes consideration of the students' lawyering skills, leadership, and professionalism); and clinical coursework (which focuses on the students' seminar participation, simulations, and reflection papers). Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Elements used in grading include: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, professionalism, ability to work with others successfully, creative thinking, peer review, and commitment to the clinical enterprise. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and the clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 912B: International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic: Clinical Methods

In the past half-century, human rights advocates have transformed a marginal utopian ideal into a central element of global discourse and practice. This Clinic gives students the opportunity to work directly with the actors and organizations behind this remarkable development as they navigate the vast challenges faced by human rights advocates and victims. In addition to operating within the human rights framework, students will also have occasion to study and contribute to efforts to resolve situations of tension and ongoing conflict using tools of transitional justice and conflict mitigation. The course aims to help students develop a broad range of multidisciplinary human rights advocacy skills--including factual documentation; litigation before national, regional, and international institutions; community empowerment strategies; and client enfranchisement and representation--through in-class sessions, role play exercises, and engagement in, and critical assessment of, clinical projects in human rights. This Clinic involves both a weekly seminar as well as work directly with clients and partner organizations (i.e. Clinic Projects). Together, these experiences give students the chance to reflect upon a number of foundational questions including: What are the origins of the human rights movement and where is it headed? What does it mean to be a human rights activist? What are the main challenges and dilemmas facing those engaged in rights promotion and defense? How is conflict resolution consistent with human rights advocacy? When and where are these approaches in tension? Students will also be confronted with the ethical and strategic issues that arise in the course of doing human rights work and balancing the often differing agendas of western international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and their counterparts in the (frequently non-western) developing world. In some sessions, part of the class will be devoted to presentations by students and clinical rounds in line with greater Mills Legal Clinic model. These presentations will consider one or more issues that arise in the course of students' own engagement in advocacy projects through the Clinic. During the course of the quarter, in addition to their work for their clients and partners, students will also be required to write several short, critical reflection papers or thought pieces (2-4 pages, double-spaced, or 500-1,000 words) on the readings, their Clinic Project(s), and/or human rights events on campus. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses. The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. As a general rule, students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work/projects (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical work product (i.e., the students' substantive contributions); clinical methods (which includes consideration of the students' lawyering skills, leadership, and professionalism); and clinical coursework (which focuses on the students' seminar participation, simulations, and reflection papers). Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Elements used in grading include: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, professionalism, ability to work with others successfully, creative thinking, peer review, and commitment to the clinical enterprise. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and the clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 912C: International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic: Clinical Coursework

In the past half-century, human rights advocates have transformed a marginal utopian ideal into a central element of global discourse and practice. This Clinic gives students the opportunity to work directly with the actors and organizations behind this remarkable development as they navigate the vast challenges faced by human rights advocates and victims. In addition to operating within the human rights framework, students will also have occasion to study and contribute to efforts to resolve situations of tension and ongoing conflict using tools of transitional justice and conflict mitigation. The course aims to help students develop a broad range of multidisciplinary human rights advocacy skills--including factual documentation; litigation before national, regional, and international institutions; community empowerment strategies; and client enfranchisement and representation--through in-class sessions, role play exercises, and engagement in, and critical assessment of, clinical projects in human rights. This Clinic involves both a weekly seminar as well as work directly with clients and partner organizations (i.e. Clinic Projects). Together, these experiences give students the chance to reflect upon a number of foundational questions including: What are the origins of the human rights movement and where is it headed? What does it mean to be a human rights activist? What are the main challenges and dilemmas facing those engaged in rights promotion and defense? How is conflict resolution consistent with human rights advocacy? When and where are these approaches in tension? Students will also be confronted with the ethical and strategic issues that arise in the course of doing human rights work and balancing the often differing agendas of western international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) and their counterparts in the (frequently non-western) developing world. In some sessions, part of the class will be devoted to presentations by students and clinical rounds in line with greater Mills Legal Clinic model. These presentations will consider one or more issues that arise in the course of students' own engagement in advocacy projects through the Clinic. During the course of the quarter, in addition to their work for their clients and partners, students will also be required to write several short, critical reflection papers or thought pieces (2-4 pages, double-spaced, or 500-1,000 words) on the readings, their Clinic Project(s), and/or human rights events on campus. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses. The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. As a general rule, students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work/projects (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical work product (i.e., the students' substantive contributions); clinical methods (which includes consideration of the students' lawyering skills, leadership, and professionalism); and clinical coursework (which focuses on the students' seminar participation, simulations, and reflection papers). Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Elements used in grading include: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, professionalism, ability to work with others successfully, creative thinking, peer review, and commitment to the clinical enterprise. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and the clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 914: Advanced Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation Clinic

Advanced clinic allows students who have taken the Advanced Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation Clinic to continue working on cases. Advanced clinic may be taken for 2-7 units. Students may not enroll in any clinic (basic or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. Elements used in grading: TBA.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 916: Advanced Organizations and Transactions Clinic

Advanced clinic allows students who have taken the Organizations & Transactions Clinic to work on ongoing projects. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical credits, however, during the course of the student's law school career. Students must have taken Organizations & Transactions Clinic (Law 916). Elements used in grading: Written assignments and client interactions.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)
Instructors: ; Sonu, M. (PI)

LAW 918: Advanced Religious Liberty Clinic

Advanced clinic allows students who have taken the Religious Liberty Clinic to continue working on cases. Participation in rounds is required. Advanced clinic may be taken for 2-7 units; general rule of thumb is 4 hours of work per week per unit. Students may not enroll in any clinic (basic or advanced) which would result in earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school enrollment. Elements used in grading: Class participation, written assignments, and case work. Students must have taken Religious Liberty Clinic.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)
Instructors: ; Huq, Z. (PI); Sonne, J. (PI)

LAW 920: Advanced Supreme Court Litigation Clinic

The Advanced Supreme Court Litigation Clinic provides an opportunity for students who have already successfully completed the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic to continue their work in the Clinic. Work includes research and drafting petitions for certiorari and oppositions, merits briefs, and amicus briefs, compiling joint appendices, and preparing advocates for oral argument, as well as commenting on drafts of briefs being filed by lawyers in other cases. Advanced students will also continue to participate in the Clinic's discussion of cases during case rounds. For a more elaborate description of the clinic's content, see the course description for Course Number 436-0-01. Special instructions: Admission is by consent of instructor. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical units, however, during the course of the student's law school career. Students have the option to receive R credit upon instructor approval. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Projects and participation.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)

LAW 920A: Supreme Court Litigation Clinic: Clinical Practice

The Supreme Court Litigation Clinic will expose students to the joys and frustrations of litigation before the Supreme Court of the United States. The bulk of the clinic will be run as a small law firm working on live cases before the Court. Students will participate in drafting petitions for certiorari and oppositions, merits briefs, and amicus briefs, compiling joint appendices, and preparing advocates for oral argument, as well as commenting (the technical term is "kibbitzing") on drafts of briefs being filed by lawyers in other cases. The precise nature of the cases will depend on the Court's docket, but in recent Terms, the clinic's cases have involved federal criminal law and procedure, habeas corpus, constitutional and statutory antidiscrimination and employment law, bankruptcy law, and the First Amendment. Our aim is to involve students as fully as possible in this type of litigation. The Clinic begins with an intensive introduction to the distinctive nature of Supreme Court practice, including the key differences between merits arguments and the certiorari process, the role of amicus briefs, and the Supreme Court Rules. After that, seminar meetings will be devoted primarily to collaborative work on the cases the clinic is handling. While students will be primarily responsible for working in teams on one case at a time, they will also be expected to acquire familiarity with the issues raised in other students' cases and will both edit each others' substantive work and assist each other and the instructors with the technical production work attendant on filing briefs with the Supreme Court. The course will involve substantial amounts of legal research. The Supreme Court operates on a tight, and unyielding deadline, and students must be prepared both to complete their own work in a timely fashion and to assist one another and the instructors on other cases. The instructors will not ask students to do any kind of "grunt work" that they themselves will not also be handling, but grunt work there will be: proofreading, cite-checking, dealing with the joint appendix, and the like. The nature of the work product means that while students will average thirty hours per week on their case-related work, that work will surely be distributed unevenly across the quarter. Unlike most other courts, the Supreme Court has no student practice rules. Thus, students will not be able to argue cases before the Court. But they will participate in moot courts on their cases, as both advocates and Justices. Each student will also have the opportunity to travel to Washington to see the Court in session, preferably with respect to a case on which the student has worked. Ideally students will already have experience with persuasive doctrinal writing, through a course like Federal Pretrial Litigation or through intensive supervision during their summer jobs or other clinics. Admission to the Clinic is by consent of the instructors. Students will need to submit a writing sample that reflects their facility with doctrinal legal arguments and the name of at least one reference who can comment on their legal analytic ability. - - Special instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 units. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four units. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical units during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Written work, editing of other student's written work, attendance, class and moot court participation.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 920B: Supreme Court Litigation Clinic: Clinical Methods

The Supreme Court Litigation Clinic will expose students to the joys and frustrations of litigation before the Supreme Court of the United States. The bulk of the clinic will be run as a small law firm working on live cases before the Court. Students will participate in drafting petitions for certiorari and oppositions, merits briefs, and amicus briefs, compiling joint appendices, and preparing advocates for oral argument, as well as commenting (the technical term is "kibbitzing") on drafts of briefs being filed by lawyers in other cases. The precise nature of the cases will depend on the Court's docket, but in recent Terms, the clinic's cases have involved federal criminal law and procedure, habeas corpus, constitutional and statutory antidiscrimination and employment law, bankruptcy law, and the First Amendment. Our aim is to involve students as fully as possible in this type of litigation. The Clinic begins with an intensive introduction to the distinctive nature of Supreme Court practice, including the key differences between merits arguments and the certiorari process, the role of amicus briefs, and the Supreme Court Rules. After that, seminar meetings will be devoted primarily to collaborative work on the cases the clinic is handling. While students will be primarily responsible for working in teams on one case at a time, they will also be expected to acquire familiarity with the issues raised in other students' cases and will both edit each others' substantive work and assist each other and the instructors with the technical production work attendant on filing briefs with the Supreme Court. The course will involve substantial amounts of legal research. The Supreme Court operates on a tight, and unyielding deadline, and students must be prepared both to complete their own work in a timely fashion and to assist one another and the instructors on other cases. The instructors will not ask students to do any kind of "grunt work" that they themselves will not also be handling, but grunt work there will be: proofreading, cite-checking, dealing with the joint appendix, and the like. The nature of the work product means that while students will average thirty hours per week on their case-related work, that work will surely be distributed unevenly across the quarter. Unlike most other courts, the Supreme Court has no student practice rules. Thus, students will not be able to argue cases before the Court. But they will participate in moot courts on their cases, as both advocates and Justices. Each student will also have the opportunity to travel to Washington to see the Court in session, preferably with respect to a case on which the student has worked. Ideally students will already have experience with persuasive doctrinal writing, through a course like Federal Pretrial Litigation or through intensive supervision during their summer jobs or other clinics. Admission to the Clinic is by consent of the instructors. Students will need to submit a writing sample that reflects their facility with doctrinal legal arguments and the name of at least one reference who can comment on their legal analytic ability. - - Special instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 credits. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four credits. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical credits during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Written work, editing of other student's written work, attendance, class and moot court participation.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 920C: Supreme Court Litigation Clinic: Clinical Coursework

The Supreme Court Litigation Clinic will expose students to the joys and frustrations of litigation before the Supreme Court of the United States. The bulk of the clinic will be run as a small law firm working on live cases before the Court. Students will participate in drafting petitions for certiorari and oppositions, merits briefs, and amicus briefs, compiling joint appendices, and preparing advocates for oral argument, as well as commenting (the technical term is "kibbitzing") on drafts of briefs being filed by lawyers in other cases. The precise nature of the cases will depend on the Court's docket, but in recent Terms, the clinic's cases have involved federal criminal law and procedure, habeas corpus, constitutional and statutory antidiscrimination and employment law, bankruptcy law, and the First Amendment. Our aim is to involve students as fully as possible in this type of litigation. The Clinic begins with an intensive introduction to the distinctive nature of Supreme Court practice, including the key differences between merits arguments and the certiorari process, the role of amicus briefs, and the Supreme Court Rules. After that, seminar meetings will be devoted primarily to collaborative work on the cases the clinic is handling. While students will be primarily responsible for working in teams on one case at a time, they will also be expected to acquire familiarity with the issues raised in other students' cases and will both edit each others' substantive work and assist each other and the instructors with the technical production work attendant on filing briefs with the Supreme Court. The course will involve substantial amounts of legal research. The Supreme Court operates on a tight, and unyielding deadline, and students must be prepared both to complete their own work in a timely fashion and to assist one another and the instructors on other cases. The instructors will not ask students to do any kind of "grunt work" that they themselves will not also be handling, but grunt work there will be: proofreading, cite-checking, dealing with the joint appendix, and the like. The nature of the work product means that while students will average thirty hours per week on their case-related work, that work will surely be distributed unevenly across the quarter. Unlike most other courts, the Supreme Court has no student practice rules. Thus, students will not be able to argue cases before the Court. But they will participate in moot courts on their cases, as both advocates and Justices. Each student will also have the opportunity to travel to Washington to see the Court in session, preferably with respect to a case on which the student has worked. Ideally students will already have experience with persuasive doctrinal writing, through a course like Federal Pretrial Litigation or through intensive supervision during their summer jobs or other clinics. Admission to the Clinic is by consent of the instructors. Students will need to submit a writing sample that reflects their facility with doctrinal legal arguments and the name of at least one reference who can comment on their legal analytic ability. - - Special instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses - - The Law School's clinical courses are offered on a full-time basis for 12 credits. This allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without the need to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic are not permitted to enroll in any other classes, seminars, directed research or other credit-yielding activities within the Law School or University during the quarter in which they are enrolled in a clinic. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants who are expected to attend a class on a regular basis. There is a limited exception for joint degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from ever taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved on a case-by-case basis. Clinic students are expected to work in their clinical office during most business hours Monday through Friday. Students are also expected to be available by e-mail or cell phone when elsewhere during those hours. Because students have no other courses (and hence no exams or papers), the clinical quarter begins the first day of classes and runs through the final day of the examination period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday to Friday work week without prior authorization from the clinical supervisor. The work during a typical week in a clinic is divided into three components. First, as they are for practicing attorneys, most of the hours of any week are taken up by work on client matters or case work (this time includes meetings with instructors to discuss the work). Again, as is the case for practicing lawyers, in some weeks these responsibilities demand time above and beyond "normal business hours." Second, students will spend approximately five-to-seven hours per week preparing for and participating in weekly discussions or other group work in their individual clinic (scheduling varies by clinic). Third, over the course of the quarter each clinic student (with the exception of those enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic) is required to prepare for and attend a few inter-clinic group sessions. Students will be awarded three separate grades for their clinical quarter, each reflecting four credits. The three grades are broken into the following categories: clinical practice; clinical methods; and clinical coursework. Grading is pursuant to the H/P system. Enrollment in a clinic is binding; once selected into a clinic to which he or she has applied, a student may not later drop the course except in limited and exceptional cases. Requests for withdrawal are processed through the formal petition and clinical faculty review process described in the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Students may not enroll in any clinic (full-time or advanced) which would result in them earning more than 27 clinical credits during their law school career. The rules described here do not apply to advanced clinics for students who are continuing with a clinic in which they were previously enrolled. For information about advanced clinics, please see the course descriptions for those courses. For more information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website. Elements used in grading: Written work, editing of other student's written work, attendance, class and moot court participation.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 922: Advanced Youth and Education Advocacy Clinic

The Youth and Education Advocacy Advanced Clinic provides an opportunity for students who have already successfully completed the Education Advocacy Clinic to continue their advocacy work in the Clinic and/or to pursue a discrete project related to educational equity advocacy. Examples of projects include strategic policy research and management consulting for public education institutions on specific topics (e.g., accountability programs, community outreach and engagement, school climate); investigation and preparation for impact litigation; and community education and outreach on a specific education-related issue. All projects will be jointly designed by the instructor and the advanced student. Advanced students will also continue to participate in the Clinic's discussion of cases during case rounds. Special instructions: Admission is by consent of instructor. Advanced students may arrange with the instructor to receive between two and seven units. No student may receive more than 27 overall clinical units, however, during the course of the student's law school career. Elements used in grading: Projects and class participation.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2-7 | Repeatable 7 times (up to 15 units total)
Instructors: ; Trillin, A. (PI)

LAW 1012: Corporate Reorganization

This course examines reorganization of a company under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. We will examine reorganization through several stages of a business turnaround and restructuring (such as an out-of-court workout, a Chapter 11 filing, selected Chapter 11 operating issues, and the Chapter 11 plan of reorganization). We will also consider a few controversial issues that test the boundaries of bankruptcy law. For example, should a debtor have virtually unfettered discretion to choose any district (or any judge) for its Chapter 11 case? To what extent does Chapter 11 provide an appropriate forum to resolve mass tort claims? Can a Chapter 11 plan provide for a non-consensual settlement and release of claims held by one third-party against another third-party? Along the way we will touch on topics that often arise in a reorganization setting such as valuation, leveraged buyouts, and distressed debt investing. We will also follow current developments in actual Chapter 11 cases, primarily through reports in the media. Elements used in grading: class participation and final exam.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Ray, S. (PI)

LAW 1013: Corporations

This course is an introduction to the basic legal rules and principles governing the relations between managers, investors, and creditors in the business enterprise. The course is the foundation for advanced business law courses. We focus on problems that arise because a firm's managers and owners have conflicting interests. We examine the costs associated with this conflict and how markets, legal standards (particularly judicially developed fiduciary duties) and contracts might reduce them. We also examine the way in which federal securities law complements state-level corporate law in the governance of public corporations. Topical areas of coverage include shareholder activism, mergers and acquisitions, and insider trading. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: ; Milhaupt, C. (PI)

LAW 1029: Taxation I

This course provides an overview of the federal income tax from learning to read the charming prose of the Internal Revenue Code to the principles and policies underlying the income tax, which is - by far - the largest source of revenue for the federal government (and some states, such as California). This class will provide the necessary foundations for taking more advanced tax classes but is also designed to provide crucial background for those pursuing careers in numerous other areas. For example, tax is crucial to the business lawyer's toolkit because most major business decisions have tax implications. Furthermore, because much - perhaps even most - of American public policy is conducted through the tax code, understanding tax is crucial for policy analysis. Elements used in grading: class participation and final exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: ; Jurow Kleiman, A. (PI)

LAW 1033: Trusts and Estates

This course will examine aspects of the law of donative transfers in the areas of wills, trusts and agents. The course will cover the following topics: intestacy; will execution and revocation; will provisions and interpretations; restrictions on the right to devise; probate; creation, amendment and termination of trusts; revocable and irrevocable trusts; trust provisions; charitable trusts; trust administration; and durable powers of attorneys, advanced health care directives, and conservatorships. Elements used in grading: Final exam (open book, essay).
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 1035: Mergers and Acquisitions

This course focuses on the role of law and lawyers in the evaluation, design and implementation of mergers and acquisitions transactions, including mergers, stock sales, and asset sales. Primary attention will be devoted (1) to corporate law issues relevant to merger or acquisition transactions; and (2) to contract law issues on important private ordering mechanisms, such as merger or acquisition agreements, and confidentiality and other ancillary agreements. Time permitting, we will also delve into other legal issues, such as those involving federal securities, tax, and antitrust laws. Prerequisite: Corporations, except on petition to the instructors based on prior coursework or special experience. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Choi, A. (PI)

LAW 1040: Venture Capital

This class examines the economics of U.S. venture capital finance and the contract structures that are used to achieve these economics. Special attention will be paid to developing pro-forma financial models that analyze how various contract provisions affect investor and founder cash flows. Among other things, students will study how VC contract provisions are designed to protect investors from economic and voting dilution, how they allocate merger consideration in an acquisition of a VC-backed startup company, and how they can be used to incentivize subsequent investment by a company's VC investors. Students will complete several "modeling" exercises (using Microsoft Excel) throughout the semester that cover common modelling tasks expected of lawyers working in VC finance. Access to Microsoft Excel is required for this course. The course is open to Graduate School of Business and other non-law students with permission of the instructors. See Non-Law Student Registration at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/non-law-students/.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Bartlett, R. (PI)

LAW 1043: Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies: Law, Economics, Business and Policy

Blockchain and cryptocurrency technologies have spawned an extensive and rapidly growing set of businesses along with a corresponding rapidly expanding need for lawyers and regulators with the required expertise. This course provides core background for legal, policy, or business work in the field by nurturing three areas of understanding: (1) the technologies themselves; (2) the scope and nature of business applications; and (3) the pertinent legal and regulatory structures with particular emphasis on securities regulation aspects. Elements used in grading: Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: ; Strnad, J. (PI)

LAW 1081: Regulation of Global Financial Markets

We will consider how US and international regulatory bodies respond to economic trends and shocks. How should we regulate international financial markets to respond to urgent and changing social needs? We start with an overview of the U.S. economic policy and regulatory framework and the components of the international framework for economic cooperation, including the G7 and G20, IMF and World Bank. We then consider how these laws and institutions should respond to pressing issues: (1) financial crises and the Covid-19 shock; (2) economic inequality and discrimination; (3) the ESG movement; (4) the proliferation of crypto assets; (5) terrorist financing an d money-laundering; and (6) international conflict and statecraft (as in the war in Ukraine or tension between US and China). Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation and a group in class presentation on a topic of the group¿s choice. Interested SLS students should complete and submit an S-Term Course Selection Form 2023 available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/s-term/) by April 25, 2023. Forms received after the deadline will be processed on a rolling basis until the class is full. Course open to GSB students with consent of the instructor. See Non-Law Student Registration at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/non-law-students/. S-Term early start for Autumn Quarter. Class meets 9:00AM-12:00PM on September 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, & 21.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 1082: The Business of Venture Capital

This course will cover the business of venture capital. We will begin the course with a broad discussion of why venture capital exists, how it works, the role of the LP, and how venture capital firms make investment decisions. Thereafter, we will address term sheets & valuation, managing the lifecycle of a company, and important topics in the governance of early-stage companies (e.g., the rights of common vs. preferred shareholders and ESG). Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, written assignments. Interested SLS students should complete and submit an S-Term Course Selection Form 2023 available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/s-term/) by April 25, 2023. Forms received after the deadline will be processed on a rolling basis until the class is full. Course open to GSB students with consent of the instructor. See Non-Law Student Registration available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/non-law-students/. S-Term early start for Autumn Quarter. Class meets September 11 (8:00AM-12:00PM), September 12 (9:00AM-12:00PM), September 18 (8:00AM-12:00PM), September 19 (9:00AM-1:00PM), & September 21 (8:00AM-11:00AM).
Terms: Aut | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Kupor, S. (PI)

LAW 1083: Startup Law: Sustainability

This course offers an opportunity to study the history, legal structure, and financial incentives of the startup economy while getting hands-on experience advising clients--Stanford founders building sustainability startups. The curriculum has three pillars: lectures and guest lectures outlining fundamental concepts and topics, a simulation in which all students will represent "Model Corporation" throughout its early life cycle, and advisory work on actual startup client matters. For the client work, students will perform client intake, draft an initial scope of work, complete due diligence and make supplemental due diligence requests, make any necessary adjustments to scope of work, and ultimately deliver work product in the format most appropriate & valuable for the particular matter (e.g., drafted documents, written memos, and oral presentations). Because of the nature of the client relationship the course relies on students' hard work, flexibility, and commitment to keeping pace with the material and assignments. The class will meet for 4 hours per week. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, and Client Deliverables. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 4

LAW 2002: Criminal Procedure: Investigation

The law school offers two survey courses dealing with constitutional criminal procedure. "Criminal Adjudication" covers the formal pretrial and trial processes, including the right of counsel, prosecutorial charging criteria, grand juries, bail, speedy trial, discovery, plea bargaining, trial by jury, and double jeopardy. This course, "Criminal Investigation," covers police investigation in the form of searches and seizures, interrogations, lineups, and undercover operations, and hence examines the Fourth and Fifth (and, to a limited extent, the Sixth) Amendment rules regulating the police in these endeavors. It also incorporates some of the federal laws governing electronic communications and privacy. Students may take both Criminal Investigation and Criminal Adjudication. (There is, of course, no requirement to do so.) Elements used in grading: Final exam (open book), plus small adjustments for exceptional class participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: ; Weisberg, R. (PI)

LAW 2008: Criminal Justice Reform & Litigation: Three Strikes Project

This seminar offers an opportunity to study mass incarceration and criminal law reform in real time while getting hands-on experience in active litigation on behalf of Three Strikes Project clients serving life sentences for nonviolent crimes. In this course, students read and analyze a variety of cases and articles, examining the evolution of incarceration and sentencing policies in California and across the country. Students also assist with live post-conviction litigation on behalf of clients in trial and appellate courts across the country. The class focuses largely on the Three Strikes law as a case study in the history, politics, constitutional doctrine, and reform of criminal law policy. The Project has been intimately involved in the criminal law reform movement, partnering with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Obama administration on different projects. Students enrolled in the seminar quickly become involved in all aspects of the Project's work, including assistance with different stages of ongoing litigation. Students will visit a Project client in prison, conduct factual investigations, and draft pleadings on our clients' behalf. The Project is an active, fast-paced organization that depends on the hard work and contributions of law students enrolled in this seminar. This seminar offers the opportunity to both study the theory behind the law and to hone practical litigation and advocacy skills. The seminar will meet for 3 hours per week, including 1 hour small group meetings with Project director Michael Romano. In addition, students will participate in field trips to various prisons in California. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Romano, M. (PI)

LAW 2403: Federal Courts

This course addresses the role of the federal courts in the American system of federalism and separation of powers, as well as their role in the development of substantive federal law and constitutional rights. These roles are defined by both constitutional and statutory directives and limitations. Many of them implicate central themes of judicial supremacy and judicial review. The subjects likely to be covered include congressional control of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States, lower federal courts, and state courts; the justiciability doctrines of standing, ripeness, and mootness; the nature of constitutional and statutory federal question jurisdiction; federal common law and implied causes of action; sovereign immunity; the abstention doctrines; and habeas corpus. The course is strongly recommended for students interested in pursuing a judicial clerkship and/or a career in litigation. Elements used in grading: Class attendance, class participation, one-day take home exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4
Instructors: ; Smith, F. (PI)

LAW 2404: Global Litigation

German owned VW admits that it included a "defeat device" in the software for its diesel cars so they could fraudulently pass US environmental tests, and is sued by thousands of US consumers in state and federal courts in the US. Very quickly, the cases are consolidated in the federal court in Northern California. Meanwhile, special purpose foundations are established in the Netherlands to seek a settlement with VW on behalf of European consumers under the Dutch collective settlement act, and a securities lawsuit on behalf of investors whose share values have dropped dramatically is filed in Germany, using that country's special group litigation procedure. The Dutch foundations may be coordinating their actions with US lawyers, the shareholders in Germany are represented by the local partners of a leading US-based litigation boutique, and the shareholder suit is funded by a UK-based international litigation financing firm. In 2019, a jury in E.D. Va. delivers a verdict holding a former Somali army commander now living in the U.S. liable under the Torture Victim Protection Act for compensatory and punitive damages to a Somali citizen he injured 30 years ago. The plaintiff is represented by the Center for Justice & Accountability in San Francisco and DLA Piper lawyers serving pro bono; the witnesses include public and private actors from different countries. In 2011, US-based Apple sues Korea-based Samsung for patent infringement in N.D. CA and Samsung counter-sues in Korea, Japan and Germany. A year later more than 50 lawsuits are ongoing in more than 10 countries. Two years later the companies agree to drop their litigation outside the US and focus their resources on their US litigation battle. Apple wins a big judgment in the federal court in San Jose but Samsung appeals all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. SCOTUS rejects the appeal and remands and in Spring 2018 the case is on the calendar for the third time in San Jose. Philip Morris' Hong Kong subsidiary files a claim in an international arbitration tribunal charging that Australia's public health protection statute regarding tobacco marketing violates Australia's bi-lateral investment treaty with Hong Kong. The arbitration claim is filed after the parent company unsuccessfully challenged Australia's statute before the High Court. In December 2015 the arbitration tribunal rules that it does not have jurisdiction over Philip Morris' claim effectively dismissing it. But controversy over Philip Morris' and other multi-national corporations' attempts to use investment arbitration to challenge diverse health, safety and environmental protection regulations derails international trade negotiations and leads to efforts to establish an international court for investment disputes. These high-profile cases illustrate an important aspect of complex litigation: across many different substantive domains, in court and ADR proceedings, disputes that used to be contained within national borders are now trans-national. This seminar will consider the doctrinal, procedural and practical challenges that arise when litigation goes global. We will consider the high profile cases in which these issues have played out in recent years and hear from some of the lawyers (in-person or via zoom) who are creating a new virtual international court system for the resolution of global disputes. The goal of the seminar is to develop an understanding of how the global dimension of high-stakes complex disputes shapes parties' and lawyers' strategies and judges' decisions. The seminar will meet 3 times a week. A small number of seminar sessions will be conducted via zoom in collaboration with law faculty and students in Canada, the Netherlands and Germany, three countries that have adopted procedures for dealing with large-scale civil litigation in distinctive fashions. Special Instructions: Students on the waitlist for the course will be admitted if spots are available on the basis of priority and degree program. Elements used in grading: Class participation and course paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4

LAW 2515: Environmental Justice

This course will introduce environmental justice as a social movement, including its central substantive concerns (the needs of humans in the built environment rather than the need to protect the environment from humans) and its methods (community-based political organizing rather than professionalized judicial or legislative action). The bulk of the course will then pursue a broader conception of environmental justice today by using social science research, theory, and case studies to investigate the civil rights and poverty aspects of environmental safety and natural resources. The course will include units on: (1) toxic exposure and public health disparities stemming from the disproportionate siting of locally-unwanted land uses in poor neighborhoods of color; (2) access to natural resources and basic public services, including clean water, wastewater disposal, and open space; (3) tools in environmental justice advocacy (including community-based lawyering, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, common law nuisance actions, and transactional lawyering); (4) environmental justice issues in Indian Country, and (5) environmental justice issues in climate change policy. Much of the course material, including student presentations, will be grounded in the experiences and advocacy histories of specific communities, both urban and rural, across the country. This class is limited to 25 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (20 students will be selected by lottery) and 5 non-law students by consent of instructor. Special Instructions: Students on the waitlist for the course will be admitted if spots are available on the basis of priority and degree program. Course requirements will include class participation, in-class presentation, and either response papers (section 01) or a long research paper for R credit (section 02). A maximum of 10 students will be permitted to write the long research paper with instructor consent. After the term begins, students enrolled in the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Class participation, in-class presentation; response papers or a final research paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Anderson, M. (PI)

LAW 2528: Transitioning to a Clean Energy Economy

Ambitious new federal and state laws and policies are incentivizing a rapid transition of the U.S. economy away from fossil fuels toward clean energy. This course, open to law school students and graduate students from other schools, will survey the legal and policy tools that are being deployed to accelerate a massive shift toward clean energy in all sectors of the economy, and the associated technological, financial, legal and equity challenges associated with building out the clean energy economy. We will review the key incentive- and regulatory-based mechanisms that are driving the transition in major sectors of the U.S. economy--including transportation, electricity, industry, and buildings. Special focus will be placed on siting, permitting, and financial challenges (and opportunities) for utility-scale and distributed clean energy sources; expansion of the transmission grid; and the potential scale-up of new technologies to speed the transition, including nuclear and hydrogen-based power. The course will include guest appearances by governmental officials and opinion leaders who are working to facilitate the build-out of clean energy infrastructure in the U.S. Grades will reflect class participation, two short reaction papers, and a final paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Hayes, D. (PI)

LAW 3505: Law and Culture in American Fiction

How do we identify an owner? What does a citizen look like? Whose privacy requires protection? The stories we tell about the experience of being Americans bolster and undermine particular legal arguments and conclusions. In the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth, novels were an important source of these narratives. And over the last century movies, television and other forms of visual storytelling have recycled these stock narratives countless times. In this interdisciplinary seminar, a novel or story is paired with a contemporary legal text (and often historical material for context) each week. These pairings track the maintenance of personal identity, community stability, and even linguistic meaning across shifting legal constructions of citizenship, race, gender, and class; changes in the law of property, contract, and privacy; and other legal and extralegal deployments of the (violent) authority of the state. The writers whose work we will consider include James Fenimore Cooper, Herman Melville, Henry James, William Faulkner, Nella Larsen, John Okada, Katherine Anne Porter and Sherman Alexie. (These authors are known for great writing and cultural influence, but also, in some cases, overt racism and personal misconduct.) Reading and writing with an increased awareness of the background narratives implicit in our legal arguments is among the goals of the course. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, and written assignments. Automatic grading penalty waived for writers. For Research "R" credit, students may petition to complete one long paper based on independent research with consent of the instructor.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Sassoubre, T. (PI)

LAW 4006: Intellectual Property and Antitrust Law

This is an advanced seminar focusing on antitrust law as it applies to the creation, licensing, and exercise of intellectual property rights. At least one IP or antitrust class is a prerequisite, and ideally both. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on class participation and short reflection papers (2 units) or a long research paper (3 units) with consent of the instructor. Research papers will be due before the Law School deadline. Draft papers will be due in time for student presentations. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section 01 into section 02 (research paper) which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Research paper option is limited to 10 students.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3
Instructors: ; Lemley, M. (PI)

LAW 4007: Intellectual Property: Copyright

Copyright law is the engine that drives not only such traditional entertainment and information industries as music, book publishing, news and motion pictures, but also software, video games and other digital products. This course examines in depth all aspects of copyright law and practice, as well as the business and policy challenges and opportunities that the internet and other new technologies such as artificial intelligence present for the exploitation of copyrighted works. There are no prerequisites for this class. Elements used in grading: Final Exam (open book). A detailed description of how the class will be conducted, including reading assignments and modes of student participation, appears in the course syllabus on Canvas.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Goldstein, P. (PI)

LAW 4011: Intellectual Property: The Business & Law of Technology & Patent Licensing

If you practice in any technology-related area (whether transactions, corporate, IP management or litigation), you will encounter licensing, as it is the principal means by which technology and patent rights are disseminated, exploited and commercialized. It is fundamental to Silicon Valley and beyond, including in software, mobile, consumer devices, autonomous cars, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals. This is a practice-oriented course covering the fundamentals of licensing technology and patents, including business considerations, drafting, negotiations and strategic considerations. We will also consider the role of licensing in mergers and acquisitions, litigation and antitrust contexts. The course is structured based on a real-world hypothetical involving entrepreneurs who spin out university-developed inventions into startup companies and then seek to commercialize the technology and patents to leading companies in a specified technology industry (such as smartphones, autonomous cars, "internet of things" or the like). We will also have a guest lecturer from a major technology company with significant licensing dimensions (which in the past have included Google, Facebook, Waymo, and Qualcomm). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Final Exam. Course Prerequisite: Intro to IP (Law 4005) or equivalent, or consent of instructor.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3

LAW 4012: Intellectual Property: Trademarks

This course will consider the protection and enforcement of trademarks and related state rights in brands and names, including the right of publicity. There is no prerequisite, though some students will have taken Introduction to Intellectual Property. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Exam (Open-book one-day take-home).
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Lemley, M. (PI)

LAW 5007: International Business Negotiation

This course is structured around a quarter-long, simulated negotiation exercise which provides an in-depth study of the structuring and negotiating of an international business transaction. This class will be taught in counterpart with a class at Berkeley Law School. Students in this class will represent a U.S. pharmaceutical company, and the students in the class at Berkeley will represent an African agricultural production company. The two companies are interested in working together to exploit a new technology developed by the pharmaceutical company that uses the cassava produced by the African agricultural production company. The form of their collaboration could be a joint venture, a licensing agreement or a long term supply contract. The negotiations between the two classes will take place through written exchanges and through real-time negotiation which will be conducted both in-person and via videoconferences. The purpose of the course is to provide students with an opportunity (i) to experience the sequential development of a business transaction over an extended negotiation, (ii) to study the business and legal issues and strategies that impact the negotiation, (iii) to gain insight into the dynamics of negotiating and structuring international business transactions, (iv) to learn about the role that lawyers and law play in these negotiations, (v) to give students experience in drafting communications, and (vi) to provide negotiating experience in a context that replicates actual legal practice with an unfamiliar opposing party (here, the students at Berkeley). Students will also learn about the legal and business issues that may arise in joint ventures, supply agreements and licensing agreements. The thrust of this course is class participation and active involvement in the negotiations process. Students are expected to spend time outside of class, working in teams, to prepare the written exchanges, to prepare for the live negotiations (as well as online negotiations in a world where these will be increasingly the norm), and to prepare for class discussions. Class discussions will focus on the strategy for, and progress of, the negotiations; collective evaluation of the class's preparation for, and performance in, the negotiations; and the substantive legal, business and policy matters that impact on the negotiations. In addition to the regular Monday class, the class will meet on Saturday September 30 from 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM at Stanford Law School (necessitated by the late start for the Stanford quarter this year and the need to sync with the Berkeley class). In addition, classes will meet for the live negotiations on four Saturday mornings at 10:30 AM (10/14, 10/21, 10/28 and 11/4) in the San Francisco office of DLA Piper (555 Mission Street; close to Montgomery St. BART station), and one Thursday evening (via Zoom) at 7:00 PM-10:00 PM (10/26). The four Saturday classes will end at 1:30 PM, except for 11/4 which will end at 2:30 PM. Due to the Thursday and Saturday classes, this class will conclude on November 6. Admission to this class is by consent of instructor. The maximum class size is 21, which will include students from GSB or other departments. Attention Waitlist Students: Students on the waitlist for the course will be admitted if spots are available on the basis of their position on the waitlist and degree of study; all waitlist students are encouraged to attend the first class and will be notified as spaces become available. Attention Non-Law Students: You must complete and submit both a consent form and a Non-Law Student Course Add Request Form to the Law School Registrar's Office (Room 100). See Stanford Non-Law Student Course Registration on the SLS Registrar's Office website. Prerequisites: A course in basic negotiations (e.g., Law 7821) or comparable prior experience is recommended. Elements used in grading: Class participation, written assignments and final paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Finkelstein, J. (PI)

LAW 5011: International Investment Law

The past few decades have seen a dramatic increase in the number of bilateral investment treaties and other treaties with investment-related provisions, followed by a sharp rise in the number of disputes between private investors and sovereign states pursuant to investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions. It has also seen a rise in the review of inbound investment at the national level,as illustrated by the increasing scrutiny of foreign investment in the United States by CFIUS. This seminar will cover four broad areas: (I) the historical and policy origins of international investment agreements; (II) the substantive obligations and standards governing the investor-state relationship; (III) the investor-state arbitration process; and (IV) current controversies over the legitimacy and desirability of ISDS; and (V) an introduction to the role of CFIUS in the United States. . Students will make presentations relating to the readings, and write two reflection papers during the course of the quarter. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance and reflection papers.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3
Instructors: ; Sykes, A. (PI)

LAW 5044: Third World Approaches to International Law, Borders, and Migration

The mass movement of people across international borders is widely framed as among the most pressing challenges of the 21st Century. Globally, debates regarding immigration law and policy remain controversial political flashpoints. The purpose of this seminar is a critical examination of the international legal theory, doctrine, and practice of borders and migration, which are essential for making sense of national immigration regimes, and the contentious debates around them. An emerging body of critical scholarship is challenging the fundamental assumptions that underlie the law and political theory of borders and international migration, and that does so by foregrounding the ways in which colonial, neocolonial and other forms of empire have shaped contemporary borders. This seminar will introduce students to this emerging body of scholarship and to the applicable international law. We will consider borders as sites of racial, political, and other forms of injustice. We will also consider some of the legal arguments that have been made for decolonial, reparatory, abolitionist, and other approaches to reimagining borders. The seminar will introduce students to Third World Approaches to International Law--an approach to the study of international law that centers the mutually-constitutive relationship between European colonialism and foundational international legal doctrine. TWAIL examines international law as a (contested) historical and contemporary system of Third World subordination, and explores the possibilities of more just international legal futures. The seminar will also include Critical Race Theory analysis of borders and international migration. Public international law is not a prerequisite course for this seminar. However, students who have not taken public international law will be encouraged to do some additional assigned background reading in order fully engage with the seminar's central themes. The course will be evaluated based on attendance, class participation, reading responses and a presentation. A limited number of students will have the option of writing a long research paper in lieu of the reading responses requirement. After the term begins, a limited number of students enrolled in the course can transfer from section 01 (two units) into section 02 (three units), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3
Instructors: ; Achiume, E. (PI)

LAW 5046: Ukraine: Legal Reform and Governance in Wartime and Reconstruction

This course will consider Ukraine's Herculean political-economic and legal/regulatory challenges managing social and economic cohesion during wartime while simultaneously preparing for a healthy and durable post-war reconstruction. If you asked Ukrainians what is most important in this time of war, they may say that we need military assistance to win the war, we need to keep the economy afloat, and we need to make progress on EU accession in order to secure the future of the country. With those demands in mind --setting aside the military component, in the first week at Stanford we will start by considering Ukraine's unique history and political economy -- and how that political economy has changed during the war -- drawing in potential guest lecturers from Stanford and Ukraine. Too often reform proposals do not take into account the history and political economy of the countries in which those reforms are proposed. This course will endeavor to not repeat that mistake. The course will then focus on support for key policies, institutions (such as the judiciary and anti-corruption bodies) and infrastructure (such as electricity, gas, rail, and communications infrastructure) that will drive Ukraine into its post-war reconstruction. Finally, the course will consider the essential legal, regulatory and governance pathways Ukraine will need to follow -- from legal aspects of war damages for reconstruction, to anticorruption, to procurement and competition law, to judicial reform, to the EU accession process -- essential for a prosperous and safe post-war Ukraine in the heart of Europe. This part of the course will be supplemented with guest lecturers with direct experience in these areas, including, for example, Ukrainian government officials, private sector and civil society actors. The first week of this course will be at Stanford and the second week will be in Warsaw. Elements used in grading: TBA.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 5106: International Peace Negotiations

This intensive course taught by senior peace mediator Ameya Kilara will give students a unique window into the world of high-stakes international peace negotiations. It will help students look beyond the headlines on conflicts like Ukraine,Afghanistan and Kashmir and analyze them from a negotiation perspective. The course aims to provide students with a map of the terrain of international conflict resolution, build drafting and negotiation skills, and allow them to experience practice problem solving amidst the real-world challenges of this field. Week 1 of the course will equip students with core negotiation skills, frameworks, and tools used by negotiators and mediators, and challenge students to engage with the messy interplay between law and politics in complex conflict situations.In addition to developing students' technical skills and knowledge of peace processes, the course will encourage reflection on how identity plays out in peace processes. In particular, it will critically examine the subjective positions of those intervening in conflict situations from the perspective of race, gender and Global North/South dynamics, with a view to cultivating interventions that center the voices and needs of those directly impacted by conflicts. Week 2 of the course will be a deep dive into the Kashmir conflict, one of the world's oldest and most difficult negotiations involving three nuclear states: India, Pakistan and China. This will be an opportunity for students to apply concepts introduced in the first week, put themselves in the shoes of conflict parties and mediators, and practice problem- solving in the midst of uncertainty and complexity. Through a series of in-class exercises, students will draft and present a range of materials relevant to peace negotiations, including stakeholder maps, advisory briefs, policy memos and note verbales. As students engage in this problem-solving process, they will have the rare opportunity of engaging with and seeking guidance from guest lecturers who are leading experts, including top negotiators, former spy chiefs, and grassroots peace activists. Teaching methodology: This course will be highly participatory and designed to provide space for individual, peer to peer, and collective learning. The course will require students to proactively engage in the classroom as well as develop working relationships with each other through assignments and group exercises outside of the classroom. Students will be assigned to small cohorts that will work together throughout the course, which will be a chance for them to develop relationships with their peers. The course will be structured around a combination of lectures, discussions, case studies, group work, and simulations. Students will be expected to keep a close eye on news related to the themes of the class for the duration of the course and each class will begin with asking students to connect a current issue/topic with concepts from the course. During the course, students will practice drafting and presenting conflict analysis and stakeholder maps, note verbales, policy memos and advisory briefs: under time pressure and with imperfect information that will simulate to some degree the practical challenges of peace negotiations. Who is this course for? This course is an introductory course on international conflict resolution and does not require any prior experience or qualifications. Anyone with an interest in peace and conflict would be welcome to participate. The course is particularly relevant to students preparing for careers in foreign policy, international development, conflict resolution, mediation,human rights and transitional justice. The course would also be useful to lawyers who want to hone their negotiation skills and ability to work in complex international environments. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation, written assignments and presentations. Interested SLS students should complete and submit an S-Term Course Selection Form 2023 available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/s-term/) by April 25, 2023. Forms received after the deadline will be processed on a rolling basis until the class is full. S-Term early start for Autumn Quarter. Class meets 1:30PM to 4:30PM on September 11, 12, 14, 18, 19, 21. Guest lectures on September 15 (9:00AM-11:00AM), September 19 (9:00AM-10:30AM), & September 20 (8:30AM-9:45AM).
Terms: Aut | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Kilara, A. (PI)

LAW 5201: Foreign Legal Study: Bucerius Law School

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5204: Foreign Legal Study: Hebrew University of Jerusalem

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5207: Foreign Legal Study: Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5210: Foreign Legal Study: National University of Singapore

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5213: Foreign Legal Study: Peking University Law School

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5216: Foreign Legal Study: Waseda University

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5219: Foreign Legal Study: University of Vienna

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5222: Foreign Legal Study: Esade Law School

This course is for J.D. students who have been approved by the Law School to study at one of the following schools: Bucerius Law School (BLS) -- Hamburg, Germany, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU) -- Jerusalem, Israel, Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) -- Paris, France, National University of Singapore (NUS) -- Singapore, Peking University Law School (PKU) -- Beijing, China, University of Vienna -- Vienna, Austria, and Waseda University Law School (WLS) -- Tokyo, Japan -- Esade Law School -- Barcelona, Spain. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for study abroad opportunities each academic year and for application deadlines. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.
Terms: Aut | Units: 9-14
Instructors: ; Weiner, A. (PI)

LAW 5801: Legal Studies Workshop

The Legal Studies Workshop is designed to support students working on a piece of legal scholarship with an eye to publication. The workshop will meet four times a quarter, and will be offered in most quarters. Students may sign up for as many quarters they wish, and will receive one credit for each quarter they are enrolled. The bulk of time each session will be devoted to presentations of one or two student works-in-progress. Every student is expected to present her/his own work at least once over the quarters she/he is enrolled in the Workshop, and to provide constructive oral feedback on others' work. We will set aside some time during the quarter for informal discussion of research ideas that are in a very early stage. We welcome students who are just starting to explore their interest in an academic career; if you have any questions about whether the course is suitable for you, please contact Prof. Bernadette Meyler (bmeyler@law.stanford.edu) and Prof. David Sklansky (sklansky@stanford.edu). Attendance is mandatory, absent extenuating circumstances. There are no written requirements for the course, and no requirement that the work presented be original to the Workshop. Students may wish to use the Workshop as an opportunity to expand on seminar papers or pursue independent research projects for which they are getting separate credit through one of the research tracks (e.g., directed research, dissertation). Whether students are working on a new project or revising an old, the expectation is that students will develop their topics independently of the course. Students who would like to participate in the Workshop but feel they need help in developing a workable research topic should consult faculty members ahead of time. Elements used in grading: Class participation and attendance. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1 | Repeatable 6 times (up to 6 units total)

LAW 6001: Legal Ethics

This course will offer a broad overview of the ethical issues attorneys face throughout their legal careers. We will explore not just the rules that govern the practice of law, but the real-world scenarios that arise in modern law practice. Our objective is to prepare students for the thorny (and at times career-jeopardizing) situations they will invariably encounter upon entering the profession--whether in law firms, government, or public interest organizations. Students will review the ABA's Model Rules of Professional Conduct as well as ethics opinions, court cases, and media reports on a wide range of ethical issues. The course will also examine matters of professionalism and equity in the interests of shaping a more collegial, mutually respectful bar. Students are expected to participate in lively dialogue, and grades will be based on a final exam as well as classroom participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Fagel, M. (PI)

LAW 7001: Administrative Law

Federal agencies make an astounding number of policy decisions, engaging in more "lawmaking" and "adjudication" than Congress and the federal courts, respectively. These policy decisions range from the seemingly trivial, such as how many cherries are needed for frozen cherry pie, to matters of life-and-death importance, such as how to limit emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and mercury. These agencies also range in age, organization, and duties. There is the postal service, which was created by the Continental Congress, and changed about five decades ago from a cabinet-level department to a government corporation, with current calls to privatize it. On the newer side, there is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was established in 2011 to protect consumers in the financial arena; its leadership and funding elements produced constitutional challenges that recently resulted in the Supreme Court invalidating its leadership structure (and agreeing to hear a challenge on its funding this coming year). In this quarter of Administrative Law, we will consider the creation and control of the modern administrative state. Topics will include the structure of administrative agencies and their place in a governing scheme of separated but overlapping powers; delegation of authority to agencies; types and requirements of agency decisionmaking; availability and scope of judicial review of agency action (and inaction); and other forms of agency oversight. We will apply concepts through many recent examples. A variety of policy areas will be considered, including (among others) the COVID-19 pandemic, national security, financial regulation, health care, the environment, food and drugs, and telecommunications. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Exam. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline. This course will be capped at 60 students, randomly selected. The waitlist will give priority to third year students who cannot take the class in the winter quarter and second year students taking a winter quarter clinic that uses Administrative Law.
Terms: Aut | Units: 4

LAW 7004: Direct Democracy

In recent years, the use of ballot measures has sharply risen, and initiatives and referenda have featured prominently in contested debates over immigration, affirmative action, abortion, same sex marriage and term limits. In the wake of the Dobbs decision on abortion, controversies about ballot measures have become especially salient in many states. This seminar will focus on direct democracy as a method of lawmaking. Our principal focus will be on initiatives and referenda, but we will allocate some time to the recall, as well. We will consider the history, practice, theoretical justifications, and constitutional dimensions of direct democracy, as well as how direct democracy interacts with representative democracy. We will also explore many legal questions that have arisen as ballot measures have been used as instruments of governance and policy. Topics will include whether direct democracy comports with the federal constitution; judicial review and interpretation of ballot measures; minority rights under direct democracy; election rules relating to signature gathering, qualifying ballot measures and campaign finance; attempts to make it more difficult for voters to qualify and pass ballot measures; and the role of interest groups. Each student will briefly present on one particular ballot measure that is linked to that week's topics. Students will write either multiple response papers or a final research paper (for R credit) on a topic to be worked out with the instructor. Special Instructions: After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Students taking the seminar for R credit can take the seminar for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the paper length. Elements used in grading: Class participation, assignments, multiple response papers or a final paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3
Instructors: ; Schacter, J. (PI)

LAW 7007: Constitutional Law: Religion and the First Amendment

This course covers the major doctrines and decisions interpreting the provisions of the First Amendment affecting religion, especially the free exercise and establishment clauses. The principal focus is on modern Supreme Court cases and doctrine, but the course also emphasized the historical, philosophical, and theological roots of first amendment principles. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; McConnell, M. (PI)

LAW 7010: Constitutional Law: The Fourteenth Amendment

The Fourteenth Amendment is the source of many of the rights that have been cherished by many people throughout our nation. Rights pertaining to sex and reproduction, marriage, parenthood, abortion, birth control, educational opportunity, sex discrimination, race discrimination and many more all are rooted in the 14th Amendment. In recent years, the Supreme Court has reshaped significant aspects of 14th Amendment doctrine, and accorded ever more importance to historical understandings in interpreting and applying the Constitution to contemporary society. Recent decisions have prompted considerable controversy and highlight enduring questions about the relation (or distinction) between law and politics in constitutional interpretation. This course will examine the development of 14th Amendment doctrine, with special attention paid to equal protection and substantive due process. We will examine many contested constitutional questions, including same sex marriage and gender identity, race-based affirmative action in school admissions, and abortion and birth control, among many other topics. These constitutional controversies, in turn, raise broad questions about the meaning of citizenship, freedom, and equality, the very concerns that prompted the adoption of the 14th Amendment. Readings will include judicial opinions and some scholarly commentary. In this polarized time, it is important to note that the professor will not privilege any particular view of how the relevant controversies should be resolved. Indeed, our focus will be more on the processes and principles of constitutional decision-making than the outcomes reached by the Court. Students should be prepared to articulate and engage empathetically with arguments and perspectives that are different from their own. Class discussion will be supplemented with group exercises of various sorts. Elements used in grading: Class participation and written exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Banks, R. (PI)

LAW 7011: Civil Rights Litigation

This course addresses the enforcement of constitutional and statutory rights in court. It focuses on civil litigation brought by non-governmental parties, such as individuals or public interest organizations. Major topics include causes of action for constitutional violations (42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens), defenses and limitations to liability for constitutional violations (including qualified immunity and municipal liability), the enforcement of statutory rights, and remedies for violations. While teaching legal doctrine, the course also considers practical and strategic questions in civil rights suits as well as theoretical and historical debates concerning the value and role of such litigation. We address substantive topics including police uses of force and various constitutional rights, but the focus is on the law related to bringing and defending against such lawsuits, rather than substantive law. This course complements other offerings such as Constitutional Law, Federal Courts, Advanced Civil Procedure, and Social Justice Impact Litigation. (It overlaps heavily with Professor Karlan's Constitutional Litigation course, so you can't take both). Elements used in grading: Participation, Attendance, Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Sinnar, S. (PI)

LAW 7045: The Role of the Article III Judge

The contemporary debate over the proper role of a federal judge under the Constitution turns, in large measure, on what it is we think an Article III judge is doing when she is called upon to resolve a "case or controversy." Is she looking for the fair result? If so, by whose lights? Is she a political actor, or is she instead looking for a rule of decision that has been previously established by law (a "mere translator" of the law, in Justice Frankfurter's words). If so, by natural law or positive law? These are some of the questions we will consider in discussing what role a federal judge plays when she exercises "the judicial Power of the United States" conferred by Article III of the Constitution. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, and final paper. Interested SLS students should complete and submit an S-Term Course Selection Form 2023 available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/s-term/) by April 25, 2023. Forms received after the deadline will be processed on a rolling basis until the class is full. S-Term early start for Autumn Quarter. Class meets 1:30PM-4:30PM on September 11 and 1:30PM-4:00PM on September 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, & 19.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 7051: Local Government Law

This course will examine the source, scope and limits of local government power. It will consider the relationship of local governments to state and federal government and of the relationship of local governments to the individuals and communities within and around them. Specific themes will include the potential of local governments to be responsive democratic communities, the potential of local governments to become isolated or exclusive enclaves, and the effect of local governments on the metropolitan political economy. The course will examine state and federal doctrine that affects local government, political/ social theory and urban planning/ development literature. Students may write papers in lieu of the final exam. Upon instructor consent, students interested in writing should enroll in Law 427-0-02. Students who do not receive a spot in section 02 may enroll in section 01. Elements used in grading: Exam or paper and class participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Ford, R. (PI)

LAW 7063: Youth Law and Policy

This course examines current issues in youth law and policy with a focus on the potential and collateral effects of law on certain subpopulations of vulnerable youth. Substantively, the course focuses on case law and statutes in delinquency, dependency, education, public benefits, and health access with an attention to cross-section themes of poverty, economic justice, race, and youth voice. By the end of the course, students will have developed a better understanding of how litigation, legislation, and policy in youth law come about through examining recent developments in the field and the tools advocates have used to enact change. Any student may write a paper in lieu of the final exam with consent of instructor. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from the exam section (01) into paper section (02), with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments; Exam or Final Paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 7089: Originalism and the American Constitution: History and Interpretation

Except for the Bible no text has been the subject of as much modern interpretive scrutiny as the United States Constitution. This course explores both the historical dimensions of its creation as well as the meaning such knowledge should bring to bear on its subsequent interpretation. In light of the modern obsession with the document's "original meaning," this course will explore the intersections of history, law, and textual meaning to probe what an "original" interpretation of the Constitution looks like. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Response Papers, Research Paper. Cross-listed with History (HISTORY 252/352). Enrollment is on a first-come, first-served basis (limited to five SLS students). If you are unable to enroll in the class in Axess, please contact the instructor for availability.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Gienapp, J. (PI)

LAW 7108: State Constitutional Law

Most consideration of constitutional law in law school focuses exclusively on the federal constitution. Traditionally, state constitutional law has been a neglected body of law. That may begin to change, as the U.S. Supreme Court makes significant changes to federal constitutional law. We will consider both big-picture questions and many specific areas of law. For example, we will explore a central normative debate about whether state courts interpreting their own state's constitution should follow the approaches to cognate provisions in the federal constitution embraced by the Supreme Court. We will also consider questions about the role of elected judges in constitutional interpretation, and about the processes through which state constitutions are amended. Specific issues we will study include educational equality and school funding; marriage; reproductive rights; race and gender discrimination; criminal justice; election law; and affirmative rights under state constitutions, among others. We will also look at the role of state attorneys general and prosecutors in law reform efforts. I expect to have one or more guest speakers. Special Instructions: After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. The grade will be based on a final exam or research paper, and can be adjusted for participation.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Schacter, J. (PI)

LAW 7115: Thinking in Systems

Virtually every public policy has causes and consequences beyond those that are intended or immediately visible. This is true of criminal law policies that use algorithmic predictions of flight before trial; environmental policies involving greenhouse gas emissions and conventional pollutants; and social and health policies that address homelessness, institutional racism, and the distribution of Covid vaccines, to name just a few examples. The causes of the problems that these policies seek to address are complex. As a result, these policies often fail and sometimes have unintended adverse consequences. "Systems thinking" is a framework that describes the web of associations in which such policies reside, with the goals of understanding the multiple causes of problems and designing policies that lead to stable, positive changes. Thinking in systems and learning to map systems, are core skills for policy makers. After several introductory classes devoted to learning these concepts and learning how to use the web-based systems mapping tool, Kumu, students will work on systems design projects of their choice. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Projects, Final Paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Brest, P. (PI)

LAW 7120: Immigration, Citizenship, and Rights

This course will delve into some of the U.S. laws and policies governing immigration and citizenship. It is designed for students who have taken the basic immigration course or have equivalent academic or work exposure to immigration law. The class will focus on four major topic area: 1) immigration policing (including the bureaucratic bonds between the criminal and immigration law enforcement systems, the evolving nature of border enforcement and asylum processes, state and local efforts to criminalize migration, and the role of race in immigration policing); 2) the immigration consequences of criminal legal system contact (including the effect of citizenship status on criminal legal processes and outcomes, and the immigration consequences of criminal convictions); 3) citizenship and political participation (including limits on noncitizen access to education and voting); and 4) citizenship exclusions and loss (including historic and ongoing exclusions from citizenship, and denaturalization). Course coverage may change depending on unfolding events and student interest. Elements used in grading: Class participation and attendance; writing assignments; and an in-class final examination.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Chacon, J. (PI)

LAW 7123: Public Law Workshop

This seminar will examine current research by legal and other scholars on a variety of topics in public law. Topics may include administrative law and the federal bureaucracy, constitutional history and theory, constitutional law, criminal law, national security, and procedural law. Each session of the seminar will consist of an invited speaker, usually from another university, who will discuss an ongoing project. Students will be required to submit proposed questions in advance of each session and write three short essays reflecting on guest speakers' papers. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 7125: The Changing Media Landscape, Free Speech and the Law

Thomas Jefferson, much as he hated the press when he was President, believed firmly in the value of a free press. He most famously said: "The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." The business of media has radically changed and over the past 20 years with the introduction of the internet and the inevitable fragmentation that followed, together with the introduction of social media. Many traditional sources of news are struggling to stay viable and cutting staff, while new sources of news, including anyone with a twitter or Tik Tok account, proliferate -- with much consumer confusion about what sources are credible. In this course we will cover a range of topics: from Johnny Depp's defamation case against Amber Heard; to Elon Musk and the tweets that prompted the SEC to file suit; to the Pentagon papers and The Washington Post and more. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation and a group in class presentation on a topic of the groups choice. Interested SLS students should complete and submit an S-Term Course Selection Form 2023 available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/s-term/) by April 25, 2023. Forms received after the deadline will be processed on a rolling basis until the class is full. S-Term early start for Autumn Quarter. Class meets 10:00AM-12:00PM on September 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19, 20, & 21. Class dinner, 6:00PM-8:00PM on Thursday, September 14.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Weymouth, K. (PI)

LAW 7127: Advanced Topics in Federal Courts

We will take a "deep dive" into some of the most interesting and contentious issues in the "federal courts" space. Illustrative topics might include any or all of the following: (1) Jurisdiction-stripping (Can Congress eliminate the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to hear certain types of cases, and if so, under what circumstances?); (2) Standing doctrine (Is the "injury-in-fact" requirement made up, and might there be a better way to think about the case-or-controversy requirement?); (3) Habeas corpus (What role should innocence play?); (4) Eleventh Amendment (What should we do when constitutional text and history seem to point in different directions?); and (5) Qualified immunity (Where did it come from, what are the relevant policy justifications and critiques, and can current doctrine be squared with 42 U.S.C. 1983's plain language?). Readings will include judicial opinions and journal articles. We will aim to tackle one topic per session. Judge Newsom will introduce the topic and lead the discussion, and he will encourage vigorous classroom discussion. Grading: Students will write a short "thought piece" (NOT a research paper), due by the end of the fall quarter (NOT at the end of the two-week class period). Students are encouraged--but by no means required--to consider turning their thought pieces into more substantial written works for publication. Class will meet Tuesday, September 26 (6:30 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.), Wednesday, September 27 (6:30 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.), Thursday, September 28 6:30 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.), Monday, October 2 (6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.), Tuesday, October 3 (6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.), Wednesday, October 4 (6:30 p.m. - 9:30 p.m.), and Thursday, October 5 (6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.).
Terms: Aut | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Newsom, K. (PI)

LAW 7128: Confronting Our Housing and Homelessness Crises: Policy, Politics, and the Law

In virtually every major U.S. city, the lack of affordable housing or homelessness (or both) constitutes the most urgent concern to residents. Amid ample hang-wringing by politicians, pundits, and the press, the human toll of the housing affordability crises has only worsened. This class will focus on solutions to this crisis. Solutions abound, but implementing them at scale requires understanding--and navigating--the legal, economic, and political constraints faced by decision makers. It's in large cities where we see the problem most acutely, but where we also see America's most innovative solutions. So, this class--taught by the former mayor of one of America's dozen largest cities-- will have a decidedly urban focus. While the local entitlement and development process will provide a starting point, the class will also delve into key elements of state and federal policy and law that shape the local responses to these crises. An eclectic set of sources --studies, court opinions, consultant reports, economic meta-analyses, news accounts and an occasional guest lecturer-- will support class discussion. The class will be taught with a bias against the ideological, eschewing progressive or conservative "quick fixes," and emphasizing problem-solving, pragmatism, an openness to opposing viewpoints, and a willingness to acknowledge the trade-offs in every approach. Students will be expected to persuasively advocate for specific solutions--in class discussion and in writing-- and to demonstrate an understanding of the limitations of those solutions. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments. This class is limited to 35 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (25 students by lottery) and up to 10 non-law students with consent of the instructor. Law students may bid for LAW 7128 via the Law Lottery in Axess. Non-law students may enroll in PUBLPOL 171 up to a maximum of 10 with consent of the instructor. Cross-listed with Public Policy (PUBLPOL 171) and Urban Studies (URBANST 175). NOTE: Due to similar content, students enrolled in How Cities Can Save the World ( LAW 7119/PUBLPOL 165/URBANST 166), may not enroll in Confronting Our Housing and Homelessness Crises: Policy, Politics, and the Law (LAW 7128/URBANST 166/URBANST 175).
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Liccardo, S. (PI)

LAW 7510: Empirical Legal Studies: Research Design

Empirical legal studies have become trendy in the U.S. and are now spreading to law faculties in other countries as well. The popular image of an empirical study is that it involves sophisticated statistical analysis of quantitative data. Often the author of the study starts with a handy dataset and then tries to figure out what question he or she can answer using those data. Useful empirical studies of law and other topics don't start this way. Instead the researcher has a question, derived from theoretical literature or policy debate (or both) and faces the challenge of deciding what types of empirical data, collected and analyzed in what fashion, will best answer that question. The possibilities range from "big data" analyses of hundreds or thousands of documents, tweets or something similar to lengthy, intensive interviews with a few well-placed officials or informants, with just about any other way one might collect factual data -- e.g. online surveys, courtroom observations -- in between. What all of these approaches have in common is not that they involve numeric data but that they attempt to arrive at as objective a view of social, economic, or political reality as is possible. Learning how to design and conduct a survey or how to estimate a regression model or apply AI to vast numbers of texts is (relatively speaking) easy. There are lots of courses at Stanford that you can take on these methods. Learning what approaches are most appropriate to answer the research questions you are interested in is much harder. This seminar is directed at helping you think through the design of an empirical research project -- whether quantitative, qualitative or both -- from identifying researchable questions to collecting and analyzing data to presenting your results to academic or policy audiences. You will start with a broad question (or several questions) of interest to you, based on your previous experience, other studies or reading. By the end of the seminar you will have identified questions you can investigate empirically (perhaps in addition to theoretically) and figured out what research approach(es) will work best for you. The product of the seminar will be a preliminary research proposal, whether for your master's thesis this year or some other purpose in the future. Although plans for the fall quarter are still somewhat in flux, I expect to teach this seminar online with the assistance of the SPILS teaching fellow. I hope it will be possible to meet in person at the beginning of the quarter for a few introductory sessions to begin to get to know each other. In any event, I will be available throughout the quarter for one-on-one zoom sessions to discuss your research. Special Instructions: JD students can take the class with consent of the instructor. After the term begins, JD students accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which can potentially satisfy the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Consent Application for JD students: To apply for this course, JD students must e-mail the instructors for permission to enroll. This course is REQUIRED for all SPILS fellows and BY CONSENT for all other students. Interested students should email the instructor for consent to enroll. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and final paper.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3-4

LAW 7802: Accounting

This course covers basic accounting principles. Please note that this class differs from a typical introductory accounting class as it is more law-based. Class time will be allocated to a combination of short lectures, group work, and discussions of the assigned readings. Evaluation will be based on problem sets assigned throughout the quarter. This class is suitable for students who plan to work in transactional law or in litigation. Elements used in grading: Written Assignments.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Honigsberg, C. (PI)

LAW 7806: Redesigning Dispute Systems

Lawyers are often called upon to apply their creative skills to help design systems (comprised of one or more processes) for preventing, managing, and resolving conflicts. Examples span many domains: 1. what combination of international and domestic processes would facilitate cross-border e-commerce and protect consumers? Who should decide--consumer protection agencies? Merchants? Consumers? 2. a corporate general counsel and the director of human resources are tasked by senior management with proposing ways to decrease the number of employee disputes and reduce turnover; 3. in the era of the COVID pandemic, courts have been called upon to continue service to the public using online resources, yet maintain due process and just outcomes; 4. San Francisco Human Rights Commission has formed an African American Reparations Advisory Committee to make recommendations to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. In each example, a lawyer, businessperson, nonprofit manager, or public official (working alone or with others) must address not just a single dispute but a stream of disputes over time. Lawyers often lead the design, redesign and implementation of these conflict resolution systems. Increasingly these systems utilize technology to improve efficiency, accessibility, and transparency for disputants. In this class we will apply an analytic framework (including stakeholder assessment and conflict resolution process options) to a series of case studies and use simulations to understand different kinds of dispute systems. We will also examine the growing use of online dispute resolution (ODR), the new challenges it poses to neutrals and system designers, and evolving best practices for the use of technology in dispute system design. Special Instructions: Grades will be based on class participation and Option 1 (section 01) a series of weekly short written assignments plus a 10-page case study; or Option 2 (section 02) weekly short written assignments plus a 26-page research paper involving independent research. Students electing option 2 (section 02) will be graded on the H/P/R/F system and will receive Research (R) credit. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Negotiation Seminar (LAW 7821) is preferred but not required. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments, and final paper. Attendance at the first class is mandatory.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Martinez, J. (PI)

LAW 7807: Facilitation for Attorneys

Most lawyers and other professionals spend a significant amount of time in meetings and working in teams or groups for a variety of purposes, and many report that this can be a frustrating experience. As the practice of law becomes more complex, it includes more and more situations where groups of people need to work together planning complex legal strategies, developing firm policies, working with corporations or other multi-person clients, or participating in shareholder meetings, public commissions and councils, corporate and non-profit board of directors meetings. Group functionality and outcomes can be significantly improved by any group member who has the awareness and skills of a facilitator, whether or not that person is formally designated as the facilitator. The interactive class methodology will combine discussion with many exercises and roleplays, putting facilitation tools into practice every step of the way. We will examine group dynamics and learn skills used by professional facilitators to prevent common problems and elicit the best work of a group. We will explore how to prepare effectively with clear goals, collaborative problem definition, inclusive process design and a well-structured agenda. We will also discuss and practice core meeting management skills such as how to balance voice and participation, build consensus, inspire creativity and promote principled evaluation and decision-making. Finally, we will identify and apply communication skills that keep group sessions productive, and tools to manage difficult moments and problem behaviors. Class Schedule dates: In Autumn, this class will meet Friday, Oct 27: 4-9pm, Sunday, Oct 29: 9a-6p, and Saturday, Nov 4: 9a-5p. In Spring, this class will meet Friday, April 5 from 4-9 pm, Sunday, April 7 from 9 am-5 pm, and Sunday April 14 from 9 am-5 pm Elements used in grading: Class attendance, participation and final paper.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2
Instructors: ; Notini, J. (PI)

LAW 7809: Advanced Legal Research: Litigation

This course aims to prepare law students for research in litigation practice and judicial clerkships. At the end of this class, students, now and later in their professional lives, will be able to map out a coherent plan of action when asked to research a topic previously unfamiliar to them. Students should acquire a solid knowledge of research tools and a frame of reference that enables them to function independently and competently in the complex world of legal information. Students will accomplish the following learning objectives: 1) Develop and apply tailored research strategies for common and novel legal research problems; 2) Locate, evaluate, and apply relevant and up-to-date secondary sources and primary authority to legal problems; 3) Strategically use available and developing research tools to increase research efficiency; 4) Build and maintain a research process that incorporates metacognitive practices. Learning legal research requires a hands-on approach, so students will complete in-class exercises, homework assignments, and a final research hypothetical -- all of which contribute to grading. There will not be a final exam. This course is open to Stanford graduate students with permission from the instructor.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Joy, H. (PI)

LAW 7815B: Advanced Legal Writing: Business Transactions

This course offers comprehensive preparation for the practice of the transactional lawyer. Students will learn foundational tools to write clear, effective, plain language business contracts and analyze other transactional writings used to manage and document complex business transactions. The course provides a selective mix of interactive live and recorded lectures, and a wide range of realistic drafting and research exercises. These exercises help students sharpen their analysis, research, drafting, and editing skills, and develop sensitivity to the expectations of attorneys and clients with whom they will be working. Students will learn to interpret provisions in a variety of business agreements. Issues related to ethics in a transactional practice will also be addressed. The course should appeal especially to students interested in working for a law firm and practicing transactional law (be it corporate, venture, debt, intellectual property, mergers and acquisitions, entertainment, real estate, etc.). It will also appeal to those interested in business litigation, or those curious about the work of transactional lawyers. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Students on the waitlist for the course will be admitted if spots are available on the basis of priority and degree program. Early drop deadline: Students may not drop this course after the first week of class. Corporations (Law 1013) is a prerequisite for all but for LLM students in the CGP program only (not other LLM programs). Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments, and final paper. Please consult the syllabus for paper and assignment deadlines. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Triantis, A. (PI)

LAW 7820: Moot Court

The major moot court activity at Stanford Law School is the Marion Rice Kirkwood Memorial Competition, which takes place each year during Autumn and Winter Terms and gives students the opportunity to brief and argue an actual case before a hypothetical U.S. Supreme Court. This course is designed to facilitate the administration of the Competition and is not intended to be an advanced legal writing class. It does not meet regularly and students are expected to operate independently. Autumn term is dedicated to brief writing and completion of the written portion of the Competition; the oral argument portion of the Competition is conducted during the first four to five weeks of Winter term. Students on externship and in clinics may enroll, if permitted by their respective programs. In Autumn term there are two class meetings--one which provides an overview of the Competition and another which provides an overview of brief writing in the U.S. Supreme Court. In addition, there are individually scheduled conferences. The first draft of the brief is reviewed and extensively critiqued by the course instructors. The course instructors and the Moot Court Board Presidents score the final draft of the brief. In Winter term, there are two class meetings, one which provides guidance on oral advocacy techniques and another which is a lecture by a practitioner involved in that year's case. In addition, there are optional practice arguments with the instructors and Moot Court Board Members, which are recorded and critiqued. Participation in the oral argument competition is mandatory and includes attendance at the semifinal and final arguments. The preliminary and quarterfinal rounds are held in the evening; the semifinal and final rounds are in the late afternoon. Panels of judges and local attorneys serve as judges who score the oral argument portion of the Competition. Registration for the Kirkwood Competition is by team. Each team is required to submit an appellate brief of substantial length and quality and to complete at least two oral arguments, one on each side of that year's case. Teams are selected for the quarterfinal, semifinal, and final round of the Competition based on their brief and oral advocacy scores. The final round of the Competition is held before a panel of distinguished judges, and the entire Law School community is invited to attend. Special Instructions: To maintain academic standards, enrollment in the Kirkwood Competition is limited to 20 two-person teams. This limit will be strictly enforced. Registration forms will be distributed Spring term. If the program is oversubscribed, a lottery will be held to determine participating teams and to establish a waiting list. Priority is given to third-year students; however, several spots are reserved for second-year teams. The final drop deadline for the course will be on Thursday of the first week of classes. Enrollment in both Autumn (2 units) and Winter (1 unit) terms is required. The final grade for both Autumn and Winter terms and the Professional Skills credit will be awarded upon the completion of the course requirements. Registration and Consent Instructions: Instructions on how to register for the Moot Court Competition are sent out to students each year in Spring term for the coming academic year. The registration process is separate from the regular class registration process. Early application and drop deadlines.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 7821: Negotiation

As a lawyer, you will probably negotiate more than you do anything else. You will negotiate not just over cases, but any time that you need something that you cannot get alone. You will negotiate with your boss, your clients, your paralegal, and all of their counterparts (plus the lawyers) on the other side. You will negotiate with "the system" whether it is the court, the government, the structure of society, or the law. You will also continue to negotiate with your family, your friends, and yourself. This course is designed to: (1) develop your understanding of negotiation, and your awareness of yourself as a negotiator; (2) give you some tools and concepts for analyzing and preparing for negotiations; (3) enhance your negotiating skills through frequent role plays, reflection, and feedback; and (4) teach you how to keep learning from your own negotiation experience. In addition to negotiation skills and theory (including interviewing, counseling, negotiation, fact analysis, legal analysis, and collaboration), you will be introduced to issues of representation, ethics, and the place of negotiation in our legal system. The Negotiation Seminar is an intense, interactive course. We will require weekly preparation of readings, simulations, and written assignments. Basically, you will learn by reading about specific research and doing simulated negotiations -- figuring out with the rest of the class what works and what does not, writing about what you're learning, and trying again. Because participation in the simulations is central to the course, attendance at all classes is required. Since we will begin our simulation exercises on the first day of class, all students who are interested in taking the course (whether enrolled or on the wait-list) need to be present for the first class. (Students who are not present will be dropped from the class or waiting list unless they have made previous arrangements with the instructor.) Add-drop decisions need to be resolved at the first class. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance and written assignments. There is a mandatory class on Friday afternoon, (TBA).
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 3

LAW 7828: Trial Advocacy Workshop

This lawyering skills course gives students an orientation to and constant practice in most basic pretrial and trial advocacy skills areas. Topics include: taking and defending depositions, trial evidence, including admission of trial exhibits in evidence and use of prior witness statements to refresh and impeach a witness, jury selection and voir dire, opening statements, direct and cross-examination of witnesses, and closing arguments. Students will try a full jury case through to verdict with use of jurors and usually before a real judge in the courthouse in Palo Alto at the end of the course. Students will also have a chance to watch the jurors deliberate and talk with them after their verdict. The course takes place during eight weeks of the Autumn Quarter with two classes (one lecture and one workshop) per week on most weeks from 4:15-9:00 PM, plus the final weekend of jury trials, Saturday and Sunday, November 11 and 12. Each day's ending time will vary; most sessions will end before 9:00 PM. For details, please refer to the 2023 Trial Advocacy Workshop Schedule at https://bit.ly/3NJA7DS. The format for each topic begins with a lecture/discussion featuring video vignettes of various techniques and a live demonstration by an expert trial lawyer. Following the discussion portion of each topic are small group sessions during which each student practices the skills involved. Constructive feedback is given after each exercise by two of our faculty of very experienced Bay Area litigators and judges. Most exercises are also videoed for further one-on-one critique by another faculty member. The central philosophy of the workshop is that skills are best acquired in an experiential manner by seeing and doing. Frequent short, well-defined exercises followed by immediate constructive feedback in a non-competitive, non-threatening atmosphere provide the core of the program. The workshop directors are Judge Sallie Kim, Sara Peters, and Traci Owens. Sallie is a United States Magistrate Judge in San Francisco and was a partner in a civil litigation firm and also previously taught a class at SLS and served as Associate Dean for Student Affairs. Sara is a trial attorney for a personal injury law firm in San Francisco. She graduated from Stanford Law School in 2008 and coaches the Stanford Law School mock trial team. Traci has 23 years of trial experience. She has participated as an instructor in the Stanford Law School Trial Advocacy program for more than a decade, and she taught in a similar program at Santa Clara University School of Law for more than fifteen years. Special Instructions: If you haven't taken Evidence, you must contact Judge Kim before the course begins for some brief pre-course reading assignments. There are no papers or tests, but attendance at every session is required. Since we will begin our trial advocacy exercises on the first day of class, all students who are interested in taking the course (whether enrolled or on the wait-list) need to be present for the first class. (Students who are not present will be dropped from the class or waiting list unless they have made previous arrangements with the professor.) Add-drop decisions need to be resolved at the first class; no drops will be permitted thereafter. Exceptions to this rule will be made by petition only. Mandatory attendance. Elements used in grading: Attendance and in-class assignments. In addition, the Trial Advocacy Workshop is approved to offer Experiential Learning (EL) Credit. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis.
Terms: Aut | Units: 5

LAW 7830: Topics in American Legal Practice

This course is designed to introduce international students to American legal practice. To do this, the course begins in the spring quarter by working with students to look ahead to their summer experience and begin to identify ways in which the culture or norms of the practice setting might be distinctive, or otherwise differ from the legal, political, or workplace culture of their home country. Then in the fall quarter, students are asked to write a 10-page paper, situated in the relevant literature(s), that uses the summer experience to examine one such set of issues. Elements used in grading: Final Paper.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 1 | Repeatable 6 times (up to 6 units total)
Instructors: ; Fleischmann, S. (PI)

LAW 7833: Representing Spanish Speakers

The goal of Representing Spanish Speakers, formerly Spanish for Lawyers, is to give students the opportunity to enhance existing Spanish communication skills through Spanish only in-class simulations with a focus on cultural humility and trauma-informed interviewing skills within the legal sphere. The course will introduce Spanish legal terminology in areas including but not limited to immigration, criminal law, employment law, housing law, and family law. With an emphasis on speaking and listening comprehension through in-class partner activities and dialogue, the class will teach students how to interact with clients who possess limited English proficiency. Students will also be given reading and listening homework assignments to help better their command of the Spanish language. Class instruction will take place principally in the Spanish language. The course is designed to be beneficial for students with varying levels of Spanish language ability, up to and including students who are native speakers of Spanish. The level of difficulty of the course presupposes that students have an intermediate level of Spanish, which includes an understanding of the essentials of Spanish grammar and ability to engage in intermediate conversation. Elements used in grading are attendance and class participation. Please note, this class will expose students to emotionally complex and sensitive scenarios.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2

LAW 7836: Advanced Legal Writing: Appellate Litigation

This course will give students intensive practice with legal analysis, argument structure, and writing in the appellate context. Through a combination of lectures, discussions, selected readings, and writing exercises, we will cover the most important components of appellate writing. The Lecturer will bring her practical experience in legal writing -- both as outside counsel at a law firm and in-house counsel at a high-growth tech company -- to bear as we work together towards each student crafting an appellate brief. The goals of this class are to deepen students' understanding of how to make compelling written arguments and to practice doing so in the context of an appeal on a cutting-edge issue. While this course will be focused on writing an appellate brief, the skills learned will be useful for all legal writing in a litigation context. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar website https://registrar.law.stanford.edu/. Click SUNetID Login in the top right corner of the page and then click the "Consent Courses" tab. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Makhzoumi, K. (PI)

LAW 7846: Elements of Policy Analysis

This one-credit course supports students undertaking public policy analysis projects in the Policy Lab and in other policy-based courses. The course helps students gain facility with basic policy methods and approaches common to Policy Lab practicums. The core session of the course consists of six hours of classroom instruction on a (typically the Saturday at the end of the first week of classes). The morning session emphasizes thinking like a policy analyst (as distinguished from an advocate or lawyer), scoping policy problems, promoting and assessing evidence quality, and making valid (and avoiding invalid) inferences. Students apply learning in a team-based simulation exercise on a topical policy issue. The afternoon session introduces strategies for social change, including designing and evaluating programs that improve individual lives. The immersive exercise typically focuses on developing and evaluating a program to reduce childhood obesity. The course then offers a series of short workshops: (1) interviewing policy clients and other stakeholders (especially where ethnic and cultural differences may be salient), (2) policy research tools and strategies, (3) design thinking for law and policy, (4) systems thinking, (5) resources and methods for cultural competencies, and (6) policy writing. Students should attend at least three of the six workshops to receive credit for the course. With guidance from their faculty instructors, students may then draw on the skills developed in this introductory seminar to analyze a public policy problem, develop potential strategies to address it, weigh the pros and cons of strategy options, and produce a final product that may offer options or recommendations to a policy client, suggestions for implementing such recommendations, and techniques to assess the effectiveness of implementation. Note that the students who enroll in a Law and Policy Lab practicum for the first time are asked to participate in the full-day methods bootcamp whether or not they undertake Elements of Policy Analysis for course credit. Attention Non-Law Students: See Non-Law Student Add Request Form at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/non-law-students/ to enroll in this class. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1

LAW 8001: Corporate Governance and Practice Seminar

The seminar on corporate governance meets in the Autumn and Winter quarters and forms the core of the LL.M. Program in Corporate Governance & Practice. The course, designed to be taken in conjunction with Corporations in Autumn, takes an economic approach to the analysis of corporate law. In particular, we ask why American corporate law has its particular structure. We will seek to understand how the separation of ownership and control produces agency costs, and the ways in which corporate law seeks to remedy these through techniques like disclosure, fiduciary duties, shareholder litigation, voting, and hostile takeovers. We will read and discuss ongoing debates among scholars and practitioners about the agency cost framework, the merits and limits of current legal policies, and the role of institutional arrangements like activist shareholders. We will also consider the relevance of these disputes, and the effectiveness of corporate law and governance more generally, in the context of a variety of real-life incidents. No knowledge of economics is presupposed, so the course will also introduce basic economics and finance concepts necessary to understand these concepts. Some course sessions will feature outside speakers who will complement the discussions with real-world examples drawn from practice. Attendance and active participation are important to the success of the seminar and an important factor in the overall grade. Students are expected to have carefully read and reviewed assigned materials in advance of each session. Students will be required to submit short reflection papers that evaluate, critique, and discuss some or all of the assigned readings. Students will also be asked to prepare presentations and case studies. The class will be graded H/P/R/F in Autumn Quarter and Winter Quarter. This course is required for and limited to students in the Corporate Governance and Practice LL.M. Program. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, and assignments. Class will meet according to the schedule set forth by the Registrar's office.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 2 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 4 units total)
Instructors: ; An, J. (PI)

LAW 8002: Environmental Law and Policy Colloquium

The Environmental Law & Policy Colloquium offers students the opportunity to learn about contemporary environmental law and policy matters. These matters include, among other areas, natural resources management, energy development, climate litigation, disaster and wildfire policy, sustainable finance, environmental geopolitics and diplomacy, ecocide and the environmental ramifications of war. The colloquium meets in two quarters. During the fall quarter classes meet weekly. In the Spring quarter, the class meets 4 times in weeks 2, 3, 4 and 9 and in addition, will have one Saturday workshop where students will present their capstone research papers. Over the course of these two quarters students will develop, write, and present a capstone research paper on a contemporary environmental law issue related to their home country and/or region. During the autumn quarter, students will begin to develop their capstone research papers by developing their proposals, outlines and literature reviews. During the spring quarter, the students will write and present their research papers. Across the two quarters we will also explore and discuss a diverse range of environmental law and policy matters through readings and class discussions. Over the course of the year, the Colloquium invites a number of guest speakers, including academics, practicing attorneys and diplomats. Some of the guest seminars take place during regular class hours and some outside of these class hours. Grading in this course is based on an analytical research paper, the capstone research paper (including the proposal, outline and literature review), presentation of the capstone research paper, and class participation. This course is required for students in the Environmental Law & Policy LL.M. Program.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 4 units total)
Instructors: ; Hamilton, B. (PI)

LAW 8003: International Economic Law, Business & Policy (IELBP) Colloquium

This course enables IELBP advanced degree students to explore selected issues, case studies and policy debates in international economic law and business, global political economy, and international economic dispute resolution in a highly interactive seminar. The course is a complement to the other core degree requirements of the LLM in IELBP and is discussion-oriented. The course offers students the opportunity to engage in dialogue with experts in the field (including expert practitioners, Stanford Law faculty and interdisciplinary scholars from other schools, departments or programs at Stanford University). The course takes on a wide-ranging approach: we will examine legal issues confronting international business while also focusing on cutting-edge debates arising out of economic globalization; we will explore the complex architecture of international economic law, unpacking how international institutions and public international law sources (formal and informal) regulate: i) cross-border business transactions between private parties, ii) international economic relations between and among states, and iii) cross-border economic conduct by states, international organizations, and private actors. Students are expected to have carefully read assigned materials in advance of each session, and to actively participate during class. Grades for the colloquium are based on students' papers, a presentation, and their classroom performance (e.g., preparation, participation, attendance, etc.). The course extends over two quarters (autumn and spring), and students are required to complete both quarters in order to satisfy the program requirement. Topics in the Fall quarter will focus on developments in world trade law, international monetary cooperation, international investment law, economic integration and development, international taxation, international arbitration, and international antitrust law among others. Topics in the Spring quarter will be selected based on students' interests, as well as pressing policy concerns in international commerce.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2 | Repeatable 2 times (up to 4 units total)
Instructors: ; Willemyns, I. (PI)

LAW 8004: Law, Science, and Technology Colloquium

The Law, Science & Technology Colloquium offers students in the Law, Science & Technology LLM Program the opportunity to discuss cutting-edge legal issues at the intersection of law and technology. The colloquium is held in the Fall and Spring quarters and aims to give the LST LLM students a broad overview of the many areas within Law, Science and Technology, as well as the connections between areas. In Fall, we will focus on Internet Law and Intellectual Property, including sessions on privacy, free speech, copyright, and patents, with extra focuses on biotechnology and bioscience. In Spring, we will broaden our scope to a selection of issues including potentially AI, dark patterns, more on biotechnology & bioscience, telecommunications regulation, or legal practice. Furthermore, we will discuss how the law of science and technology is made in the United States, and how lawyers can effect change in these laws. The class will feature several guest speakers who are experts in the field, including potentially Stanford faculty, visiting scholars, technology and IP lawyers, entrepreneurs, and executives from Silicon Valley technology companies. Students are expected to have carefully read the assigned materials in advance of each session, and to actively participate during class. Students will also write a capstone paper on a topic of their choice, in consultation with the instructor. There will also be oral presentations on their capstone papers and on current events in LST. Grades for the colloquium are based on students' papers and their classroom performance (e.g., preparation, participation, attendance, etc.). This course is restricted to students in the Law, Science, and Technology LLM program, and satisfies their "colloquium requirement" for the fall and spring quarter. In fall and spring students will be graded on an Honors/Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis. Class will meet in-person unless the Law School's policies state otherwise.
Terms: Aut, Spr | Units: 2 | Repeatable 3 times (up to 4 units total)
Instructors: ; Rosenbloom, M. (PI)

LAW 8011: SPILS Law and Society Seminar

This seminar is restricted to students who are in the SPILS program. The seminar deals with the relationship between legal systems and the societies in which they are embedded. The materials are drawn from studies of many different societies. Among the issues dealt with are: What influence does culture have on the operation of legal systems? What are the social forces which produce particular forms of law? What impact do legal interventions have on society and on human behavior? Elements used in grading: Exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3

LAW 8021: Introduction to American Law

This course is designed to introduce international students in the Exchange and Advanced Degree Programs (LL.M. and SPILS) to the key principles of American law. The course provides an overview of distinctive features of the U.S. legal system, including its history and institutions. Topics include the role of precedent in the common law, distinctive elements of civil procedure and legal actions, the branches of the U.S. government and the separation of powers, federalism, due process, and equal protection. The course is offered before the start of the regular Law School quarter. Special Instructions: Required for LL.M. and SPILS but optional for Exchange Program students. Open to LL.M., SPILS and SLS Exchange Program students only. This course is taught on an accelerated basis over the course of three weeks between orientation and the beginning of the Fall Quarter classes. Precise meeting dates TBA by instructor. Final exam will be scheduled on Friday, September 22. Elements used in grading: class attendance, participation, short written assignment, and final exam.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Greely, H. (PI)

LAW 8022: Professional Responsibility

This course introduces students to the goals, rules and responsibilities of the American legal profession and its members. The course is designed around the premise that the subject of professional responsibility is the single most relevant to students' future careers as members of the bar. These issues come up on a constant basis and it is critical that lawyers be alert to spotting them when they arise and be educated in the methods of resolving them. As such, the course will address many of the most commonly recurring issues that arise, such as confidentiality, conflicts of interest, candor to the courts and others, the role of the attorney as counselor, the structure of the attorney-client relationship, issues around billing, the tension between "cause lawyering" and individual representation, and lawyers' duty to serve the underrepresented. The course will consider the overlapping, inconsistent, and incomplete sources of the regulation of lawyers in the United States. International graduate students will bring their own experiences to compare with standards applicable to legal behavior in different jurisdictions. The course will also instill familiarity with much of the coverage and testing methods of the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination that is required by virtually every U.S. state and territory for licensure. Individual and group participation in class discussion is vital, as well as good faith completion of review questions and/or brief quizzes on the daily reading assignments. Students will work regularly in small groups to discuss hypothetical problems during each class. Each student must also submit a brief reflection paper on five occasions during the course.. The instructor retains the right to take class participation and attendance into account in the final assessment. This course is taught on an accelerated basis with an introductory class at Orientation and classes on most days during the three weeks between Orientation and the beginning of the Autumn Quarter classes. Limited to LLMs, JSMs and exchange students. Required for LLMs.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: ; Marshall, L. (PI)

LAW 8031: JSD Research Colloquium

Required for and limited to JSD candidates. The objective of the colloquium is to assist students in designing, conducting, analyzing and reporting their doctoral dissertation research. Weekly colloquium sessions are devoted to work in progress presentations by JSD candidates, supplemented by occasional guest lectures and discussions of cross-cutting issues of interest to doctoral students.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 0
Instructors: ; Kessler, A. (PI)
© Stanford University | Terms of Use | Copyright Complaints