171 - 180 of 446 results for: LAW

This policy lab seminar will address the international wildlife trafficking crisis, with a focus on legal and policy tools that can help combat the scourge. The price of ivory on black markets has skyrocketed and elephant and rhino populations in Africa are being decimated. At current poaching rates, African elephants could be wiped out within 8 to 10 years. Trafficking also is hitting tigers, great apes, sharks and other important species. The seminar will key into the President's recent Executive Order on this subject (E.O. 13658, issued on July 1, 2013) and related international efforts to reduce the killing in host countries, the transshipment of poached materials, and consumer demand for ivory and other wildlife parts. The seminar will address US laws and their role in addressing trade in wildlife parts. It also will undertake a comparative review of the legal structures in relevant African and Asian nations, and the potential role of the international endangered species treaty (CITES) and transnational enforcement efforts in cracking down on ivory and other wildlife-related trafficking. The seminar will review prior poaching crises, including the elephant/ivory crisis in the late 1980s, and evaluate why the strategies that reduced killings in the 1990s are no longer successful. Based on these analyses, the class will develop and submit recommendations for reforms to US, African, and international laws and practices to two groups established under the Executive Order: (1) the President's Wildlife Trafficking Task Force, which is chaired by the Secretaries of State and Interior and the Attorney General; and (2) the Wildlife Trafficking Advisory Council, which is composed of outside experts who are advising the Task Force. (Professor Hayes is an appointed member of the Advisory Council.) Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Final Paper. Students may normally receive no more than four units for a Policy Lab practicum and no more than a total of eight units of Policy Lab practicums and Directed Research projects combined may be counted toward graduation unless additional units for graduation are approved in advanced by the Petitions Committee. A student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.

Libya's government has experienced significant strains stemming from various interest groups and armed militias calling for federalism. The General National Congress, elected in 2012, is mandated to form a government, promulgate legislation for Libya's transitional period, and establish a constitution-drafting entity. A de facto federal structure has emerged since the fall of the Qaddafi regime, and it appears that a federal state structure is the only way forward for Libya. Even a decentralized framework may be threatened, however, if it does not clearly delineate the powers of the executive heads of provincial territories. Students in this Practicum will work to support the Public Interest Law and Policy Group PILPG), a pro bono international law firm, which in turn is providing advice to civil society groups in Libya. To assist PILPG in supporting its clients' engagement on constitutional issues and decentralization, students in this Practicum will develop a legal memorandum analyzing comparative state practice of the distribution of powers between the national executive and provincial level executives in federal or decentralized states. The memorandum will address approaches states have taken on key issues such as whether the national executive can remove the heads of provincial governments; whether the provincial executive has a role in national-level policies; whether provincial executives maintain any control over the military; and whether the provincial executives' powers can supersede the national executive's powers on certain regional issues. State practice from the Middle East and North Africa region will be of particular relevance to PILPG's Libyan clients, but state practice examples will ultimately be selected based on their value in explaining or illustrating mechanisms and processes that shed light on the efficacy of different approaches to distributing powers between national and provincial executives. Students may normally receive no more than four units for a Policy Lab practicum and no more than a total of eight units of Policy Lab practicums and Directed Research projects combined may be counted toward graduation unless additional units for graduation are approved in advanced by the Petitions Committee. A student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline. Elements used in grading: Class participation, Written Assignments.

This policy lab will focus on recommendations for the reform and modernization of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) -- the granddaddy of our environmental laws. NEPA is a disclosure statute which requires that before federal officials can issue a permit, commit federal funds, or otherwise take an action that may have a significant impact on the environment, decision-makers must have the opportunity to review an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that analyzes the potential environmental consequences of the proposed action and its alternatives. Many critics from both the right and left are dissatisfied with the way that NEPA and its state analogues are being implemented, prompting some legislators to advocate statutory overrides and agency officials to expand the use of categorical exemptions. Meanwhile, NEPA proponents are interested in making the environmental review process more user-friendly and efficient, while preserving its core disclosure requirements. In this policy lab, students will review, analyze, and develop positions on potential NEPA reform options. Students will interact with NEPA experts at the White House¿s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and produce work product that CEQ can use as it responds to Congressional and outside pressure to reform the NEPA process. Students may normally receive no more than four units for a Policy Lab practicum and no more than a total of eight units of Policy Lab practicums and Directed Research projects combined may be counted toward graduation unless additional units for graduation are approved in advanced by the Petitions Committee. A student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Final Paper. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.

This policy lab seminar will address the ongoing effort by the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce carbon pollution from electric power plants. The EPA is currently in the process of writing New Source Performance Standards for new and existing coal and natural gas fired electric power plants. A critical question in writing these rules will be the extent to which EPA can allow for economically efficient approaches to cutting emissions. States, including California, industry, and environmental groups are all pushing EPA to incorporate some sort of emissions pricing as either a safe harbor or to propose it as a Federal Implementation Plan that States may choose to join. By doing so, not only will costs fall for regulated sectors but also, deeper cuts in emissions may become feasible. Almost all parties expect, based on prior precedent, that such a proposal will take the form of a cap-and-trade or at least some sort of mass-based cap on emissions. Adele Morris, the Policy Director for the Climate and Energy Economics Project at the Brookings Institution, has asked for our assistance in formulating and assessing the legal implications of an alternative proposal - a carbon tax. Students will prepare briefings and written comments to EPA and OMB explaining the potential benefits of a carbon tax approach to New Source Performance Standards as well as exploring the legal risks that might be created by this approach. We anticipate that students will also participate in briefings with key OMB and EPA Air and Radiation staff involved in drafting the proposed rule. The New Source Performance Standard rulemaking for greenhouse gases is the most environmentally and economically significant regulatory effort that EPA will undertake this decade. Partnering with Brookings will allow us to both leverage legal and economic expertise and to inject students into the most exciting environmental policy making currently underway in the United States. Doing so now, before the draft rule is published, allows us to exert maximum influence before the agency loses flexibility to respond to outside input. To develop skills relevant to the work of practicing lawyers, students will research and write parts of memos and written comments to EPA and OMB on behalf of Morris based on their research into various legal and policy aspects of Clean Air Act Section 111 as applied to the problem of power plant emissions. These assignments, for Writing (W) or Professional Writing (PW), or Research (R) credit, will be due before the end of the quarter. Students must obtain the instructor¿s approval of their election to take the course for writing (PW or W) or 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. Students may normally receive no more than four units for a Policy Lab practicum and no more than a total of eight units of Policy Lab practicums and Directed Research projects combined may be counted toward graduation unless additional units for graduation are approved in advanced by the Petitions Committee. A student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.

In this practicum, students will contribute to an analysis of the current state of human rights and the criminal justice system in one or more countries in the Americas, with particular attention to pretrial detention and prison overcrowding, with particular attention to pretrial detention and prison overcrowding. Students will become familiar with international and regional standards in human rights and, in particular, on pretrial detention and prison conditions. Working independently and/or in teams, they will prepare short reports on violations as well as best practices across the region, with a focus on issues affecting persons deprived of liberty. The scope of students' work product will expand as they acquire more expertise with international standards and transnational comparative tools in policy analysis. Fluency in Spanish or Portuguese helpful, but not required. One or more students may travel in conjunction with this practicum to sessions of the Inter-American Commission in October/November 2014. This course will be offered in the Spring and Fall of 2014. Priority will be given to students who can commit to registering to this practicum for both quarters. Special Instructions: Upon consent of the instructor, students may enroll for 3 units or 4 units with additional assignments. Students who are concurrently enrolled in a clinic full time may petition to enroll in the practicum for one unit. Class must be taken for at least two units to meet the PW requirement. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments. Students may normally receive no more than four units for a Policy Lab practicum and no more than a total of eight units of Policy Lab practicums and Directed Research projects combined may be counted toward graduation unless additional units for graduation are approved in advanced by the Petitions Committee. A student cannot receive a letter grade for more than eight units of independent research (Policy Lab practicum, Directed Research, Senior Thesis, and/or Research Track). Any units taken in excess of eight will be graded on a mandatory pass basis. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.

Earlier this year, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down the Federal Communications Commission's Open Internet rules. This policy practicum will help policy makers assess the available options in the wake of the court's decision. In December 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted the Open Internet Order, which enacted binding network neutrality rules for the first time. Network neutrality rules limit the ability of Internet service providers to interfere with the applications, content and services on their networks; they allow users to decide how they want to use the Internet without interference from Internet service providers. In January of this year, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down the core provisions of the Open Internet Order - the rules against blocking and discrimination. The decision combined two wins for the FCC with one decisive loss. According to the Court, the FCC has authority to regulate providers of broadband Internet access service under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and the FCC's justification for the Open Internet Order is "reasonable and supported by substantial evidence." The no-blocking and non-discrimination rules, the Court found, however, violate the Communications Act's ban on imposing common carrier obligations on entities like Internet service providers that the FCC has not classified as telecommunications service providers under Title II of the Communications Act. As a result of this ruling, Internet service providers like Verizon, AT&T or Cox Cable that connect users to the Internet are now free to block any content, service or application they want. They can slow down selected applications, speed up others, or ask application or content providers like Netflix or Spotify to pay fees to reach their users. These practices would fundamentally change how we experience the Internet. In the wake of the Court's decision, policy makers, stakeholders and observers are debating how to best ensure that the Internet remains open and free. Policy makers essentially have three options: First, the FCC can preserve the Open Internet Rules by reclassifying Internet service as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act. Second, it can develop a different, narrower network neutrality regime under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act within the boundaries established by the Court of Appeal's decision. Finally, Congress or the FCC can adopt a new network neutrality regime, but only, in the case of the FCC, after reclassifying Internet service as a telecommunications service. In mid-February, the Federal Communications Commission opened a docket within which to consider how the Commission should proceed. Special Instructions: Upon consent of the instructor, students may choose enrollment Option 1 or Option 2: Option 1 (3 units) - Students who elect Option 1 will research and write parts of white papers and comments to the Federal Communications Commission that will help policy makers assess the available options. In special cases, students electing Option 1 may take the policy practicum for 2 units. Students interested in this option should indicate this on their application. Option 2 (1 to 2 units) - In order to elect Option 2, students must concurrently enroll (with consent of instructor) in the seminar component, "Current Issues in Network Neutrality" (2 units), which meets Thursdays from 4:15pm-6:15pm. Students in the policy practicum with the seminar component will research and write parts of white papers and comments to the Federal Communications Commission that will help policy makers assess the available options Students will be required to attend the seminar and participate in the discussion, but will not do any of the written assignments for the seminar. Depending on the type of work in Option 1 or Option 2, students taking the policy practicum for two-units or more may receive professional writing (PW) or research (R) credit. Students must obtain the instructor's approval of their election to take the course for writing (PW or W) or research (R) credit. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from the W/PW writing section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. The class is open to law students and students from other parts of the university. It does not require any technical background. Consent Application: To apply for this course, students must complete and e-mail the Consent Application Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Registration and Selection of Classes for Stanford Law Students) to the instructors. See Consent Application Form for submission deadline.

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 credits during their law school career. Students must have taken Criminal Defense Clinic ( Law 408). Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and case work. Writing (w) credit is for 3Ls only.

This seminar offers a unique opportunity to study criminal justice reform in real time. California's "Three Strikes and You're Out" sentencing law is one of the most infamous criminal laws in America. Last year, California voters enacted an overhaul of the recidivist sentencing law ("Proposition 36")-prompted by work conducted by SLS students enrolled in the Three Strikes Project. In this seminar, students will read and discuss a variety of cases and articles, examining the evolution of the Three Strikes statute as a case study in the history, politics, practical considerations and legal regulation of sentencing in the United States. In addition to studying the law, students will have an opportunity to test their skills in the field, assisting in the representation of inmates currently serving life sentences under the Three Strikes law and hoping to win release under Prop. 36. Students will visit the client in prison, conduct factual investigation in the field, and draft petitions on the client's behalf. Students will also contribute to ongoing policy work to ensure the effective implementation of Prop. 36. The Three Strikes Project is an ongoing, fast-paced organization that depends on the hard work and contributions of law students enrolled in the seminar. This course offers the opportunity to both study the theory behind the law, and to hone practical litigation and advocacy skills in and out of the courtroom. In Autumn Quarter and Spring Quarter, the seminar will meet for 3 hours per week. Students will also meet for 1 hour individually and in teams with Project director Mike Romano each week to discuss their work on their projects. In Winter Quarter, the class will meet for a weekly "case rounds" session. Students will also meet for 1 hour individually and in teams with Project director Mike Romano each week to discuss their work on their projects. Students who have already completed one quarter of study in the Three Strikes Project may apply to enroll in the seminar for an additional two units of credit in Winter Quarter 2014. Consent Application: Interested students must apply to enroll in the seminar by sending a one-page statement of interest and resume to Mike Romano (mromano@stanford.edu). Applications will be considered on a rolling basis.

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 credits, 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. Writing (W) credit is for 3Ls only.