741 - 750 of 873 results for: 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 has begun to change, as the U.S. Supreme Court has been reshaping important areas of 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, a limited number (maximum eight) of students registered for the course may be allowed (with instructor consent) to transfer from section (01), which requires an exam, to section (02), which instead requires a substantial research paper that meets the R requirement. The grade will be based on a final exam or research paper, and can be adjusted for participation.

This course will cover the constitutional and statutory doctrines at the core of U.S. foreign affairs. Topics will include the distribution of foreign affairs powers among the three branches of the federal government; cooperative and uncooperative federalism; the scope of the treaty power and the role of the Senate; the power of the President to make executive agreements and their status as law in the United States; domestic laws that govern the use of armed force by the United States; and the application of the Constitution outside of U.S. territory and to non-citizens. The course will also consider the special role of the courts in applying international law and in developing doctrines such as the "Act-of-State" and political question doctrines. Current debates in foreign relations law, such as targeted killing abroad, electronic surveillance, and covert action, may be included. Special instructions: Students may write a paper in lieu of the final exam for Research credit. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section 01 (exam) into section 02 (paper) which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, final exam or final research paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/consent-of-instructor-forms/. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

The movement had all but ended--Malcolm and Martin twin Moseses toward the new decade's Canaan, their people at once led to and lost in Equal Right's promised land. Two Kennedys and administrations sat lost to the threshold too. Tribute to the 60s--many hands made the law's lords work. "The Revolution"--now sponsored by Black Power, deep base, and less faith--was underway, and everywhere. It would not, though, be brought to you/ by Xerox in four parts without commercial interruptions' or show you pictures of Nixon blowing a bugle. Gil told us. The old revolution was dead, long live the Revolution. Much has been written on the turn charted in Scott-Heron's Black Power anthem, expressing the sentiments of a community left to grapple with the consequences of a "rights" mission seen as, but by no means actually, accomplished. The fight for Civil Rights--at least of the sort a government could give--had ended, in no small part thanks to death, disillusionment, and a right-wing government elected by equality's opponents to trim its imagined excesses. Expressed amidst the violence and propaganda of America's smoldering wars (in Vietnam, on dissent, and on dissenters), Scott-Heron's critique of televised politics reads as a response, in part, to the power asymmetries inscribed in the form, as well as the content, of broadcast images. The Revolution would not be televised, because in truth it could not be. It could, though, be reproduced via other means: through sound. Pressed, packaged, and delivered (cheap!) to a living room near you, thanks to Phillips, RCA Victor, media mail postage (which is to say Uncle Sam), and countless others. No less baggage, just different. The Revolution could not be televised, but it could be played for audiences at home. That Revolution--the type pressed in wax along with ink--is the focus of this course. In this study, the Revolution will be considered, listened to, and, if successful, "will be no rerun,[it] will be live." Course Focus: In taking up the media and mechanisms of advocacy animating the Black Power spirit Scott-Heron captures, this course turns our attention backward, revisiting the American moment out of which Scott-Heron's contemporary was born. Keeping the Black Power Movement back-of-mind, this course focuses its attention on the late American Civil Rights era (1963-1969), re-examining Rights Advocacy in this moment through the prism of socio-cultural, rather than institutional, legal and (small c) constitutional change. Reading popular media as a flattened space for socio-legal argumentation, this course traces how a culture moves through and with a populace to reshape conceptions of justice and legality. In doing so, we approach popular media as a critical interlocutor with traditionally privileged socio-legal discourses. Putting the two in conversation, this course aims to rebalance examinations of Black Rights discourse, de-centering rhetorical and legal rights advocacy in examining the rights claims advanced in the period. In doing so, we hope to better understand the mechanisms of socio-legal change, as well as the late Rights Era's relationship to its Black Power permutation. Elements used in grading: Grading will consist of [75%] class participation (attending and contributing to discussion, participating in syllabus creation, etc.) as well as a [25%] collaborative final project whose format is to be decided among course participants. In offering syllabus entries, participants are welcome (and encouraged) to discuss their selections with members of the course before finalizing submissions.

Over the past fifty years, there have been dramatic ebbs and flows in support for, and application of, the death penalty in the United States. Lawyers have played key roles in these shifts--through their in-court work and through other forms of organizing and advocacy. We will begin the seminar by examining the law and politics regarding the Supreme Court's invalidation of all death penalty statutes in 1972, and the central roles lawyers played in that result. We will then turn to states' successful efforts (advanced by lawyers) to secure judicial approval of revised capital-punishment systems in 1976. For the 20 years that followed, support for capital punishment continued to grow, and no state had come close to abolishing the death penalty. Over the past 15 years, by contrast, ten states have abolished capital punishment, and three other states have in place moratoria on executions. The number of death sentences imposed nationally, which reached 315 in 1996, has been 18 for each of the past two years. This seminar endeavors to understand the rise and fall of the death penalty by way of an extended case study of the State of Illinois--a particularly interesting jurisdiction because of the dramatic events leading to abolition and the rapid pace of change: in an eight-year period, it went from a death row of 171 to outright abolition of the death penalty. We will focus especially on the roles that lawyers played in bringing about this transformation, both in their service on individual cases and also as advocates in the service of a movement. The aim of the seminar is to invite a broad, yet critical understanding of the ways in which lawyers have been and can be instruments of social change--lessons that resonate well beyond the field of capital punishment. Students may elect to write a substantial research paper (on a topic to be decided upon after consultation with the instructor) or a series of short response papers. 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.

This course focuses on episodes of heightened political conflict that have been framed in constitutional terms. Each of the episodes has raised anxieties about the capacity of the constitutional order to resolve severe conflict. Much current constitutional doctrine emerged from them. Topics include the Civil War, the New Deal, and the Civil Rights Movement; the dispossession of the Cherokee Indians in the Jackson era and the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II; the elections of 1800, 1876, 2000, and 2020; and the impeachments of Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton. We will consider how the Constitution's provisions on the structure of government shape conflict and the extent to which its guarantees of rights protect vulnerable people in times of political turmoil. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Final Exam.

Temporary leaders exist in almost every sector--acting cabinet secretaries, interim chief executive officers, interim university presidents, temporary pastors, interim coaches, to name just a few. In many roles, they abound as more permanent leaders are often missing. In some sectors, they are women and persons of color, breaking into roles that they had not held before. Commentators often lump temporary leaders into an amorphous caretaker category, with underwhelming performance, but that placement often does not match what interim officials are doing. This seminar will focus on temporary leaders in government and business, but use other sectors as relevant. Drawing on legal materials, social science research, business studies, historical examples, and guest speakers, it will explore the causes and consequences of interim leaders as well as the constraints under which they operate. The seminar will also consider how such leaders could be more effective and how interim officials can become more permanent leaders. Requirements will include multiple writing assignments (including short reading reflections and a 10-15 page paper on a relevant topic or interim leader). Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, final paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website ( https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/consent-of-instructor-forms/) by August 31, 2022.

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.

This course will explore the intersection of U.S. criminal law and immigration law enforcement, including: the bureaucratic bonds between the criminal law enforcement and immigration law enforcement systems; the effect of citizenship status on criminal legal processes and outcomes; the immigration consequences of criminal convictions; the procedural rules and norms governing the policing of crimes of migration; the policing of the border region and immigrant communities; the punishment of noncitizens; and the extraterritorial reach of the criminal law. The focus will be primarily domestic, but we will pay some attention to comparative developments. Special Instructions: Grades will be based on class participation; writing assignments; and an in-class final examination. Prerequisite: Immigration Law LAW 7026.

Social media platforms are arguably the most important channels of communication in the modern world, but it's not always clear how existing legal frameworks apply to them--not to mention the proliferation of new laws attempting to rein platforms in. This course will explore the changing legal landscape governing platforms, and the role of the First Amendment in either constraining legal changes or being the vehicle through which such changes are made. We will explore topical and live legal issues in the platform regulation space, which may include section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, attempts to impose must-carry and common carrier obligations on platforms to carry certain speech, how the First Amendment constrains government actors on social media, the constitutionality of imposing transparency and due process requirements on platforms' content moderation practices, attempts to restrict minors' access to social media, or efforts to ban certain platforms altogether. Students will complete multiple short reflection papers throughout the quarter. Students may elect to write a substantial research paper for R-credit with instructor permission. Students taking the course for R-credit (Section 02) will receive 3 units. 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 instructors. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments. Interested students are asked to fill out a very short application form, in order to gauge the level of background knowledge the class will have. 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. See application for deadline and instructions.