151 - 160 of 873 results for: LAW

Changes in the nature of transnational crime and developments under international law may necessitate adjustments of INTERPOL's policy and legal considerations in three broad areas: (1) online manifestations of support for extremist and terrorist conduct; (2) misinformation and fake new; (3) online incitement of violence and hatred, defamation, harassment, and cyber bullying. This Practicum aims to develop principles for INTERPOL to guide its interpretation and application of Article 3 to capture this new--online--manifestation of transnational crime. More specifically, it aims to establish general guidelines that INTERPOL can rely on in determining whether a request to process information on offenses arguably implicating freedom of expression online is in alignment with its constitutional obligation to remain neutral and adhere to international human rights standards. This Practicum is open to graduate students from law (2L, 3L, and Advanced Degree), business, international policy, communications, computer science, and other relevant programs. Highly qualified undergraduates are also invited to apply. The practicum meets 9-10:30 on Wednesdays. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.Cross-listed with International Policy ( INTLPOL 255) in Winter and Spring.

Legal aid groups, government agencies, and state courts offer free help to people experiencing housing, debt, family, and other major life problems. This policy lab will examine how to make this legal help more accessible, trusted, and impactful. How can more people be aware and empowered to use legal help, especially in a more equitable way? Students in this policy lab will research and design national strategies for making legal help and government services more discoverable, user-friendly, and trustworthy. Students will conduct user research, technology experiments, and legal research to identify what specific initiatives might make legal help more engaging and impactful. The students will be able to explore a range of new kinds of innovations from technology, to community partnerships, to service design--and help justice organizations make a coherent strategy for increasing uptake and engagement with their public services. This class is open to Stanford Law students, and available for cross-registration for graduate and undergraduate students from across campus. We encourage students from outside the Law School to apply. Students will be working together in small teams. Grading will be based on presentations, written assignments, class participation, and group work. 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. Cross-listed with Design ( DESIGN 271).

Clients: Stanford Election Law Project law.stanford.edu/stanford-university-election-law-project/> and the Stanford PACS Program on Democracy and the Internet pacscenter.stanford.edu/research/program-on-democracy-and-the-internet/projects/>. California recently passed SB 759, the "Every Vote Counts Act," to codify requirements allowing voters a chance to fix their ballot in case of a signature mismatch. SB 759 requires elections officials notify voters of mismatched signatures at least 8 days prior to the certification of an election. Ballots would be counted by elections officials if a signature verification statement is returned no later than 5:00 p.m. two days prior to certification. However, the law does not specify in great detail the steps that counties should take to contact voters. Prior to the bill's passage, a report by the California Voter Foundation revealed substantial variation in how counties verified mismatched signatures and contacted affected voters. This Policy Lab research project will produce the first public report tracking how counties have implemented/are planning to implement the requirements of SB 759. This project maps how the implementation of state statutes and guidelines dealing with vote-by-mail signature verification varies among California counties. Research questions for each county include: (1) What criteria does a signature need to meet to "not appear to be the same" (and therefore result in a ballot being invalidated)? (2) What remedial steps are taken, with regards to SB 759, if an election worker determines there is a "signature mismatch" before the statutory deadline? To answer these questions, students will conduct a survey of county election officials and administrative material and produce a final report with findings and lessons to improve county procedures. Students will research legal and policy frameworks, interview policy makers and state administrative officials, develop targeted policy recommendations, and brief policy makers on recommendations. The final report will be publicly available and will inform California county election officials, state policy-makers, and voting rights advocacy groups. This policy practicum is offered for two to three variable units. Students may elect three units by special arrangement with the instructors. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

Client: Yurok Tribe. Students will assist the client, the Office of the Tribal Attorney of the Yurok Tribe (the largest federally recognized Native nation in California), by conducting legal research on a variety of possible topics, including tribal water rights, tribal police powers, tribal/county relationships, and the Indian Child Welfare Act. The exact scope and nature of the research will be determined in consultation with the client. Students will produce policy memos based on their research to share with the client. Coursework or background in federal Indian law is helpful but not required. The project may involve opportunity to present virtually to the tribal council. Elements used in grading: Attendance, performance, class participation, written assignments, and final paper. 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.

Client: Steyer-Taylor Center for Climate Energy and Finance. This is the winter quarter continuation of this practicum. We take as a given the well-established scientific evidence establishing the causal connection between greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and global warming, and the likelihood that current trajectories of fossil fuel use are leading to catastrophic climate change. In addition to its global consequences, climate change threatens to compromise Stanford's core missions through fires, environmental damage, and other harms to the University's staff, students, and faculty. In the Autumn Quarter, in which the practicum was co-taught by Alicia Seiger, students undertook several research projects, including how Stanford researchers' broad-ranging expertise in energy-related finance issues could be most effectively deployed to inform policy makers; reducing food waste as a means of reducing GHG emissions; and Stanford health services' role in reducing GHG emissions. In the Winter Quarter, we will focus on the possible effects on GHG emissions of investment policies and practices, automobile and air transportation, and the consumption of beef and other foods. The mandate of Stanford Law and Policy Labs is to conduct impartial, evidence-informed policy analysis. Rather than deliver a set of specific recommendations, this practicum seeks to assess the pros and cons of plausible policies. While participants may have prior views on some of the issues, they should be open to revising their views in light of the evidence. Policy Lab practicums are research seminars. Although we will assign some readings and invite experts to meet with the seminar during the quarter, much of the research will be conducted by student teams. Policy Lab practicums are designed primarily for law students, but are open to students throughout the University. This practicum seeks students with knowledge of economics, finance, food systems, and environmental science. Admission is by petition. Elements used in grading: Autumn Quarter - Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Winter Quarter- Class Participation, Final Paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

The donor advised fund (DAF) is an increasingly popular vehicle for charitable giving. Donors receive a tax deduction when they contribute money or appreciated assets to a DAF; at their discretion, donors (DAF "holders") may advise the DAF manager, or "sponsor," to distribute funds to tax-exempt charities. There are about 500,000 individual DAFs across the country, with total assets of over $100 billion. The major DAF sponsors are community foundations and the charitable arms of investment managers like Schwab, Fidelity, and Vanguard. Although donors can only "advise" rather than "direct" a sponsor to make a gift, their advice is almost always heeded. DAFs arguably incentivize giving by providing a vehicle for donating complex assets and reducing a donor's burdens by offloading administrative tasks to the DAF sponsor. Some DAF sponsors also offer advice to enable their DAF holders to give more effectively. Yet DAFs have been criticized on several grounds, and legislation has been introduced (but not enacted) to regulate them. One criticism is that while donors receive the tax deduction immediately upon contributing to a DAF, they can take as long as they wish to make gifts from the DAF, and even pass advisory authority on to their heirs, thus delaying putting the funds into the hands of charities that can use them. (In comparison, foundations are required to spend at least 5 percent of their assets annually.) Another criticism is that gifts made through a DAF can be anonymous, with only the DAF sponsor listed as the donor. (In comparison, gifts and grants by foundations must be reported on publicly available tax returns.) In addition, some DAF sponsors have concerns about requests to make gifts to putative hate groups: how to determine whether an organization falls in this category, and how to respond to the request if it does. At a time when the controversy around DAFs is only likely to grow, this Policy Lab practicum will provide an evidence-based analysis of the pros and cons of various self-reform and regulatory proposals. The research team will focus on understanding the perspectives of the recipients of DAF funding as well as those of DAF sponsors, DAF holders, regulators, and critics. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, 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 (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

Post-Ferguson Civil Rights Enforcement and Municipal Courts. The Ferguson Report prepared by the United States Department of Justice identified a number of procedural due process violations in the way the city's municipal courts functioned. These procedural defects amplified the consequences of racial disparities in who was arrested and charged in the city. In the wake of the Ferguson Report, civil rights litigation has been brought challenging similar procedural due process violations in other municipal courts around the country. Litigation has concentrated on excessive bail, fines, fees, and other court costs, conflicts of interests in having judges whose budgets depend on collection exercise discretion in setting these charges and collecting them, and failure to comply with Bearden v. Georgia (1983) (prohibiting imprisonment for failure to pay court charges without inquiring into a litigant's indigence and determining that a litigant's failure to pay is "willful"). This two-quarter sequence policy lab focuses on (i) gathering empirical, doctrinal, historical, and other research on municipal court practices associated with the setting, charging, and collection of court fines, fees, and other costs, including demographic research on vulnerable populations affected by procedural errors, (ii) gathering evidence regarding best practices to reform court procedures, particularly regarding compliance with Bearden v. Georgia, (iii) drafting initiatives for recommendation to the client, and (iv) closely editing and refining the proposals for distribution. Applicants should have interest and/or expertise in criminal or civil justice reform, civil rights litigation and enforcement, procedure, and judicial ethics. Strong legal research and writing skills are imperative. Applicants must also be willing to work under conditions that require strict confidentiality. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

Client: National Assembly of Venezuela, Special Committee for the Defense of the Constitution. Venezuela is undergoing a profound political, humanitarian, and economic crisis. Although a dictatorship currently reigns, reformers have begun to plan for a brighter and more democratic future. Students enrolled in this policy lab will have a unique opportunity to help set the terms of a future Venezuelan democracy (and institutional reforms) via a report to be submitted to the Venezuelan National Assembly, the only remaining democratic institution in the country. The report will inform efforts to create a new Venezuelan judiciary. Specifically, students will spearhead completion of a report designed to explore reforms and improvements to judicial independence, judicial appointments, the workings of the judiciary, and the broader legal system. Students will interact with Venezuelan congressional representatives, human rights experts, and research other countries' experiences with judicial reform. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final 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.

Partner: Brennan Center for Justice. Most states and the federal government have adopted laws enhancing penalties for hate crimes, but questions remain as to the effectiveness of these laws in deterring hate violence and making victims whole. Some within marginalized and civil rights communities seek alternative---or additional---approaches that do more to address the communal injuries hate crimes inflict, without an exclusive focus on lengthening incarceration for offenders. Yet many of these alternative models, including restorative justice approaches, are undertheorized, rare in practice, and insufficiently assessed. In conjunction with the Brennan Center for Justice, this policy lab assesses alternative approaches to hate crimes in theory and practice. Students will work in collaborative teams to analyze existing research in fields including criminal law and criminology, identify innovative hate crimes programs established by nonprofit organizations or local governments, review outcomes related to restorative justice models, and prepare for an expert convening in the Winter term. The project will conclude with a final report. This policy lab is open to 4-6 students and will be graded on an H/P basis. Students may take this policy lab for either 2 - 3 credits. Some students may continue in the spring. R credit is available to law students upon approval by the instructor. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.