Results for LAW

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.

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. This course offers an introduction to American constitutional law. In addition to examining questions of interpretive method, the course focuses on the powers of the federal government and the allocation of decision making authority among government institutions, including both federalism and separation of powers. Class participation, attendance, written assignments, and final exam. This course is open to first-year Law School students only.

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.

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It examines the traditional general issues in the substantive criminal law, including the purposes of punishment and the appropriate limits on the use of the criminal sanction. It focuses predominantly on how criminal statutes are organized around objective offense elements (conduct, causation, and attendant circumstances) and mental states, and to a lesser degree on inchoate crimes, complicity, justification and excuse.

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It deals with possession and ownership of land and with the incidents thereof, including private and public restrictions on its use and development, nuisance, trespass, concurrent interests, landlord and tenant, and eminent domain. Attendance and final exam. Your instructor will advise you of other basis of grading. This course is open to first-year Law School students only.

Legal Research and Writing is a two-unit course taught as a simulation. Students work on a legal problem starting with an initial interview, and they conduct fact investigation and legal research related to that problem. Students receive rigorous training in reading and analyzing legal authority, and in using persuasive strategies--legal analysis, narrative, rhetoric, legal theory, and public policy--to frame and develop legal arguments. Students write predictive memos and persuasive briefs, and are introduced to the professional norms of ethics, timeliness, and courtesy. This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum.

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.

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It is an introductory course in the litigation process. Students represent the plaintiff or defendant in a simulated global torts case set in a federal district court that raises complex issues of federal civil procedure. Students plan litigation strategy, draft pleadings, conduct discovery, write short briefs, and orally argue major motions. While developing students' written and oral advocacy skills, the course also focuses on substantive issues of civil procedure and transnational lawyering. Elements used in grading: attendance, class participation, oral argument, assignments in preparation for written briefs (outlines, drafts, research and citation assignments), written briefs, and professionalism. This course is open to first-year Law School students only.

This course is part of the required first-year JD curriculum. It is an introductory course in the litigation process. Students represent the plaintiff or defendant in a simulated global torts case set in a federal district court that raises complex issues of federal civil procedure. Students plan litigation strategy, draft pleadings, conduct discovery, write short briefs, and orally argue major motions. While developing students' written and oral advocacy skills, the course also focuses on substantive issues of civil procedure and transnational lawyering. Elements used in grading: attendance, class participation, oral argument, assignments in preparation for written briefs (outlines, drafts, research and citation assignments), written briefs, and professionalism. This course is open to first-year Law School students only.

This discussion seminar will consider the legal treatment of Asian Americans. We will read materials about the history of citizenship, exclusion, and internment, and discuss contemporary issues affecting the individuals of Asian descent in the American legal system. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

In this discussion seminar, we will examine how various countries across Europe and Latin American, as well as the United States, seek to deploy law to promote equality for subordinated groups---including especially racial minorities and women. We will examine how laws seeking to promote racial and gender equality, often developed first in the United States, came to be transplanted elsewhere, and how in the process these were transformed in significant ways. Topics will include anti-discrimination law, harassment law, affirmative action (including but not limited to quotas), and parental leave. How and why did the law change as it was transplanted from one legal system and culture into another? To the extent that different legal systems have adopted different approaches, which is preferable---and according to what metrics? Moreover, to the extent that we prefer an approach deployed elsewhere, what are the chances of adopting some version of it here in the United States (or vice versa)? This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

How can a company's managers safeguard the firm's financial value for its shareholders while, at the same time, operating ethically and purposively benefiting other stakeholders, including its employees and the communities in which the firm operates? Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is rooted in the idea that shareholder value is not the only measure of a firm's value and, indeed, that the exclusive pursuit of profits may produce social harms. The seminar will consider a variety of legal issues related to CSR, including: 1. The meaning and measure of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria for corporations. 2. The voluntary or mandatory disclosure of a company's environmental and social harms or risks. 3. When is it legally and ethically appropriate for corporate managers or institutional investors to compromise shareholder value in the pursuit of social and environment goals? 4. Constituency statutes and benefit corporations that reflect interests other than profit maximization. 5. The power of investors to influence corporate behavior through capital allocation-investments (including impact investing) and divestments-and shareholder activism. 6. The power of other stakeholders, including consumers and employees, to influence corporate behavior. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

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 progressive 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. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

Dress codes may seem a bit old fashioned, but in fact we are constantly told who should wear what and when. Rules---written and implied---divide formal from casual attire and children's clothing from that of adults. There are rules for what to wear in each season of the year and rules about the right attire for different times of the day. And, of course, there are rules about the types of clothing men may wear and about the clothing suitable for women. Adherence to such rules is considered by many to be an important signal of breeding and even character: accordingly, immediate social sanctions---and indirect professional consequences---can follow from breaking them. Some dress codes are job requirements or house rules of an organization or establishment---flouting them can get one fired, kicked out of school or barred from a restaurant. Finally, there are laws about clothing, enforced by police or government officials. Break these rules and you may find yourself facing a fine or even a jail sentence. Why is attire so rule bound? Why and when is clothing important enough to become the subject of written treatises, rules and regulations, legislative proclamations and judicial edicts? This seminar will explore dress codes, from the sumptuary laws of the late Middle Ages to the unstated norms of the 21st century, and discover what they can tell us about the significance of clothing---our most conspicuous medium of self-expression---and its relationship to individual identity, community cohesiveness and social order. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

This discussion seminar will consider some of the major theoretical writings of the past 40 years in feminist legal theory, and explore the application of different theoretical approaches to contemporary issues in the law. Likely readings include Catherine MacKinnon, Robin West, Janet Halley, and Angela Harris. Possible topics include campus sexual misconduct codes, the Me Too movement, the meaning of consent, and the legal treatment of the family. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

Throughout history, innovation has been a leading driver of economic growth and has helped lift communities out of poverty, and the importance of knowledge goods to the global economy has only increased with the rise of computing and information technologies. Legal institutions incentivize innovation and allocate access to knowledge goods through a variety of mechanisms, including intellectual property, direct funding through grants and national laboratories, tax incentives, and innovation inducement prizes. In this discussion group, we will examine how these bodies of law are used both to reinforce and subvert existing power structures and inequalities, including issues related to gender, race, geography, and income. We will discuss inequalities among innovators as well as inequalities in access to new innovations, or in who those innovations are made for. We will also consider how these issues might be addressed through legal reforms either internal or external to innovation laws. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

In this discussion seminar, we will explore the intersection of access to information and access to justice. Our current social and technological moment promises increased access to basic legal information without economic or geographic boundaries. But access and accessibility remain influenced by identity, privilege, and power. What are our collective expectations for governments to provide legal information in the digital age? How does access to free, easy-to-use, reliable legal information -- or the lack thereof -- have an impact on low-income and other marginalized communities, particularly in how they exercise their rights and protect themselves from harm? By examining how some of the most vulnerable populations access legal information, we can better assess the concept of open government with an eye toward informing and improving access to justice efforts. Topics to be explored through readings and discussion include: 1) the adequacy of pro se litigants' access to legal information within the American prison system; 2) measuring the impact of U.S. states and municipalities that contract with private companies to publish public laws; 3) ways in which technology might help close the justice gap in low-income communities v. how technology can expose vulnerable communities to new forms of victimization; 4) creative and unique systems of information-sharing within the homeless population and how legal organizations might penetrate those systems to combat disenfranchisement of the homeless and provide them with broader access to legal services; and 5) the fragility of freedom of information laws in democracies and whether these laws contribute to a more informed public. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

What opportunities do prosecutors and defense attorneys have to help reform the criminal justice system and the wider society? And how can they best take advantage of those opportunities? We will explore these questions by reading and discussing three books: J Anthony Lukas, Big Trouble: A Murder in a Small Western Town Sets Off a Struggle for the Soul of America (1998); Gilbert King, Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America (2013); and Emily Bazelon, Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration (2019). This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

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 bridgebuilding, this seminar is warmly and equally open to students of any religious tradition and those of no religion at all. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

This discussion group 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. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

We will consider the developing legal and ethical problems of robots and artificial intelligence (AI), particularly self-directed and learning AIs. How do self-driving cars (or autonomous weapons systems) value human lives? How do we trade off accuracy against other values in predictive algorithms? At what point should we consider AIs autonomous entities with their own rights and responsibilities? And how can courts and legislatures set legal rules robots can understand and obey? This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

This discussion seminar will focus on racial factors in the criminal justice system, using the Central Park 5 case and the Netflix series "When They See Us" as the jumping off point for the discussion. Following each episode of the series, the seminar will discuss the investigation, the trial, incarceration and post incarceration experiences. Although there may be some readings, the primary material will be the Netflix series. I hope to have some additional help with the discussion by asking a few outside players to join the class. Participants could include George Gascon, the San Francisco District Attorney who has been a leader in the investigation of racism in enforcement of the laws, Linda Farstein, the main prosecutor in the case who was the Chief of the New York DA's sex crimes unit, and one of the Three Strikers whose release was secured by Stanford's Three Strike Project. If they are available, these outside participants will join the discussion in order to be a resource and to provide color and insight into the topics being covered. Note: This seminar will meet in San Francisco and transportation will be provided. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

Much of the basic structure of twenty-first-century American legal education was put in place by late nineteenth-century Harvard Law School Dean Christopher Columbus Langdell. This seminar will begin by examining the impetus for and nature of Langdell's reforms then consider various twentieth- and twenty-first-century critiques and modifications of legal education, including Duncan Kennedy's Legal Education and the Reproduction of Hierarchy and the work of critical race theorists like Patricia Williams and Lani Guinier. We will conclude by examining the most significant change within law schools over the past century, the rise of clinical legal education, reading parts of the Carnegie Report on Legal Education and Sam Moyn's recent critique of clinical education as well as a range of responses to his piece. Throughout the seminar, we will pay attention to the historical and social contexts out of which proposals for changing legal education arose as well as to how we might assess the contemporary structure of legal education in light of its history. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

Reasonable people sometimes disagree. How can reflective individuals hope to evaluate those disagreements? Fundamental notions of justice and rationality seem to dominate particular traditions in different places and different times. How can a twenty-first century product of American or other cultures decide which of various compelling ideas of justice and rationality is most persuasive to us? How can anyone escape the accidents of birth and tribal worldview? We will approach these questions through Alastair MacIntyre's provocative book of that name: Whose Justice? Which Rationality? (Univ. Of Notre Dame Press 1988). Whether or not MacIntyre¿s neo-Aristotelian approach to the fundamental questions of ethical theory ultimately prove persuasive, his attempt to find alternatives to the utilitarian and Kantian relics of the Enlightenment will, I hope, open a conversation about what we believe and why. This discussion seminar will meet four times during the Fall quarter. You will be notified of the meeting times by the instructor. Specific dates, time, and location will also be listed in "Notes" below. Elements used in grading: Attendance and class participation.

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.

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.

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.

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. See Directed Professional Writing under Curricular Options in the SLS Student Handbook for requirements and limitations. 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.

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.

Client: Judicial Council of California (https://www.courts.ca.gov/policyadmin-jc.htm). Three out of five people in civil cases have no lawyer, but are often navigating issues of profound importance to their lives. At the same time, the courts are trying to manage a massive volume of cases, with particularly large numbers of cases concerning debt collection and housing. How can courts help people resolve their problems, and still operate efficiently? This policy practicum partners student researchers with courts that are interested in reimagining how one very common type of case -- eviction -- could work better for all involved. We will work on site at court, with observations, interviews, ride-alongs, and workshops to understand how these cases work and what outcomes result. Students will map opportunities for change and a vision of what a redesign process might look like. This class is part of an ongoing partnership with the Judicial Council of California to redesign the civil justice system so that it works better for all litigants, especially those who are without lawyers. Students will learn how to do design research, facilitate multi-stakeholder system redesign, and envision a government innovation process. This work will feed directly into future pilots, reforms and studies on how to make housing court more efficient, accessible, and just. Though students need to be available for the 6 hours a week designated as class time -- (TBA) -- not all of that time will be used. Much of our time will be taken up with court visits and related activities. Group projects will be a major part of the work. Students must take both the fall and winter quarters in order to receive credit for the course. Special instructions: In Winter Quarter, new students may enroll in this policy lab for two units only. New students will focus on researching eviction laws and policies around the country. Students continuing in the policy lab from Autumn Quarter 2019, must enroll for four units. In Spring Quarter, the course will be offered for 2 or 4 units depending on the student's time commitment. 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.

Clients: Stanford Election Law Project <https://law.stanford.edu/stanford-university-election-law-project/> and the Stanford PACS Program on Democracy and the Internet <https://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 interstate water law, economic development, sovereign immunity, and tribal agriculture. 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 will likely involve travel to present research before the Tribal Council. 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.

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 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.

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.

Partner: Santa Clara County Counsel's Office. This policy lab inaugurates a new kind of partnership between Stanford Law School and the Office of the County Counsel for the County of Santa Clara. SCCLPP students will work with the leadership and deputies of the office on both litigation and policy matters related to urgent local challenges. Over the long run, SCCLPP projects will relate to fields such as environmental protection, consumer protection, criminal justice, land use law, the rights of immigrant residents, public health, and local finance. During the 2020 Winter and Spring quarters, each student group will focus on one of the following projects: 1. Protecting farm workers and their children from pesticide exposure. 2. Protecting the rights of immigrant residents. 3. Protecting the privacy rights of criminal defendants. 4. Protecting Consumer Rights in Household Tax Preparation. The SCCLPP is open only to Stanford Law Students (both JD and Advanced Degree students). Students will be admitted by consent, with a preference for those with past coursework or experience in state or local government law, public interest lawyering, and public service generally. A strong preference attaches to students intending to enroll in both the Winter and Spring quarters, and we do not expect to enroll any new students in the spring quarter. (Students undertaking an externship at the County Counsel's Office during either term will be treated as two-term participants.) The seminar portion of the course meets the first five Wednesdays of the quarter from 4:15-6:15; it meets again the last Wednesday of the quarter for a lengthy evening briefing at the SCCC's office starting at 5:15 PM. 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.

Several states --- including California, Arizona and Utah --- are considering or already moving forward with changes to the regulations on who can provide legal services --- regulations that are contained in the Rules of Professional Conduct for each state. These proposed reforms are designed to accelerate innovation in the delivery of legal services, and increase access to justice, in part by allowing technology and people without JDs to play a greater role than they can today. As states consider these reforms, there are many questions around the likely impact of these reforms on consumers and providers of legal services, and the most promising regulatory regime(s). Students will research and write about such questions as: (1) What are some of the most promising models from other industries for protecting consumers from harm, and providing redress? (2) What might an independent regulator that oversees entities that provide legal services look like? (3) What are the most promising innovations in states that have experimented with non- lawyer providers and other access to justice initiatives. (4) What lessons can we learn from other contexts, including other countries and other professions (for example the medical context, where nurse practitioners can provide services directly, and people other than physicians can own entities that provide health care)? The client will be one or more of the following non-profits working on these issues: the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System, National Center on State Courts, or Responsive Law. The deliverables will be a set of policy briefs and talking points that will inform the regulatory reform debate. Students from a range of disciplines are very welcome, including undergraduates interested in public policy. We will tentatively meet Tues 4-5, but if that doesn't work for everyone, we can find times to meet during the lunch hour as well. Elements used in grading: Performance, Written Assignments, Final Paper. This practicum continues for two quarters - winter and spring. Only students enrolled in the winter quarter may continue with the project in the spring term. 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: Various government agencies and nonprofit groups. Formerly incarcerated individuals face a range of personal and institutional challenges in their reentry into broader society. Considerable research and many programs have focused on systems reform and support and social programs to increase the likelihood of successful reentry. But technological tools also have the potential to help lower friction and increase the success of reentry. This policy lab will engage with challenging legal, social, government systems, and technological questions, with opportunities to design and/or implement new tools to aid in the reentry process. We will work with a variety of stakeholders including government organizations and programs, non-profit entities, and legal innovators to prototype and evaluate new technological solutions to facilitate the reentry process and reduce recidivism. This practicum will build a collaborative team of diverse backgrounds and skill sets to learn from each other and enhance the overall capacity of the research and tool development. We encourage students who are interested in criminal justice, technology for social impact, access to justice, and entrepreneurship and innovation for social good to join us, including upper-division and graduate students from Law, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, MS&E, Public Policy, and the social sciences. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Performance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final PROJECT. 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.

This policy lab assists the newly formed California Committee for the Revision of the Penal Code in developing strategies for criminal justice reform in California. The Committee is directed by the Governor and state legislature with studying and making recommendations to simplify and rationalize the substance and procedure of criminal law in California. In 2020, the Committee will likely address five areas of the state's criminal justice system, and students will be responsible for helping set reform priorities within those subject areas, researching existing policy strengths and weaknesses, comparing California law with other jurisdictions, consulting with subject-matter experts, and suggesting and analyzing reform proposals. Students will work directly with Committee members and staff and attend Committee hearings in Sacramento and across the state. 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: Stanford Center for Ocean Solutions, https://oceansolutions.stanford.edu/. Illegal fishing has long plagued the world's oceans, undermining economic development, national security, food security, and human rights -- and nowhere is this more starkly evident than in the Pacific. From cans of tuna to shrimp cocktail, the legality of how this seafood is caught and processed is often uncertain. A recent World Resources Institute study estimates that half of illegal marine trading networks come from the Pacific, totaling between 3.7 and 7.2 million tons of fish stolen from fishermen and coastal nations. This policy lab confronts the global environmental, human rights and privacy challenges associated with the existing framework of international laws and policies. The research delves into international laws that apply to the high seas, illegal fishing and forced labor and slavery to locate leverage points and explore innovative solutions, including how new technologies might be developed and deployed. The research contributes to a pilot project -- The Friends of Ocean Action - led by World Economic Forum leaders who are exploring the nexus of international laws and policies, together with national implementation and enforcement mechanisms, related to governance of the oceans. Effective governance includes cooperation among nations, international seafood companies, nonprofit organizations, and the containment of rogue actors. The Stanford Center for Ocean Solutions serves as the policy client and will connect students with such partners as UN-sanctioned working groups, large seafood companies, and human rights and environmental NGOs. Students will produce policy briefs that will contribute to a comprehensive public report by the Center for Ocean Solutions. The Practicum will target using forums such as the upcoming UN Ocean Conference and UN Ocean Day as a platform to share student results. The practicum seeks law students and graduate and well-qualified undergraduates in such programs as earth systems, computer science, product design, public policy, sociology, and marine biology. 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.

Same as PSYC 107. Client: Broken No More, http://broken-no-more.org/about-us/. More Americans die every year of overdose than died in the entire course of the 1955-75 Vietnam conflict. Overdose has helped reduce aggregate US life expectancy for three years in a row¿something that has not happened in 100 years, including at the height of the AIDS epidemic in the '80s and '90s. Measured by loss-of-life, opiate-related overdose is the most acute national health crisis of our lifetimes. Student researchers will work closely with the client, Broken No More, a national organization of parents and families who have lost family members to opioid use. The organization supports grieving members and also pushes forward evidence-based, public health interventions to the opioid epidemic. This practicum explores legal approaches to a more comprehensive and thoughtful understanding to the Opioid Epidemic. The research team will evaluate whether various stakeholders have fulfilled their legal and regulatory obligations to respond to the epidemic, including whether hospitals and insurers fulfill their implied "duty of care." The questions addressed in this practicum could have life-saving impact on people currently suffering from opioid use disorder. The course seeks to build a diverse research team with students from law, public policy, medicine, public health, and sociology. 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.

Stanford Law and GSB graduates will play important roles solving many of our greatest societal problems¿in areas such as education, health, energy, and domestic and global poverty¿that call for action by governments and nonprofit, business, and hybrid organizations. Faculty at the two schools are currently working to enhance courses and programs that prepare students for careers addressing such challenges. This policy lab practicum will complement and support their efforts. We will learn about the careers that graduates of the two Schools have had in social problem-solving, policymaking, and policy advocacy; what skills their work demands; and how they acquired those skills. We will examine the curricula of policy schools, law schools, and business schools to learn how they prepare students for these roles. We will also ascertain student interest in particular courses and programs at Stanford and other institutions, including what attracts or deters students from pursuing joint degrees in policy. Insights from this practicum will help the two Schools design changes to their programs. GSB as well as SLS students are encouraged to enroll. 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.

This project will research and build an open-source resource library about diversity and classroom dynamics. The goal is to produce a well-curated collection linking to articles, books, and other reliable and authoritative materials to support faculty facilitation of dynamic and productive class discussions about issues of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, religion, exceptionalities, and more. Students will deeply engage with a broad range of literature in order to select the best resources for this unique collection. Students will also explore available trainings and workshops, including online programs, and create a resource list. 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.

Client: Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance. China is engaged in massive energy-infrastructure spending around the world. Whether that spending is high-carbon or low-carbon will do much to determine the future of global climate change. One swathe of that spending is known as the Belt and Road Initiative, or BRI. But there's confusion about (1) which Chinese-funded energy-infrastructure projects outside China are part of the BRI and which are not and (2) how Chinese energy-infrastructure spending, both as part of the BRI and beyond it, is affecting the carbon-emissions trajectory in key countries. These are crucial questions as the world crafts policies and financial mechanisms to meaningfully curb carbon emissions. In this policy lab, students will continue research underway at the Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance into (1) the opacity of definitions of the BRI and (2) how green or brown Chinese-infrastructure investments are, both in the BRI and outside of it. The work will proceed as case studies of four countries. The initial work has begun to point up two important hypotheses: (1) that, because of the fuzziness of definitions of what constitutes the BRI, analyzing Chinese foreign energy-infrastructure investment writ large is more important than analyzing so-called BRI investment specifically, and (2) that the environmental effect of Chinese energy-infrastructure investments abroad depends more on policies in the host countries than on Chinese policies. These conclusions, illustrated with real-world examples in the four case-study countries, have the potential to reframe Western attitudes toward Chinese energy spending in ways that could promote more international cooperation in battling climate change. The lab seeks two to four graduate students. Law students, business students, engineering and environmental-science students, and students with a focus in East Asia will be eligible. 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.

Background: With the sudden onslaught of the pandemic COVID 19 creating emergency requirements regarding professional and social distancing, government agencies in California have had to implement "telework" or remote work policies quickly, with limited guidance and limited awareness of best practices. Government agencies are complex institutions, performing diverse and vital functions and employing a wide variety of types of employees, some of whom are represented by labor bargaining units. They handle and manage information subject to privacy protections, and many of the communications engaged in between employees and with members of the public are also subject to public disclosure requirements. Public agencies also face financial, technological, and personnel resource limitations. California state agencies need to be able to anticipate work and access issues due to its experiences with natural and manmade disasters, frequently in the form of earthquakes and fires. The disruptions created by this pandemic, because of its impacts on the workforce and economy, are extreme but highlight the need for broad reconsideration of work functions, locations, and worker support. The Project: Working with one state agency, the California State Controller's Office (SCO), students will research and evaluate best practices for remote work by government employees and develop recommendations to ensure the critical government functions continue during a variety of disasters and emergencies. Students will also try to learn what remote work policies could be effectively implemented over the long term. After gaining an understanding of the key functions of the State Controller's Office, students will research and provide answers to several critical questions, which may include: What are legally required timelines for performance of key tasks and functions and how do these requirements implicate remote work? What are the best practices related to chain of command, communications, and redundancy protocols to ensure ongoing operations? How can remote work policies ensure that decision-making remains efficient and effective? What are the priority factors to analyze when determining which staff positions should be designated "essential" or "non-essential"? In the current coronavirus environment, how does this analysis implicate who can or should be physically onsite? What are the processes that are required to be in place should an employee whose work is designated essential have a person who is at risk at home? What are the implications for public employees related to FLSA, OSHA, and Workers' Compensation Insurance compliance? How have business, other government agencies, and nonprofits resolved these issues and what are their best practices? How can those practices be implemented within the SCO? What are the technology requirements that can effectuate remote work? What types of encryption are necessary to protect private and sensitive data? If workers are using their privately-owned technology (e.g., cellular phones, computers), what are the possible exposures due to public records act reporting requirements and in a litigation setting? What are the equity implications of operationalizing remote work policies? What are the demographics of the positions with functions that can and cannot most likely take advantage of remote work? What are implications for the worker experience of remote work in different demographic groups? What are the impacts of differential levels of access to adequate technology at home? What is a cost-benefit analysis of shifting to more remote work? Are there cost-savings through potential reduction of work force or physical space? If so, what are the equity implications? What are the environmental benefits of shifting to remote work? Student Skills and Interests: All students are welcome regardless of experience as long as you are interested in this topic. However, if you have any experience working with government agencies, in disaster or emergency prepared or response, or in applying an equity analysis to policies and programs, please note that in your consent form. 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.

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.

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 in the Bay Area 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. .

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 in the Bay Area 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.

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.

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.

The CLC is the closest thing to a general legal services office among Stanford's clinical offerings. Based in East Palo Alto, the CLC provides students with the opportunity to provide direct legal services to low-income residents, while thinking critically about the role of lawyers and lawyering in addressing the problems of America's so-called "working poor." The Clinic's practice is in four areas: (1) housing (eviction defense and Section 8 termination); (2) wage and hour and related workers' rights; (3) social security and disability benefits; and (4) criminal record expungement. Each student handles his or her own caseload, which is comprised of cases matters in all of the practice areas. The practice areas are selected and designed to lie at the intersection where the community's unmet legal needs and students' learning needs correspond. The clinic's docket is fundamentally a trial docket. Students have first-chair responsibility for their cases, and perform all of the lawyering tasks necessary to advance their clients' interests, including interviewing, counseling, negotiation, fact investigation, legal research, and representation in the court and agency settings that hear the clients' cases. Skills emphasized include those trial lawyering skills, as well as time management and developing client-centered lawyering practices. Students may also have the chance to participate in outreach or policy-level projects, such as representing the clinic on a state or regional committee on a substantive issue, doing community education workshops at sites around the Peninsula, and/or legislative research and advocacy. In the clinic seminar and in regular supervision, students are encouraged to interrogate the effectiveness of the legal system at delivering "justice" for their clients and to explore creative ways that legal knowledge can be deployed to attack the social problems attendant to low wages, substandard and unstable housing, and other features of low-income life in Silicon Valley. 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: Clinical case/project work, seminar preparation and participation, attendance, reflection papers and project.

The CLC is the closest thing to a general legal services office among Stanford's clinical offerings. Based in East Palo Alto, the CLC provides students with the opportunity to provide direct legal services to low-income residents, while thinking critically about the role of lawyers and lawyering in addressing the problems of America's so-called "working poor." The Clinic's practice is in four areas: (1) housing (eviction defense and Section 8 termination); (2) wage and hour and related workers' rights; (3) social security and disability benefits; and (4) criminal record expungement. Each student handles his or her own caseload, which is comprised of cases matters in all of the practice areas. The practice areas are selected and designed to lie at the intersection where the community's unmet legal needs and students' learning needs correspond. The clinic's docket is fundamentally a trial docket. Students have first-chair responsibility for their cases, and perform all of the lawyering tasks necessary to advance their clients' interests, including interviewing, counseling, negotiation, fact investigation, legal research, and representation in the court and agency settings that hear the clients' cases. Skills emphasized include those trial lawyering skills, as well as time management and developing client-centered lawyering practices. Students may also have the chance to participate in outreach or policy-level projects, such as representing the clinic on a state or regional committee on a substantive issue, doing community education workshops at sites around the Peninsula, and/or legislative research and advocacy. In the clinic seminar and in regular supervision, students are encouraged to interrogate the effectiveness of the legal system at delivering "justice" for their clients and to explore creative ways that legal knowledge can be deployed to attack the social problems attendant to low wages, substandard and unstable housing, and other features of low-income life in Silicon Valley. 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: Clinical case/project work, seminar preparation and participation, attendance, reflection papers and project.

The CLC is the closest thing to a general legal services office among Stanford's clinical offerings. Based in East Palo Alto, the CLC provides students with the opportunity to provide direct legal services to low-income residents, while thinking critically about the role of lawyers and lawyering in addressing the problems of America's so-called "working poor." The Clinic's practice is in four areas: (1) housing (eviction defense and Section 8 termination); (2) wage and hour and related workers' rights; (3) social security and disability benefits; and (4) criminal record expungement. Each student handles his or her own caseload, which is comprised of cases matters in all of the practice areas. The practice areas are selected and designed to lie at the intersection where the community's unmet legal needs and students' learning needs correspond. The clinic's docket is fundamentally a trial docket. Students have first-chair responsibility for their cases, and perform all of the lawyering tasks necessary to advance their clients' interests, including interviewing, counseling, negotiation, fact investigation, legal research, and representation in the court and agency settings that hear the clients' cases. Skills emphasized include those trial lawyering skills, as well as time management and developing client-centered lawyering practices. Students may also have the chance to participate in outreach or policy-level projects, such as representing the clinic on a state or regional committee on a substantive issue, doing community education workshops at sites around the Peninsula, and/or legislative research and advocacy. In the clinic seminar and in regular supervision, students are encouraged to interrogate the effectiveness of the legal system at delivering "justice" for their clients and to explore creative ways that legal knowledge can be deployed to attack the social problems attendant to low wages, substandard and unstable housing, and other features of low-income life in Silicon Valley. 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: Clinical case/project work, seminar preparation and participation, attendance, reflection papers and project.

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.

Students in the Criminal Defense Clinic represent local residents in a wide range of misdemeanor cases in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties. Students are California Bar Certified and thus appear in court and argue cases with faculty standing by. Students take the lead role in all aspects of case development, including interviewing clients and witnesses, investigating facts, developing case strategy, negotiating with prosecutors, drafting and arguing motions, and occasionally trying cases before judges and juries. Common charges include drug use and possession, assault, theft, and vandalism. While students have primary responsibility for all aspects of their cases, all work is closely supervised. The Criminal Defense Clinic is an intensive, fast-paced, and demanding program of education and practical skills, taught through introductory training and ongoing workshops and skills practicums. The Clinic also addresses broader systemic issues such as implicit bias in the legal system, immigration consequences, economic disparities, and addiction. The goal of the Clinic is to train students how to conduct a criminal case while engaging in thoughtful reflection and providing holistic representation. The Clinic's broader goal is to provide lawyering skills and habits of mind transferrable to any student's chosen field of practice. While the work is often challenging and sometimes heartbreaking, it offers students a unique opportunity to put their skills, intellect, and compassion to use by serving people in a moment of great need. 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: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and case work and professionalism.

Students in the Criminal Defense Clinic represent local residents in a wide range of misdemeanor cases in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties. Students are California Bar Certified and thus appear in court and argue cases with faculty standing by. Students take the lead role in all aspects of case development, including interviewing clients and witnesses, investigating facts, developing case strategy, negotiating with prosecutors, drafting and arguing motions, and occasionally trying cases before judges and juries. Common charges include drug use and possession, assault, theft, and vandalism. While students have primary responsibility for all aspects of their cases, all work is closely supervised. The Criminal Defense Clinic is an intensive, fast-paced, and demanding program of education and practical skills, taught through introductory training and ongoing workshops and skills practicums. The Clinic also addresses broader systemic issues such as implicit bias in the legal system, immigration consequences, economic disparities, and addiction. The goal of the Clinic is to train students how to conduct a criminal case while engaging in thoughtful reflection and providing holistic representation. The Clinic's broader goal is to provide lawyering skills and habits of mind transferrable to any student's chosen field of practice. While the work is often challenging and sometimes heartbreaking, it offers students a unique opportunity to put their skills, intellect, and compassion to use by serving people in a moment of great need. 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: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and case work and professionalism.

Students in the Criminal Defense Clinic represent local residents in a wide range of misdemeanor cases in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties. Students are California Bar Certified and thus appear in court and argue cases with faculty standing by. Students take the lead role in all aspects of case development, including interviewing clients and witnesses, investigating facts, developing case strategy, negotiating with prosecutors, drafting and arguing motions, and occasionally trying cases before judges and juries. Common charges include drug use and possession, assault, theft, and vandalism. While students have primary responsibility for all aspects of their cases, all work is closely supervised. The Criminal Defense Clinic is an intensive, fast-paced, and demanding program of education and practical skills, taught through introductory training and ongoing workshops and skills practicums. The Clinic also addresses broader systemic issues such as implicit bias in the legal system, immigration consequences, economic disparities, and addiction. The goal of the Clinic is to train students how to conduct a criminal case while engaging in thoughtful reflection and providing holistic representation. The Clinic's broader goal is to provide lawyering skills and habits of mind transferrable to any student's chosen field of practice. While the work is often challenging and sometimes heartbreaking, it offers students a unique opportunity to put their skills, intellect, and compassion to use by serving people in a moment of great need. 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: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and case work and professionalism.

The six students enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic advocate before the San Jose Superior Court under the guidance of Santa Clara County prosecutors. Students formulate case strategy, identify and interview witnesses, and conduct evidentiary motions, preliminary hearings, and occasional nonjury trials. The cases concern thefts, burglaries, assaults, weapons possession, drunk driving, and a range of other crimes. Students offer testimony by police officers, crime victims, and other witnesses and cross-examine defense witnesses, including those defendants who take the stand. Clinic students spend at least four full days a week -- Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays -- at the D.A.'s office or in court. There generally will be two class sessions each week: a three-hour on-campus class on Wednesday mornings and a Tuesday lunch seminar at the D.A.'s office. Toward the beginning of our term, classes focus on skills training, including direct and cross-examination, admission of physical evidence, making and answering objections, and argument. Toward the end of the term our classroom focus shifts to an examination and critique of the local mechanisms of criminal justice. Topics include the impact of race, gender, and class on the quality of justice; the institutional strengths and weaknesses of the actors in the system; prison conditions and prison reform; and the ethical issues that confront prosecutors and defense lawyers. Students typically tour the Santa Clara County crime lab, Solano State Prison, FCI-Dublin (a federal women's prison), and the Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility in Stockton and have the option to spend an evening on a police ride-along. Students must submit regular written reflections on their experiences in and observations of the local justice system. Their assigned cases often will demand written court filings. During most weeks students will meet one-on-one with the faculty supervisor. Evidence is a prerequisite. Courses in criminal procedure (investigation) and trial advocacy are strongly encouraged. Students will be awarded three separate grades, each reflecting four credits, for clinical practice, clinical methods, and clinical coursework. Elements used in grading include class attendance and participation, writing assignments, case preparation, and courtroom presentations and advocacy. Class attendance is mandatory. Grading is on the H/P system. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses: All of the Law School's clinical courses, other than advanced clinics, are offered fulltime for twelve credits. This format allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without having to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams, and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic may not enroll in any other class, seminar, directed research, or other credit-yielding activity within the Law School or University during their clinical quarter. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants expected to attend a daytime class regularly. There is a limited exception for joint-degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved case by case. The clinical quarter begins on the first day of classes and runs through the final day of exam period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday-to-Friday workweek without permission from onsite and faculty supervisors. Students are expected to be available by email or cellphone during workday hours Monday through Friday and are expected to devote at least thirty-five hours per week to various facets of this work. In some weeks casework may demand much longer hours. Enrollment in a clinic is binding: Once a student has applied to and been selected by a clinic, the student may not drop the course except in rare 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 (fulltime or advanced) that would result in their earning more than twenty-seven clinical credits during their law school careers. For more general information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.

The six students enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic advocate before the San Jose Superior Court under the guidance of Santa Clara County prosecutors. Students formulate case strategy, identify and interview witnesses, and conduct evidentiary motions, preliminary hearings, and occasional nonjury trials. The cases concern thefts, burglaries, assaults, weapons possession, drunk driving, and a range of other crimes. Students offer testimony by police officers, crime victims, and other witnesses and cross-examine defense witnesses, including those defendants who take the stand. Clinic students spend at least four full days a week -- Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays -- at the D.A.'s office or in court. There generally will be two class sessions each week: a three-hour on-campus class on Wednesday mornings and a Tuesday lunch seminar at the D.A.'s office. Toward the beginning of our term, classes focus on skills training, including direct and cross-examination, admission of physical evidence, making and answering objections, and argument. Toward the end of the term our classroom focus shifts to an examination and critique of the local mechanisms of criminal justice. Topics include the impact of race, gender, and class on the quality of justice; the institutional strengths and weaknesses of the actors in the system; prison conditions and prison reform; and the ethical issues that confront prosecutors and defense lawyers. Students typically tour the Santa Clara County crime lab, Solano State Prison, FCI-Dublin (a federal women's prison), and the Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility in Stockton and have the option to spend an evening on a police ride-along. Students must submit regular written reflections on their experiences in and observations of the local justice system. Their assigned cases often will demand written court filings. During most weeks students will meet one-on-one with the faculty supervisor. Evidence is a prerequisite. Courses in criminal procedure (investigation) and trial advocacy are strongly encouraged. Students will be awarded three separate grades, each reflecting four credits, for clinical practice, clinical methods, and clinical coursework. Elements used in grading include class attendance and participation, writing assignments, case preparation, and courtroom presentations and advocacy. Class attendance is mandatory. Grading is on the H/P system. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses: All of the Law School's clinical courses, other than advanced clinics, are offered fulltime for twelve credits. This format allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without having to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams, and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic may not enroll in any other class, seminar, directed research, or other credit-yielding activity within the Law School or University during their clinical quarter. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants expected to attend a daytime class regularly. There is a limited exception for joint-degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved case by case. The clinical quarter begins on the first day of classes and runs through the final day of exam period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday-to-Friday workweek without permission from onsite and faculty supervisors. Students are expected to be available by email or cellphone during workday hours Monday through Friday and are expected to devote at least thirty-five hours per week to various facets of this work. In some weeks casework may demand much longer hours. Enrollment in a clinic is binding: Once a student has applied to and been selected by a clinic, the student may not drop the course except in rare 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 (fulltime or advanced) that would result in their earning more than twenty-seven clinical credits during their law school careers. For more general information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.

The six students enrolled in the Criminal Prosecution Clinic advocate before the San Jose Superior Court under the guidance of Santa Clara County prosecutors. Students formulate case strategy, identify and interview witnesses, and conduct evidentiary motions, preliminary hearings, and occasional nonjury trials. The cases concern thefts, burglaries, assaults, weapons possession, drunk driving, and a range of other crimes. Students offer testimony by police officers, crime victims, and other witnesses and cross-examine defense witnesses, including those defendants who take the stand. Clinic students spend at least four full days a week -- Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays -- at the D.A.'s office or in court. There generally will be two class sessions each week: a three-hour on-campus class on Wednesday mornings and a Tuesday lunch seminar at the D.A.'s office. Toward the beginning of our term, classes focus on skills training, including direct and cross-examination, admission of physical evidence, making and answering objections, and argument. Toward the end of the term our classroom focus shifts to an examination and critique of the local mechanisms of criminal justice. Topics include the impact of race, gender, and class on the quality of justice; the institutional strengths and weaknesses of the actors in the system; prison conditions and prison reform; and the ethical issues that confront prosecutors and defense lawyers. Students typically tour the Santa Clara County crime lab, Solano State Prison, FCI-Dublin (a federal women's prison), and the Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility in Stockton and have the option to spend an evening on a police ride-along. Students must submit regular written reflections on their experiences in and observations of the local justice system. Their assigned cases often will demand written court filings. During most weeks students will meet one-on-one with the faculty supervisor. Evidence is a prerequisite. Courses in criminal procedure (investigation) and trial advocacy are strongly encouraged. Students will be awarded three separate grades, each reflecting four credits, for clinical practice, clinical methods, and clinical coursework. Elements used in grading include class attendance and participation, writing assignments, case preparation, and courtroom presentations and advocacy. Class attendance is mandatory. Grading is on the H/P system. Special Instructions: General Structure of Clinical Courses: All of the Law School's clinical courses, other than advanced clinics, are offered fulltime for twelve credits. This format allows students to immerse themselves in the professional experience without having to balance clinical projects with other classes, exams, and papers. Students enrolled in a clinic may not enroll in any other class, seminar, directed research, or other credit-yielding activity within the Law School or University during their clinical quarter. Nor are they allowed to serve as teaching assistants expected to attend a daytime class regularly. There is a limited exception for joint-degree students who are required to take specific courses each quarter and who would be foreclosed from taking a clinic unless allowed to co-register. These exceptions are approved case by case. The clinical quarter begins on the first day of classes and runs through the final day of exam period. Students should not plan personal travel during the Monday-to-Friday workweek without permission from onsite and faculty supervisors. Students are expected to be available by email or cellphone during workday hours Monday through Friday and are expected to devote at least thirty-five hours per week to various facets of this work. In some weeks casework may demand much longer hours. Enrollment in a clinic is binding: Once a student has applied to and been selected by a clinic, the student may not drop the course except in rare 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 (fulltime or advanced) that would result in their earning more than twenty-seven clinical credits during their law school careers. For more general information about clinic enrollment and operations, please see the clinic policy document posted on the SLS website.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The International Human Rights & Conflict Resolution Advanced Clinic offers the opportunity for students who have already successfully completed Clinic quarter to pursue one or more specific projects in conjunction with the Clinic, either independently or in collaboration with colleague(s) enrolled in the regular clinic. Any travel will be strictly contingent on the Advanced Clinical student's availability and the needs of the project. Advanced Clinical students are expected to participate in as much of the regular clinical seminar and seminar simulations as possible given pre-existing scheduling constraints and previous experience. 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: Project work, writing assignments, case preparation, attendance and class participation.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation Clinic provides students the opportunity to understand and advocate for sound innovation policies. Students in the clinic will help shape the course and outcome of significant legal and policy debates before courts, legislators, regulatory bodies, and other policy makers. Our work focuses on the relationship between law, regulation and innovation in areas ranging from biotechnology to information technology, pharmaceuticals, clean technology, and the creation and distribution of information. Students will represent a variety of NGOs and non-profit entities and, in certain cases, groups or associations of innovators, entrepreneurs, technology users or consumers, economists, technologists, legal academics, and the like, and occasionally individual inventors, start-ups, journalists, or researchers. Students will address their client's complex issues through tools that may include amicus briefs; comments or testimony in rulemaking and regulatory proceedings (i.e., DMCA exemption requests, comments to OSTP on issues such as open access, privacy or open data, comments to the FTC as part of IP and innovation hearings and reports, comments to the PTO or FDA, etc.); comments or testimony on proposed legislation; and whitepapers or other "best practices" documents to encourage sensible and balanced legal approaches to innovation and creativity. Our policy advocacy will often involve intertwined factual, technological, business, economic, political and public relations considerations along with the substantive legal issues. Students in the clinic may be called upon to collaborate with technologists, researchers, doctors, economists, social scientists, industry experts, and others to develop and articulate the appropriate policy advocacy for their clients. The clinic seminar will focus on student-led workshops regarding client projects, and on engaging with current thinking around innovation, innovation economics and the impact of IP, antitrust, and other law and regulation on innovation. We will explore the process of policy advocacy, including various policy levers, the types of tools available to advocates and the strategies and tactics that may be employed, and will consider and critique a variety of case studies of previous advocacy, situating them in the larger context in which these efforts occurred. Students will critically examine the role of lawyers advocating for the public interest and for sound and sensible innovation policy outcomes and bring those lessons to bear on their own clinic work. A background in technology may be useful in some cases but is not necessary to a successful experience in the clinic. - - 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, preparation for and participation in clinic seminar; reflection papers; and clinical case and project work including specific elements of methodical analysis, critical thinking, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and strategy development, applicable across client and seminar work.

The Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation Clinic provides students the opportunity to understand and advocate for sound innovation policies. Students in the clinic will help shape the course and outcome of significant legal and policy debates before courts, legislators, regulatory bodies, and other policy makers. Our work focuses on the relationship between law, regulation and innovation in areas ranging from biotechnology to information technology, pharmaceuticals, clean technology, and the creation and distribution of information. Students will represent a variety of NGOs and non-profit entities and, in certain cases, groups or associations of innovators, entrepreneurs, technology users or consumers, economists, technologists, legal academics, and the like, and occasionally individual inventors, start-ups, journalists, or researchers. Students will address their client's complex issues through tools that may include amicus briefs; comments or testimony in rulemaking and regulatory proceedings (i.e., DMCA exemption requests, comments to OSTP on issues such as open access, privacy or open data, comments to the FTC as part of IP and innovation hearings and reports, comments to the PTO or FDA, etc.); comments or testimony on proposed legislation; and whitepapers or other "best practices" documents to encourage sensible and balanced legal approaches to innovation and creativity. Our policy advocacy will often involve intertwined factual, technological, business, economic, political and public relations considerations along with the substantive legal issues. Students in the clinic may be called upon to collaborate with technologists, researchers, doctors, economists, social scientists, industry experts, and others to develop and articulate the appropriate policy advocacy for their clients. The clinic seminar will focus on student-led workshops regarding client projects, and on engaging with current thinking around innovation, innovation economics and the impact of IP, antitrust, and other law and regulation on innovation. We will explore the process of policy advocacy, including various policy levers, the types of tools available to advocates and the strategies and tactics that may be employed, and will consider and critique a variety of case studies of previous advocacy, situating them in the larger context in which these efforts occurred. Students will critically examine the role of lawyers advocating for the public interest and for sound and sensible innovation policy outcomes and bring those lessons to bear on their own clinic work. A background in technology may be useful in some cases but is not necessary to a successful experience in the clinic. - - 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, preparation for and participation in clinic seminar; reflection papers; and clinical case and project work including specific elements of methodical analysis, critical thinking, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and strategy development, applicable across client and seminar work.

The Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation Clinic provides students the opportunity to understand and advocate for sound innovation policies. Students in the clinic will help shape the course and outcome of significant legal and policy debates before courts, legislators, regulatory bodies, and other policy makers. Our work focuses on the relationship between law, regulation and innovation in areas ranging from biotechnology to information technology, pharmaceuticals, clean technology, and the creation and distribution of information. Students will represent a variety of NGOs and non-profit entities and, in certain cases, groups or associations of innovators, entrepreneurs, technology users or consumers, economists, technologists, legal academics, and the like, and occasionally individual inventors, start-ups, journalists, or researchers. Students will address their client's complex issues through tools that may include amicus briefs; comments or testimony in rulemaking and regulatory proceedings (i.e., DMCA exemption requests, comments to OSTP on issues such as open access, privacy or open data, comments to the FTC as part of IP and innovation hearings and reports, comments to the PTO or FDA, etc.); comments or testimony on proposed legislation; and whitepapers or other "best practices" documents to encourage sensible and balanced legal approaches to innovation and creativity. Our policy advocacy will often involve intertwined factual, technological, business, economic, political and public relations considerations along with the substantive legal issues. Students in the clinic may be called upon to collaborate with technologists, researchers, doctors, economists, social scientists, industry experts, and others to develop and articulate the appropriate policy advocacy for their clients. The clinic seminar will focus on student-led workshops regarding client projects, and on engaging with current thinking around innovation, innovation economics and the impact of IP, antitrust, and other law and regulation on innovation. We will explore the process of policy advocacy, including various policy levers, the types of tools available to advocates and the strategies and tactics that may be employed, and will consider and critique a variety of case studies of previous advocacy, situating them in the larger context in which these efforts occurred. Students will critically examine the role of lawyers advocating for the public interest and for sound and sensible innovation policy outcomes and bring those lessons to bear on their own clinic work. A background in technology may be useful in some cases but is not necessary to a successful experience in the clinic. - - 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, preparation for and participation in clinic seminar; reflection papers; and clinical case and project work including specific elements of methodical analysis, critical thinking, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and strategy development, applicable across client and seminar work.

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 272). Elements used in grading: Written assignments and client interactions.

The O&T Clinic is Stanford's only corporate experiential course involving representation of real clients. We're designed for both students interested in M&A, capital markets, emerging company, tech transactions or other corporate work, and those wanting to explore a non-litigation, advisory-oriented practice. Prior experience in business or corporate law is welcome but certainly not necessary. Students represent multiple clients during the term. Our clients are all established nonprofit corporations. Most generate annual revenues in the range of $1 - $100 million, and some are larger. These clients have boards of directors, run complex programs, own brands and other intellectual property, and engage in a range of transactions, yet are small enough that our contact is almost always the CEO, CFO, general counsel, or other senior executive. O&T client engagements provide students with opportunities to assess facts; develop advice; read and write contracts, corporate governance materials, emails and other client communications; lead meetings and calls with clients; collaborate with colleagues; and manage projects. Our practice is document-intensive and service-oriented; we focus on clear communication and crisp execution. The course includes a class that generally meets twice a week. Class meetings center on student-led workshops regarding client projects and on orientation to corporate practice, including discussion of core commercial relationships such as acquisition, credit, and licensing, and practice skills such as transaction planning and management. Guests often join us; those are occasions for informal conversations with general counsels and law firm partners. Information about prior projects is available from the instructors and on the SLS website. 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: The syllabus includes specific expectations and criteria relating to methodical analysis, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and crisp execution, applicable across client and seminar work.

The O&T Clinic is Stanford's only corporate experiential course involving representation of real clients. We're designed for both students interested in M&A, capital markets, emerging company, tech transactions or other corporate work, and those wanting to explore a non-litigation, advisory-oriented practice. Prior experience in business or corporate law is welcome but certainly not necessary. Students represent multiple clients during the term. Our clients are all established nonprofit corporations. Most generate annual revenues in the range of $1 - $100 million, and some are larger. These clients have boards of directors, run complex programs, own brands and other intellectual property, and engage in a range of transactions, yet are small enough that our contact is almost always the CEO, CFO, general counsel, or other senior executive. O&T client engagements provide students with opportunities to assess facts; develop advice; read and write contracts, corporate governance materials, emails and other client communications; lead meetings and calls with clients; collaborate with colleagues; and manage projects. Our practice is document-intensive and service-oriented; we focus on clear communication and crisp execution. The course includes a class that generally meets twice a week. Class meetings center on student-led workshops regarding client projects and on orientation to corporate practice, including discussion of core commercial relationships such as acquisition, credit, and licensing, and practice skills such as transaction planning and management. Guests often join us; those are occasions for informal conversations with general counsels and law firm partners. Information about prior projects is available from the instructors and on the SLS website. 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: The syllabus includes specific expectations and criteria relating to methodical analysis, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and crisp execution, applicable across client and seminar work.

The O&T Clinic is Stanford's only corporate experiential course involving representation of real clients. We're designed for both students interested in M&A, capital markets, emerging company, tech transactions or other corporate work, and those wanting to explore a non-litigation, advisory-oriented practice. Prior experience in business or corporate law is welcome but certainly not necessary. Students represent multiple clients during the term. Our clients are all established nonprofit corporations. Most generate annual revenues in the range of $1 - $100 million, and some are larger. These clients have boards of directors, run complex programs, own brands and other intellectual property, and engage in a range of transactions, yet are small enough that our contact is almost always the CEO, CFO, general counsel, or other senior executive. O&T client engagements provide students with opportunities to assess facts; develop advice; read and write contracts, corporate governance materials, emails and other client communications; lead meetings and calls with clients; collaborate with colleagues; and manage projects. Our practice is document-intensive and service-oriented; we focus on clear communication and crisp execution. The course includes a class that generally meets twice a week. Class meetings center on student-led workshops regarding client projects and on orientation to corporate practice, including discussion of core commercial relationships such as acquisition, credit, and licensing, and practice skills such as transaction planning and management. Guests often join us; those are occasions for informal conversations with general counsels and law firm partners. Information about prior projects is available from the instructors and on the SLS website. 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: The syllabus includes specific expectations and criteria relating to methodical analysis, close reading, efficient writing, effective collaboration, and crisp execution, applicable across client and seminar work.

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.

The Religious Liberty Clinic is the only clinic of its kind in the country. The landmark program offers participating students a full-time, first-chair experience representing a diverse group of clients in legal disputes arising from a wide range of beliefs, practices, and circumstances. Students learn in class and engage through reflective and supervised practice the laws, norms, and limits affecting the exercise of religious freedom in a pluralistic society. Students are expected to counsel individual or institutional clients and litigate on their behalf with excellence, professionalism, and maturity. In clinic, students typically handle an accommodation project - e.g., represent a prisoner, student, or employee facing obstacles in the exercise of faith - as well as a longer-term litigation or development matter - e.g., represent a small church, synagogue, or mosque with zoning issues, or an individual challenging state preferences for particular beliefs. Opportunities to draft amicus briefs also arise. The clinic involves agency, trial, and appellate practice - though time constraints may not permit each student to work in all areas - under the empowering supervision of faculty and staff. Students work in assigned case teams but are also encouraged to help develop new clients and matters. 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: Clinical case/project work, clinical performance, seminar preparation and participation.

The Religious Liberty Clinic is the only clinic of its kind in the country. The landmark program offers participating students a full-time, first-chair experience representing a diverse group of clients in legal disputes arising from a wide range of beliefs, practices, and circumstances. Students learn in class and engage through reflective and supervised practice the laws, norms, and limits affecting the exercise of religious freedom in a pluralistic society. Students are expected to counsel individual or institutional clients and litigate on their behalf with excellence, professionalism, and maturity. In clinic, students typically handle an accommodation project - e.g., represent a prisoner, student, or employee facing obstacles in the exercise of faith - as well as a longer-term litigation or development matter - e.g., represent a small church, synagogue, or mosque with zoning issues, or an individual challenging state preferences for particular beliefs. Opportunities to draft amicus briefs also arise. The clinic involves agency, trial, and appellate practice - though time constraints may not permit each student to work in all areas - under the empowering supervision of faculty and staff. Students work in assigned case teams but are also encouraged to help develop new clients and matters. 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: Clinical case/project work, clinical performance, seminar preparation and participation.

The Religious Liberty Clinic is the only clinic of its kind in the country. The landmark program offers participating students a full-time, first-chair experience representing a diverse group of clients in legal disputes arising from a wide range of beliefs, practices, and circumstances. Students learn in class and engage through reflective and supervised practice the laws, norms, and limits affecting the exercise of religious freedom in a pluralistic society. Students are expected to counsel individual or institutional clients and litigate on their behalf with excellence, professionalism, and maturity. In clinic, students typically handle an accommodation project - e.g., represent a prisoner, student, or employee facing obstacles in the exercise of faith - as well as a longer-term litigation or development matter - e.g., represent a small church, synagogue, or mosque with zoning issues, or an individual challenging state preferences for particular beliefs. Opportunities to draft amicus briefs also arise. The clinic involves agency, trial, and appellate practice - though time constraints may not permit each student to work in all areas - under the empowering supervision of faculty and staff. Students work in assigned case teams but are also encouraged to help develop new clients and matters. 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: Clinical case/project work, clinical performance, seminar preparation and participation.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The Youth and Education Advocacy Clinic offers students the opportunity to participate in a wide variety of educational rights and reform work, including direct representation of youth and families in special education and school discipline matters, community outreach and education, school reform litigation, and/or strategic policy research and consulting. All students will have an opportunity to represent elementary and high school students with disabilities in special education proceedings, to represent students in school discipline proceedings, or to work with coalitions and/or other education-sector agencies to advance equity-minded educational policies and school reform. Students working on special education matters will have the opportunity to handle all aspects of their clients' cases. Students working in this area will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, work with medical and mental health professionals and experts, conduct legal and educational research, create case plans, and represent clients at individual education program (IEP) team meetings, mediation or special education due process hearings. This work will offer students a chance to study the relationship between individual special education advocacy and system-wide reform efforts such as impact litigation. Students working on school discipline matters will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, interview witnesses, conduct legal and educational research, create case plan, and represent clients at school discipline hearings such as expulsion hearings. Such hearings provide the opportunity to present oral and written argument, examine witnesses, and present evidence before a hearing officer. If appropriate and necessary, such proceedings also present the opportunity to represent students on appeal before the school district board of trustees or the county board of education. Students may also have the opportunity to participate in complex school reform litigation, including the monitoring and enforcement of a consent decree and corrective action plan in an ongoing special education lawsuit or appellate and trial work in a pathbreaking educational rights case on behalf of Native American students. Finally, students who are interested in strategic policy research and management consulting on behalf of public education institutional clients (school districts, charter schools, state education agencies) will have the opportunity to participate in the multi-disciplinary collaborations with non-profit clients. The education clinic includes a one-week intensive training program held at the beginning of the quarter, weekly seminars that focus on legal skills and issues in law and education policy, regular case review, and a many opportunities for feedback and reflection with the instructors. Admission is by consent of instructor. 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. -- Cross listed with the School of Education. -- Elements used in grading: Projects and class participation. (Cross-listed with EDUCATION 334 A,B,C).

The Youth and Education Advocacy Clinic offers students the opportunity to participate in a wide variety of educational rights and reform work, including direct representation of youth and families in special education and school discipline matters, community outreach and education, school reform litigation, and/or strategic policy research and consulting. All students will have an opportunity to represent elementary and high school students with disabilities in special education proceedings, to represent students in school discipline proceedings, or to work with coalitions and/or other education-sector agencies to advance equity-minded educational policies and school reform. Students working on special education matters will have the opportunity to handle all aspects of their clients' cases. Students working in this area will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, work with medical and mental health professionals and experts, conduct legal and educational research, create case plans, and represent clients at individual education program (IEP) team meetings, mediation or special education due process hearings. This work will offer students a chance to study the relationship between individual special education advocacy and system-wide reform efforts such as impact litigation. Students working on school discipline matters will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, interview witnesses, conduct legal and educational research, create case plan, and represent clients at school discipline hearings such as expulsion hearings. Such hearings provide the opportunity to present oral and written argument, examine witnesses, and present evidence before a hearing officer. If appropriate and necessary, such proceedings also present the opportunity to represent students on appeal before the school district board of trustees or the county board of education. Students may also have the opportunity to participate in complex school reform litigation, including the monitoring and enforcement of a consent decree and corrective action plan in an ongoing special education lawsuit or appellate and trial work in a pathbreaking educational rights case on behalf of Native American students. Finally, students who are interested in strategic policy research and management consulting on behalf of public education institutional clients (school districts, charter schools, state education agencies) will have the opportunity to participate in the multi-disciplinary collaborations with non-profit clients. The education clinic includes a one-week intensive training program held at the beginning of the quarter, weekly seminars that focus on legal skills and issues in law and education policy, regular case review, and a many opportunities for feedback and reflection with the instructors. Admission is by consent of instructor. 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. -- Cross listed with the School of Education. -- Elements used in grading: Projects and class participation. (Cross-listed with EDUCATION 334 A,B,C).

The Youth and Education Advocacy Clinic offers students the opportunity to participate in a wide variety of educational rights and reform work, including direct representation of youth and families in special education and school discipline matters, community outreach and education, school reform litigation, and/or strategic policy research and consulting. All students will have an opportunity to represent elementary and high school students with disabilities in special education proceedings, to represent students in school discipline proceedings, or to work with coalitions and/or other education-sector agencies to advance equity-minded educational policies and school reform. Students working on special education matters will have the opportunity to handle all aspects of their clients' cases. Students working in this area will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, work with medical and mental health professionals and experts, conduct legal and educational research, create case plans, and represent clients at individual education program (IEP) team meetings, mediation or special education due process hearings. This work will offer students a chance to study the relationship between individual special education advocacy and system-wide reform efforts such as impact litigation. Students working on school discipline matters will interview and counsel clients, investigate and develop facts, interview witnesses, conduct legal and educational research, create case plan, and represent clients at school discipline hearings such as expulsion hearings. Such hearings provide the opportunity to present oral and written argument, examine witnesses, and present evidence before a hearing officer. If appropriate and necessary, such proceedings also present the opportunity to represent students on appeal before the school district board of trustees or the county board of education. Students may also have the opportunity to participate in complex school reform litigation, including the monitoring and enforcement of a consent decree and corrective action plan in an ongoing special education lawsuit or appellate and trial work in a pathbreaking educational rights case on behalf of Native American students. Finally, students who are interested in strategic policy research and management consulting on behalf of public education institutional clients (school districts, charter schools, state education agencies) will have the opportunity to participate in the multi-disciplinary collaborations with non-profit clients. The education clinic includes a one-week intensive training program held at the beginning of the quarter, weekly seminars that focus on legal skills and issues in law and education policy, regular case review, and a many opportunities for feedback and reflection with the instructors. Admission is by consent of instructor. 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. -- Cross listed with the School of Education. -- Elements used in grading: Projects and class participation. (Cross-listed with EDUCATION 334 A,B,C).

Antitrust law sets the ground rules for competition. This course will explore the basic concepts in antitrust law. We will examine cartels and competitor collaborations, monopolization, vertical restraints and horizontal mergers. There are no prerequisites for this course. No economic background is required. The course is open to GSB students and graduate students in the Economics Department. To apply for this course, non-Law students must complete a Non-Law Student Add Request Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website (see Non-Law Students). Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance and TBA.

This course concerns the law and finance of corporate bankruptcy with an emphasis on reorganization. The course reviews the fundamentals of debt contracting, including the role of events of default, debt priority, and security interests. The course examines various aspects of the bankruptcy process: including the automatic stay, the avoidance of prebankruptcy transactions (e.g. fraudulent conveyances and preferences), the treatment of executory contracts, the debtor's governance structure during bankruptcy, the financing of operations and investments in bankruptcy, sales of assets during bankruptcy, and the process of negotiating, voting, and ultimately confirming a plan of reorganization. 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 section 01 (final exam) into section 02 (final paper), with consent of the instructor. Elements use in grading: Class participation; and exam or paper.

This course will provide advanced-degree students with coverage of Contracts law comparable to the fall course offered for first-year JD students. The course will identify the scope and purpose of the legal protection accorded to interests created by voluntary undertakings. We will focus on problems of contract formation, enforceability, interpretation, performance and excuses for non-performance, and remedies for breach. Not open to JD students. Open only to students in the SLS Advanced Degree Programs. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, paper, final exam.

The course discusses many of the major financial decisions made by corporate managers and investors. Topics include criteria for making investment decisions, valuation of financial assets and liabilities, relations between risk and return, capital structure choice, payout policy, the effective use and valuation of derivative securities, risk management and executive compensation. Essential in many of these decisions is the process of valuation, which will be an important emphasis of the course. Our goal is to understand general principles and then apply them in practically important scenarios. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, Midterm, Final Exam.

This course will cover the basic principles and rules regarding the taxation of domestic corporations. Prerequisite: LAW 1029 Taxation 1. Students must contact the instructor if they wish to have the prerequisite substituted or waived. Elements used in grading: attendance, class participation and final exam.

Lawyers often need an advanced understanding of corporate financial decisions, instruments, and transactions, including equity financing and initial public offerings, the determination of a firm's cost of capital, valuation, payout policy, recapitalizations and bankruptcy, mergers and acquisitions, and the market for corporate control. Advanced Corporate Finance introduces these topics by lecture and then explores them through detailed analysis of actual cases. This structure maximizes the synergy between theory and practice, providing students with portable, durable, and marketable tools for their careers. Legal considerations that arise in the execution of these corporate financial decisions include mandatory disclosure requirements, the issuance of dual class shares, charges of anticompetitive practices, taxation, appraisal cases and fairness opinions, takeover defenses and fiduciary duty challenges, contractual provisions in merger agreements, insider trading, and Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. This class rigorously advances both conceptual and practical/analytical understanding. The knowledge gained will facilitate professional dealings with chief executive officers and chief financial officers, boards of directors, investment bankers, consultants, portfolio and investment managers, venture capitalists, and private equity investors. Prerequisite: Corporate Finance I (Law 1009) or equivalent background with professor permission. Elements used in grading: class participation and final exam.

This course is an introduction to the basic legal rules and principles governing corporations and is the foundation for advanced business courses. We focus on the conflicts that arise between managers, investors, and creditors and we examine how law, markets, and contracts can reduce these conflicts and thereby improve firm value. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments, midterm, final exam.

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 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 rules 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. Class meets the first seven weeks of the quarter with an exam in the eighth week. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Exam. This class is open to ALL students (except 1Ls), and is not limited to students enrolled in the Global Quarter.

This course applies economic concepts to the practice of drafting and structuring contracts. Most of the materials consist of case studies of actual deals--movie financing, private equity investments, venture capital investment, mergers and acquisitions, bonds, joint ventures, and more. We will use those case studies to analyze the economics underlying business transactions and the contractual terms and structures used to respond to underlying economic challenges. Unlike past years, there will be no Deals II that follows Deals I; Deals I is a stand-alone course this year. There will be short written assignments, based on the case studies, for each class. In addition, there will be an in-school final exam. This is a consent of the instructor course only so that we can have students from all classes and students from outside the law school. There is no background required for the course. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, written assignments for each class, and TBA. 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 course will examine the legal, regulatory, trading and risk management aspects of the $600 trillion notional over-the-counter and cleared derivatives markets. Derivatives have historically not been well-understood by regulators or the public and have been blamed for causing or contributing to the economic crisis. This course will offer students the opportunity to understand how various derivative products are designed, traded and risk-managed and what role regulators play in the derivatives industry. In addition, students will focus on understanding key legal contracts that underpin the global derivatives industry, in particular focusing on the ISDA© Master Agreement and Credit Support Annex, as well as documentation supporting credit derivatives and other common derivative types. Students will also consider the shifting regulatory landscape for financial institutions and hedge funds as it relates to the way in which these products are traded, with rates and credit products migrating to clearinghouses. The course will conclude with an examination of the economic crisis that erupted with Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy in September 2008 and the consequent policy reactions to that event from a derivatives and bankruptcy perspective. Elements used in grading: attendance, written homework assignments and a final exam.

This class will cover the basics of the gift and estate tax system and estate planning principles. With these fundamentals, the course will then examine basic and advanced estate planning and wealth transfer techniques, including wills, various types of trusts, titling property, gifts during lifetime, charitable vehicles, handling closely held businesses and valuation matters--with an emphasis on how to use these tools in planning an estate to meet the objectives of a couple or individual. Probate of an estate, durable power of attorneys, conservatorships, and planning for other life situations will be explored. Elements used in grading: Class participation (is a small factor and only in the positive direction) and final open book exam. This course is open to GSB and other graduate students with consent of the instructor.

This course examines the United States federal income taxation of international operations and transactions, including international joint ventures and M&A transactions. Traditional issues such as income source, foreign tax credits, Subpart F, and international transfer pricing rules will be addressed. Congress recently encated fundamental reform of US international tax rules; important new provisions in this area will also be covered. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

This course examines the legal regime governing capital formation in the United States through the lens of the Silicon Valley venture capital process. The course addresses regulations governing the earliest angel investing rounds, through billion-dollar private placements, initial public offerings (IPO's), and subsequent governance as a publicly traded firm. The course also covers securities market litigation, including the Elon Musk Tesla Tweets and the Worldcom fraud. In addition, the course explores proposals to share equity with "gig-economy" workers, and secondary market mechanisms for trading privately held shares. The course relies extensively on recent real-world transactions as case study material. Elements used in grading: Final exam.

This course will explore various tax policy issues. In past years, the issues we've explored have included the carbon tax, health care, social security, consumption tax, tax compliance, tax shelters and school financing. Special Instructions: Grades will be based on either (A) class participation and memos responding to the discussion questions for any three of the sessions or (B) class participation and a research paper on a topic of your choosing (subject to instructor approval). Option B is 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. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, attendance and written assignments.

This course provides an overview of the federal income tax. Elements used in grading: class participation and final exam (self-scheduled).

This course provides an overview of the federal income tax. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam.

This 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 (In-School: open book, essay).

Real Estate Transactions and Commercial Development examines the structuring, negotiation and documentation of commercial real estate transactions. Working both individually and in groups, students will learn the requisite skills for drafting and negotiating leases, letters of intent, sale contracts and related financing documents. As time permits, development-related matters will be explored, including the legal aspects of site acquisition, design and construction. Classes will be a mixture of lectures, interactive discussions, and several mock negotiations. Elements used in grading: Class attendance, individual and group project participation, and written assignments. No final exam.

This course is a comprehensive introduction to the law and practice of mergers and acquisitions. It will cover key and emerging issues in transactional legal practice, including in mergers, tender offers, carve-outs and asset sales, negotiated and unsolicited acquisitions, buyouts, conflict transactions, and deal activism. In addition to the relevant laws, regulations and fiduciary standards, the course will cover key aspects of the deal-making process, including mechanisms for protecting a preferred transaction and increasing deal certainty, takeover preparedness and responding to hostile offers, as well as structuring alternatives. The course will include practical exercises on M&A topics and guest speakers who have encountered some of the issues discussed. Prerequisite: Corporations, except on petition to the instructors based on prior coursework or special experience. The course is intended both for students anticipating a career in transactional legal practice as well as for students seeking to develop a general understanding of issues in M&A transactions. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Exam. Casebook: We will be using a casebook: Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Theory, and Practice by Claire Hill, Brian JM Quinn and Steven Davidoff Solomon (2nd Ed; West Academic Publishing 2019).

This course is open to all students. It is a 7- week long course, but we will meet in person only during the first and last week. The course will consist primarily of on-line modules and problem sets that you will complete on your own and in small groups. It offers a basic introduction to the principles of finance and is intended as a primer on principles of valuation that are useful in everything from settlement negotiations to family law. No prior knowledge of finance will be assumed. We will cover topics such as: earnings, cash flows, income statements, interest rates, time value of money, estimating firm value, risk and return and the cost of capital. We will provide a framework for answering questions such as: how much is this project (or firm) worth? How should the firm raise money for a new investment? There will be weekly problem sets and you will get experience with building a simple model (excel spreadsheet) that will help you estimate the value of a potential new project. There is a final project where you are asked to value a company and present your teams' findings to the class during the final week of class. If you want an introduction to corporate finance and won't take the full 3 credit course, this is for you. We hope that this flexible format will allow more students to take finance. If you wish, you can take this course and then later take Corporate Finance courses. On-line component. Elements used in grading: Written Assignments, Final Project. This class is open to ALL students, and is not limited to students enrolled in the Global Quarter.

This 2-credit course will examine vast changes driven by innovation both from within traditional finance and from new ecosystems in fintech among others. Breathtaking advances in financial theory, big data, machine learning, artificial intelligence, computational capability, IoT, payment systems (e.g. blockchain, crypto currencies), new products (e.g. robo advising, digital lending, crowd funding, smart contracts), new trading processes (e.g. algorithmic trading, AI-driven sales & trading), and new markets (e.g. ETFs, zero-cost products), among others are changing not only how financial and non-financial firms conduct business but also how investors and supervisors view the players and the markets. We will discuss critical strategy, policy and legal issues, some resolved and others yet to be (e.g. failed business models, cyber challenges, financial warfare, fake news, bias problems, legal standing for cryptos). The course will feature perspectives from guest speakers including top finance executives and Silicon Valley entrepreneurs on up-to-the-minute challenges and opportunities in finance. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Final Paper. Cross-listed with Economics (ECON 152/252), Public Policy (PUBLPOL 364), Statistics (STATS 238).

This seminar is designed as an introduction to mergers and acquisitions litigation. The course provides both a practical and doctrinal perspective on M&A-related litigation and relies heavily on readings and issues derived from practice in the Delaware courts where much contemporary deal litigation occurs. Students will be asked to apply cases and legal principles in various practical situations that may arise in a transactional litigation practice. Familiarity with basic corporate law principles is assumed. Classes and readings. The first segment of the course will introduce basic doctrinal principles of M&A law and provide an introduction to the litigator's role in the transactional setting. The remaining sessions will revolve around two detailed M&A case studies, with seminar members divided into group roles. The first week of each case study will involve the negotiation and structuring of an M&A transaction. The second week will involve litigation relating to the transaction. As part of the case studies, students will negotiate a transaction, advise their client, take depositions, write briefs and present oral argument. Reading for the case studies will include case scenarios, supporting materials, and additional relevant case law and articles. Written assignments and grading. Students will be expected to write a final paper, in addition to the brief they will write in connection with their assigned case study. 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. Corporations (Law 242) is a prerequisite. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, brief writing/oral argument, and 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. Please note that due to scheduling issues this quarter, class will not meet on April 6 or 13, or May 18, and makeup classes will be scheduled.

This course examines the venture capital (VC) financing model from both a theoretical and a practical perspective. The course traces the start-up process from initial formation of a new venture and angel investments, through multiple institutional venture capital financing rounds, with a view to potential exits via acquisition or initial public offering. The class will analyze each step in the process from the perspective of the business entity, the founders and employees, the investors, and the lawyers for each party. It also will consider the incentives and control structures used at each stage of financing, with a focus on both the underlying economic and financial theory, as well as on pragmatic considerations in structuring the transactions. Students will learn the VC business model to understand what makes it unique from other investment forms and how that impacts the startup ecosystem. Students will be expected to participate in teams in a term sheet negotiation exercise, become familiar with spreadsheet capitalization tables, participate in class discussions, and sit for an examination. There will be required readings for each session that include a range of materials from law review articles and case law to model deal documents and case studies. Some sessions will include guest speakers with experience in VC or entrepreneurship. This course is co-taught by Gordon Davidson and Michael Esquivel. Both are partners at Fenwick & West LLP who advise technology companies, startups, and venture capitalists. Elements used in grading: Class participation/assignments, negotiation exercises and written summary, and the final exam (open book).

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.

Success as an attorney and businessperson depends on the ability to predict outcomes in complex situations. Law school courses generally do not develop this skill set. The traditional "case method" asks us to understand how and why cases have been decided. I contrast, this course's "prediction method" challenges students to understand how and why cases yet to be decided will be resolved. The course addresses the academic literature related to prediction, and uses a series of case studies related to undecided cases currently on the US Supreme Court docket to develop student skills as predictors and analysts of complex litigation and transactional situations. This course is open only to students who have already taken and successfully completed a course on Corporate Law or Securities Regulation. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, and Final Exam. 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. This class will not be offered in 2020-2021.

Large corporations now routinely spend millions of dollars to protect human rights and the environment. Shell Nigeria builds hospitals and schools in the Niger Delta. Nike employs hundreds of inspectors to improve conditions for the factory workers who produce its shoes across Asia and Latin America. Technology companies such as Facebook have scrambled to fend off the threat of new regulation since the Cambridge Analytica revelations. Other examples abound, across industries and around the globe. "Don't be evil" (Google's former motto) may be one motivation for these companies, but something more mundane is also at work: many companies believe they will do well, financially, if they do good, ethically. This course examines questions that lawyers in large law firms, corporations, NGOs, and government agencies regularly confront: --What does it mean for a company to "do good"? Should it care? --When does it serve a company's interest to take costly action to address human rights, labor, and environmental concerns? --What tactics have activists used to shift public opinion, media frames, and the law, and thereby change companies' incentives? We will learn through seminar-style discussion, lectures, role play, and small group exercises. Several guest speakers with experience in business, advocacy, or in between will provide insights from their experiences on the ground. Special Instructions: Students have the option to write a long research paper in lieu of the final exam with consent of instructor. 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, Written Assignments; Final Exam or Final Paper. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 358).

This seminar will focus on key topics in corporate governance. We will cover a range of legal and economic issues, including the following topics: hedge fund activism, gatekeeper liability, executive compensation, proxy advisory services, environmental, social, and governance ("ESG") investing, and independent directors. Each of these issues will be introduced by readings and presentations, but the classes will rely on student discussion and critical evaluation of the papers and positions we examine. Many classes will have guest speakers who are experts in the respective area. Students will have the opportunity to write reaction papers that critically analyze the required readings, and to analyze other corporate governance issues of their choice by working in groups. Elements used in grading: Evaluation will be based on reaction papers, class participation, and performance in the group project and presentation.

This course will combine contract theory, a field of economics for which several Nobel prizes have been awarded, with a study of the practice of business transactions. Our discussion will explore how well economic theory illuminates actual contracting practices and how the practice of contract design deviates from theory. Our overarching goal will be to develop an understanding of business transactions that goes beyond the drafting of contract language to conceptual and structural features of agreements. We will discuss design topics such as how contracts respond to incomplete information, the "make or buy" choice (whether to carry out a project within a firm or contract with an external party), the role of judicial enforcement in relational contracts, the use of vague and/or precise language in agreements, obstacles and process of innovation in contracting, and the role and effect of bargaining power. This course differs from the Deals course in that it covers a different set of topics and is less applied, and this course will be conducted in a seminar fashion. Elements used in grading: Class participation, Written Assignments.

This course provides an overview of laws and policies affecting the nonprofit sector. The course will focus both on state laws governing nonprofit corporations and charitable trusts as well as federal tax laws applicable to section 501(c) entities. Topics will include the fiduciary duties of nonprofit directors and trustees, obtaining and maintaining tax-exempt status, nonprofit lobbying and political activities, private foundations and donor-advised funds, and alternative organizational forms such as low-profit limited liability companies and benefit corporations. Lectures and discussions will be supplemented by in-class conversations with leaders of local nonprofit organizations. Special Instructions: No pre-requisites. Knowledge of basic tax and/or corporate law is helpful but not required. Elements used in grading: Final exam.

Law 1056 examines public policies for dealing with problems arising in markets in which competitive forces are weak. The focus is on monopolies, oligopolies, cartels, and other environments where market mechanisms are unlikely to produce outcomes that benefit consumers more than the alternatives involving costly government intervention. The two main areas examined are competition policy and economic regulation. Competition policy refers to laws that define certain market behavior as illegal because it is harmful to competition or fails to provide consumer benefits that justify its costs to consumers. Economic regulation refers to policies in which government controls prices and/or decides the terms and conditions under which firms can participate in a market. A growing area of study and policy design is the introduction of market mechanisms into formerly regulated industries such as: telecommunications, electricity, airlines, railroads, postal delivery services and environmental regulation. Prerequisites: Econ 51 or equivalent. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Paper and Final Exam. Cross-listed with Economics (ECON 158).

This seminar is designed to prepare students for the field study portion (Law 1061) of the Global Quarter. It will introduce key attributes of the legal, financial and corporate governance systems of Japan and China, particularly those aspects most pertinent to lawyers counseling clients on investing and doing business in those countries. The seminar will also examine several subjects that serve as important conceptual background for the field study, including the widespread phenomenon of foreign legal transplants in Asia, cross-border investor activism, and the role of the state as a participant (via state-owned enterprises) in the economies of China and Singapore. This seminar is only open to students participating in the Global Quarter. Class meets first seven weeks of the quarter. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

This course is the field study portion of the Global Quarter. The field study is comprised of a three-week itinerary of office visits, simulated negotiations and counseling sessions, and seminars in Beijing, Hong Kong, Shenzhen, Singapore, and Tokyo. Participation in the field study qualifies for Pathway B treatment of the Experiential Learning requirement. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

This course will cover a mix of issues that lie at the intersection of the financial regulation of capital markets and corporate finance. The course will include an examination of US regulation of capital flows into and out the United States (including Regulation S, Rule 144A and the use of ADRs), shareholder class action litigation in capital markets around the world through the use of case studies (including the US, Canada, Australia and Japan), financial manipulation in derivative markets (such as the LIBOR scandal), and international arbitration of financial claims. This class runs from January 6 through January 21. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Final Exam. This class is open to ALL students (except 1Ls), and is not limited to students enrolled in the Global Quarter. This class does not overlap with Accounting (students can take both.

This is a seminar for students participating in the Global Quarter (GQ). Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Antitrust law has in the last couple of years become a controversial topic and the subject of intense academic debate, proposed legislation, and international discussion. The seminar will provide a forum in which the students could better understand the current controversies and discuss them in a thoughtful and rigorous fashion. We will have 5 2-hour sessions, each on a different topic with assigned readings. The tentative list of topics is this: (1) "New Brandeis" or populist criticism of the fundamental normative (Chicago and post-Chicago) underpinning of U.S. antitrust law; (2) antitrust and IP, especially patents; (3) antitrust and the digital platforms; (4) antitrust in the health care sector; and (5) comparative perspectives -- antitrust in the U.S. and the European Union. Stanford faculty outside the law school will probably participate in one or more sessions. The class will meet on Wednesdays, from 4:45 to 6:45, on April 1, 15, and 29 and May 13 and 27. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation. 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.

This course will acquaint you with the basic rules and structure of partnership tax. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation. Class will meet every other Wednesday, 4:10PM to 6:10PM.

The Law School offers two survey courses dealing with constitutional criminal procedure. "Criminal Investigation" will consider questions that arise under the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments regarding investigations, interrogations, and charging decisions. This course, "Criminal Adjudication," will look at the way the judicial system handles criminal cases. Topics will include the right to counsel (and the concomitant right to "effective assistance" of counsel), prosecutorial discretion and plea bargaining, joinder and severance, discovery, the right to jury trial, double jeopardy, sentencing, and appellate review. Students may take both Criminal Investigation and Criminal Adjudication. (There is, of course, no requirement to do so.) Elements used in grading: Attendance, participation and final exam. Small grade adjustments will be made for exceptional class participation.

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 (in-class, open book), plus small adjustments for exceptional class participation.

This seminar offers an opportunity to study mass incarceration, criminal justice reform, and post-conviction litigation in real time. In many ways, the era of mass incarceration began in California with the enactment of the "Three Strikes and You're Out" sentencing law in 1994. Today, California leads political and policy trends in the opposite direction with a number of critical reforms to the state's justice system. In this seminar 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 litigation on behalf of inmates sentenced to life in prison for nonviolent crimes. Students also have the opportunity to contribute to ongoing research, public policy analysis and advocacy in the area of criminal justice reform. The class focuses largely on California's Three Strikes law as a case study in the history, politics, constitutional doctrine, and reform of criminal justice policy throughout the country. Students will test their skills in the field by assisting with the representation of individual inmates sentenced to long prison terms for nonviolent crimes in state and federal courts. The Project has been intimately involved in the movement to reduce incarceration in California and throughout the country, partnering with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Obama administration on different projects including direct legislative reform, impact litigation, executive clemency, and prisoner reentry. 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 petitions 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 in and out of the courtroom. The seminar will meet for 3 hours per week, including 1 hour individual meetings with Project director Mike Romano. CONSENT APPLICATION: Interested students must apply to enroll in the seminar by sending a one-page statement of interest and resume by email with the subject line "application" to Mike Romano (mromano@stanford.edu). Applications will be considered on a rolling basis. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments.

This course explores the law of economic and political crimes associated with the rubric "white collar crime." The class is divided thematically between mens rea issues and substantive issues. Among the substantive areas which are covered are: obstruction of justice, perjury, bribery and gratuities, mail and wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering. We will study specific federal statutes in considerable detail, while also speculating about the jurisprudence underlying these crimes, and related issues of prosecutorial discretion and attorney ethics. Special instructions: Students may write a paper in lieu of the final exam for Research credit. Also, classroom participation may be taken into account to some very small degree. 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: Class participation and final exam or paper.

The most recent financial crisis that began in 2008 has resulted in a call, mostly ignored, for significant jail time for those allegedly responsible, without any explanation of the crimes that may have been committed. The aggressive use of the criminal laws to respond to perceived financial abuse probably had its birth in the prosecution of Michael Milken. Although folks will differ about the prosecution, there is no realistic dispute about the influence Mr MILKEN has had in creating the markets which made possible for new ideas and ventures to have access to the capital needed to build and thrive. . MILKEN effectively developed the so called "junk bonds" market which was the engine that allowed for this theoretically high risk capital to be effectively deployed. As the high yield market grew, Michael Milken and the firm he worked for, Drexel Burnham became the largest and most effective competitor in the market place. This led to a call for an investigation and coincided with a significant insider trading investigation centered on Ivan Boesky (fictionalized in the first Wall Street movie). The US Attorney in NY at the time was Rudolph Giulliani (later Mayor of NY and, more recently, know for his representation of President Trump in various matters including the Ukrainian matter) who led the investigation. Ultimately Mr MILKEN was indicted and pled guilty and was imprisoned. This seminar will involve an in depth study of the circumstances surrounding the high yield securities market and the investigation, indictment and guilty pleas and the subsequent impact of the case. The seminar will examine the tools available to prosecutors, including the use of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in white collar cases, in pursuing this and other cases, the affect of the media in high profile cases and other systemic elements that come into play. The seminar will feature presentations of many colorful key players including those involved in the prosecution and defense and those with knowledge of the high yield markets. The seminar will be taught jointly by Professor Mills (who was intimately involved with Mr MILKEN and defended some of the other cases which arose at the time) and Richard Sandler who served as Michael Milken's personal counsel throughout the time and has continued to work with Michael Milken to the present time. Elements used in grading: Class presentation and final paper.

The intensity of the current debates over criminal law and criminal justice policy is at an unusually high level, with strong and conflicting positions being staked out in the areas of race and crime, policing, incarceration and sentencing, drug policy, and guns. We will be discussing these topics with a mixture of doctrinal analysis of key issues, review of secondary commentaries on key aspects of criminal justice policy, and analysis of empirical papers that illuminate important elements relevant to these legal and policy debates. Elements used in grading: Grading will be based on attendance, class participation, one-to-two-page response papers to readings, and three six-page papers on topics distilled from each of the three three-week blocks in the course.

Over the course of the past two decades there has been increasing recognition that, despite its commitment to the concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, our criminal justice system yields a steady stream of wrongful convictions. This Seminar will focus on some causes, preventions and potential remedies for this phenomenon. Subjects to be addressed include eyewitness identification, interrogations and confessions, jailhouse informant testimony, forensic evidence, the psychology of tunnel vision and confirmation bias, the role of appellate review and habeas corpus, the role of clemency, the impact of the problem on the death penalty, and issues around compensation of those who have been wrongly convicted. As we study these subjects, we will also reflect on whether taking some reforms too far will impair on the efficacy of legitimate law enforcement. The class will meet for two hours each week. In addition, there will be three additional evening or weekend sessions (to be scheduled at the convenience of the participants). During each of these additional sessions, students will watch a film involving a wrongful conviction and will engage in conversation about the particular case involved. Each student will be responsible for preparing a paper on an appropriate topic to be chosen in consultation with the instructor. Consent 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. Elements used in grading: Class participation; Paper.

This seminar will deal with the history of criminal justice in the United States, since the colonial period. The emphasis will not be on doctrines of criminal law, or (for the most part) on reported case law; but rather on the relationship between the working criminal justice system and American society. Indeed, throughout our history, there has been a huge gulf between the formal law and the way the system actually operated. At all points, the criminal justice system has responded to social, economic, political and cultural factors; and it is these that the course will focus on. The students will read a number of original sources that bear on the relationship between law and society, including sources on the rise of the penitentiary, the death penalty, the development of correctional methods, such as parole and indeterminate sentences; also race and gender relations and their influence on criminal justice. The course will also look at the rise and fall of laws controlling moral and sexual behavior. Students will be expected to write brief reflection papers (roughly two pages) before each of the sessions in which readings will be discussed. The reflection papers should not be mere summaries of the readings, rather, students will explain how the readings bore on the general theme or themes of the course; and the student's reaction to the writer's point of view. Each student will also be asked to develop a topic, carry out research, and write a paper on one or more aspects of the history of criminal justice. Papers can either be synthetic (a review of the literature on some aspect of the history of criminal justice) or embody original research, using such material as court files, older treatises, and newspaper and periodical literature. Elements used in grading: The grade in the seminar will be based on the paper, and (to a degree) also on class participation, including the reflection papers.

Human decision making is increasingly being displaced by predictive algorithms. Judges sentence defendants based on statistical risk scores; regulators take enforcement actions based on predicted violations; advertisers target materials based on demographic attributes; and employers evaluate applicants and employees based on machine-learned models. One concern with the rise of such algorithmic decision making is that it may replicate or exacerbate human bias. This course surveys the legal and ethical principles for assessing the equity of algorithms, describes statistical techniques for designing fair systems, and considers how anti-discrimination law and the design of algorithms may need to evolve to account for machine bias. Concepts will be developed in part through guided in-class coding exercises. Admission is by consent of instructor and is limited to 20 students. CONSENT APPLICATION: To enroll in the class, please complete the course application by March 20, available at: https://5harad.com/mse330/. Elements used in grading: Grading is based on response papers, class participation, and a final project. Prerequisite: CS 106A or equivalent knowledge of coding. Cross-listed with Comparative Studies in Race & Ethnicity (CSRE 230), Management Science & Engineering (MS&E 330), Sociology (SOC 279).

This will be a 2-hour advanced criminal procedure class, designed to acquaint students with the challenges confronting judges as they apply the Fourth Amendment to the bewildering array of search and surveillance techniques available to law enforcement in the 21st century. Various surveillance techniques will be examined, such as cell site simulators, GPS and RFID tracking devices, remote computer access (NITs), biometric identification, facial recognition technology, and automated license plate readers. The novel legal and practical issues generated by computer-based search techniques will be explored, for example: Should the plain view exception apply to computer searches? Are ex ante conditions on computer search warrants necessary, or even advisable? When is compulsion of biometric device identifiers appropriate? Can providers be compelled to decrypt locked cell phones? What are the notice requirements for search warrants directed to service providers? What limits should be placed on border searches of electronic devices? After the Supreme Court's 2018 decision in Carpenter, what rules govern law enforcement access to medical or genetic databases maintained by third parties? How is a cell tower dump order distinguishable from a general warrant? What are the particularity requirements for search warrants seeking electronically stored information? Should there be super-warrant requirements pertaining to minimization and overcollection for such searches? What about extraterritoriality and conflict of law issues raised by U.S. law enforcement access to data stored on foreign servers? Broader policy questions will also be addressed. For example, is it sensible to rely on the exclusionary rule to develop Fourth Amendment doctrine in this "golden age of surveillance"? Are courts or legislatures better equipped to regulate modern police investigations? What lessons can be learned from comparative approaches to police regulation in other countries? The course will build upon foundations laid in the Criminal Procedure--Investigation and Criminal Procedure--Adjudication courses. Those classes touch upon the basics of search warrants and the Fourth Amendment, and both are recommended prerequisites for this class. The next generation of judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and civil rights advocates will be forced to apply existing legal precedent to unprecedented surveillance technologies generated by the digital era. This course is designed to help them meet that daunting challenge. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Final Exam.

This seminar on selected issues in search and seizure for criminal lawyers will enhance your future clinic experience. Students will explore thorny issues raised in suppression motions using fact patterns and investigative materials from actual, prior clinic cases. Assigned readings will include briefs and governing caselaw on each topic. Students can take the course for either 2 or 3 units. Students electing 3 units will write an additional 10 page brief. After the term begins, students enrolled in the course can transfer from section 01 (2 units) into section 02 (3 units) with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. This seminar will be offered to students who were enrolled in the Spring 2020 Criminal Defense Clinic (which was cancelled). Depending on enrollment, other students may be considered with the consent of the instructors.

In this course students will participate in direct dialogs with major national experts and institutional leaders from a variety of perspectives on the country's criminal law system. We will hear from experts and leaders from law enforcement, prosecution, public defense, the judiciary, and corrections, and policy experts (including from the academic world). The thematic coverage of the course will be broad, covering empirical assessments of the state of criminal justice in the US, efforts to bring the country out of the phase of mass incarceration while maintaining record-low crime rates, reforms in our sentencing laws (including the death penalty), assessing what is meant by the rubric "progressive prospection," the workload challenges of public defenders, addressing the problem of wrongful convictions, and racial discrimination in both investigation and adjudication of crime. Each week there will be a Zoom interview with a guest. The instructors will interview the guests, and students will then participate in a Q and A phase. The interview sessions will generally run 90 minutes. For each guest there will be preassigned material to be read before the interview. Within 2 days after each interview, students will turn in 3-page reflection papers derived from the interview and reading. The final product will be a 10-page essay on a topic that has emerged from the course. This 10 page paper need not me a scholarly or research endeavor. It can be, in effect, a more extended reflection essay. We anticipate that for most weeks we will have one guest, either Monday or Wednesday, and the other day will be reserved for more elaborate discussions of the most previous guest's presentation or of reading for the next guest. There may be one or 2 weeks where we have 2 guests. While we are just now settling the guest list and anticipate some very exciting additions, for sure it will include Barry Scheck, founder of the famed Innocence Project. Professor Rachel Barkow of NYU. Leading authority on criminal justice administration. Earlonne Woods, former California life prisoner and co-creator and now co-producer and writer for of the Ear Hustle podcast. George Gascon, former Police Chief and former District Attorney of San Francisco and now candidate for Los Angeles County District Attorney. Professor John Donohue of Stanford, widely regarded as the nation's leading empirical researcher of crime and sentencing. Professor Sherri Lynn Johnson of Cornell, expert on the death penalty, who successfully argued the dramatic Flowers v. Mississippi case in SCOTUS last year (overturning a death verdict because of racial discrimination in jury selection.). Enrollment: Limited to 25 students; slots are guaranteed for students who had been enrolled in the Three Strikes Project course or Advanced Criminal Law for Spring term. Schedule. There may be a few sessions at a different time to accommodate our guests' schedules and constraints. The attendance rule for students is that they must ensure live attendance at least 8 of the sessions. For any missed session, the student must view the recorded video of the session within 24 hours and submit the reflection paper on schedule. 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 (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

This course will address significant areas of procedural law and design that go beyond the first-year civil procedure course, with special attention to the relevance of procedural choices to civil rights and public law litigation. Contemporary litigation frequently involves multiple related actions, multiple parties, and multiple claims that may interact in complex ways, and often aspires to reform institutions in addition to seeking remedies for discrete past harms. This course introduces procedural doctrine, theory, and practice related to complex and/or public law litigation, including such topics as the joinder of claims and parties, claim and issue preclusion, class action law, multidistrict litigation, mandatory arbitration, and nationwide injunctions. The course should be of particular interest to aspiring litigators (in any substantive area) and social justice lawyers (litigators or otherwise), and complements other curricular offerings in complex and constitutional litigation. Elements used in grading: Class participation, Exam.

This course will address significant areas of procedural law and design that go beyond the first-year civil procedure course, with special attention to the relevance of procedural choices to civil rights and public law litigation. Contemporary litigation frequently involves multiple related actions, multiple parties, and multiple claims that may interact in complex ways, and often aspires to reform institutions in addition to seeking remedies for discrete past harms. This course introduces procedural doctrine, theory, and practice related to complex and/or public law litigation, including such topics as the joinder of claims and parties, claim and issue preclusion, class action law, multidistrict litigation and other forms of aggregation, and the turn towards mandatory arbitration. The course should be of particular interest to aspiring litigators (in any substantive area) and public interest lawyers (litigators or otherwise), and complements other curricular offerings in complex and constitutional litigation. Elements used in grading: Exam, class participation.

Evidence rules constrain proof at criminal and civil trials. We will study the Federal Rules of Evidence, related case law, and those constitutional concepts that limit proof at criminal trials. Topics include relevance, unfair prejudice, character evidence, impeachment, the rape shield law, hearsay, the Confrontation and Compulsory Process Clauses, and expert testimony. Please note that the California Bar Examiners have posted this announcement: "Applicants should be prepared to answer questions that have issues concerning the Federal Rules of Evidence and the California Evidence Code. Applicants should be prepared to compare and contrast the differences between the Federal Rules and the California Evidence Code, especially where the California rules of evidence have no specific counterparts in the Federal Rules." This evidence course covers only the Federal Rules of Evidence and does not address the California Evidence Code. Though similar principles of law govern the Federal Rules and California Code, the two sets of rules are not identical. Students preparing for the California Bar Exam will have to learn some new material. Elements used in grading: Final exam (one-half essay and one-half multiple choice).

This course examines the law of proof, with special attention to the Federal Rules of Evidence, constitutional restrictions on proving facts in criminal cases, and selected provisions of the California Evidence Code that diverge significantly from federal law. Topics include relevance, unfair prejudice, hearsay, confrontation, character evidence, impeachment, and expert witnesses. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

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. A central premise of the course is that the institutional, political, and constitutional features of federal court litigation cannot be understood without engaging the historical context, especially the social, political, and legal movements, in response to which the federal courts have developed. Thus while many of the traditional aspects of federal court jurisprudence will be covered (e.g., federal common law including implied rights of action, justiciability doctrines and other doctrines of restraint, congressional power to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts and to create "legislative courts" outside of Article III, Supreme Court review of judgments, state sovereign immunity, litigating against the government, and federal habeas corpus), doctrine will be placed alongside interdisciplinary readings on social, political, and theoretical accounts that reveal how the courts and ordinary Americans have come to understand the distinctive role of the federal courts, as well as claims for expansion or contraction of their powers. The course is strongly recommended for students interested in pursuing a career in litigation and/or judicial clerkships in the federal courts. Elements used in grading: Class attendance, class participation, take home exam.

This is a course about the role of the federal courts in our constitutional democracy. It covers a series of topics about how those courts--which most students will deal with either as law clerks or lawyers--operate in a context characterized by the separation of powers and federalism. The course takes a pragmatic approach to deciding what counts as relevant federal courts jurisprudence. Its primary aim is to cover the central problems that law clerks, practicing lawyers, and policy-makers encounter in the world. Broadly speaking, it will address three large questions. First, we will examine the federal judiciary's basic structure. This means looking at the extent (and limits) to Congress's power under the Constitution to allocate cases to (different) federal courts, and to shuffle cases between federal courts and state courts. Second, we will consider how legal obligations can be enforced against state and federal actors. We will mainly be concerned with constitutional and statutory rules. We will consider a variety of different kinds of immunity and a range of mechanisms for obtaining relief. Third, we will look at how federal and state courts interact. This means looking at a series of abstention doctrines. We focus in particular on anti-suit injunctions and on federal habeas corpus. The latter is now a large part of many federal courts' docket. Elements used in grading: attendance, class participation and take-home exam.

Arbitration, once narrowly defined as a party-selected method for resolving contract-based disputes arising out of commercial transactions, is now ubiquitous. In the U.S. in addition to resolving run-of the-mill commercial disputes, arbitration may be used to resolve claims invoking anti-trust, securities, and civil rights law, and consumers, employees, patients and other individual claimants may be held to arbitration provisions included in form contracts drafted by corporations that the individuals overlooked or barely understood. Businesses too may find themselves held to an arbitration clause hastily chosen by a transactional lawyer who didn't understand what she was committing her client to. Economic globalization has created increased demand for international commercial arbitration, which offers binding resolution of trans-national business disputes, enforceable in virtually every court in the world. The increased frequency of complex high-value international transactions involving key industries -- e.g. energy and telecommunications -- has led to an increasing fraction of transnational business disputes with a significant public policy dimension. Moreover, the desires of countries with less developed economies to attract foreign direct investment has led to the creation of a specialized form of arbitration for disputes between private investors and states. Often bundled with other forms of alternative dispute resolution ("ADR") such as mediation, arbitration is actually a rule-defined adjudicative procedure, in which parties submit their disputes to privately-chosen and privately-paid decision-makers who deliver binding (and usually unappealable) outcomes, often in closed proceedings. The law that governs arbitration is a mix of domestic statutes (e.g., in the U.S., the Federal Arbitration Act) and international conventions (e.g., the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States ("ICSID")) that have been entered into by a large majority of countries. Today, arbitration offers a challenging and lucrative practice area to lawyers representing corporations in multiple industries, in domestic and international contexts, and to lawyers serving as arbitrators, who often command high hourly rates. Understanding the differences and similarities among arbitration law and practice in multiple domains and the intersection of public and private law is valuable to lawyers who specialize in arbitration. This seminar is intended for students who wish to develop this capacity as well as for students who want to understand better how to draft business contracts that will protect their clients should they find themselves subject to arbitration. Although arbitration is well-accepted around the world, certain applications of arbitration have become increasingly controversial. In the U.S. the requirement that employees agree to arbitrate sexual harassment claims as a condition of employment has led to boycotts against "big law" firms. Requirements to arbitrate disputes between private investors and national governments have knocked high-profile multi-lateral trade negotiations off-track. Some business decision-makers are turning away from arbitration for "ordinary" commercial disputes, arguing that it has become as expensive and time-consuming as court adjudication, without the protections of the latter. In this course we will consider separately and together, the statutes that provide the legal framework for arbitration, the specific rules that govern different types of arbitration, the ongoing controversies evoked by some of these rules and their application, and the reforms that have been proposed in response to these controversies. We will read and discuss U.S. case law, international arbitration decisions, academic commentary and empirical analyses of arbitration use and consequences, and hear from leading arbitration practitioners. Students will select aspects of arbitration law or practice or the controversies that surround it and write research papers on their topic of interest. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Final Paper.

This advanced course in structural constitutional law builds on concepts, doctrines, and themes developed in Federal Courts. Modern doctrines attempting to reconcile federalism, the supremacy of federal law, separation of powers, and the specific jurisdictional limitations of Article III judicial power raise complex questions about the nature and scope of judicial review, remedies, the adversary system, and alternatives to adjudication, among other subjects. This course is designed to allow students to deepen their expertise and explore discrete topics in a tutorial-style format with the instructor. Individual topics will be selected on the basis of student interest in consultation with the instructor, appropriate reading will be selected for analysis and discussion (generally by using a canonical or innovative text as a springboard), and students will be guided in the development of novel doctrines, theories, and practical solutions to some of the most vexing issues in the field. Evaluation will be based on participation in mentored research and tutorial engagement as well as the creativity, prose quality, and persuasiveness of the paper. Students may take the course for 1-3 units. The paper requirement is 10-12 pages for each unit. Student electing 2 or 3 units should enroll in Section 02 (which can count for R-credit). Class sessions to be scheduled in harmony with students' other course commitments. Elements used in grading: Written Assignments, Final Paper. Prerequisite: Federal Courts. 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.

Modern energy systems aim to deliver a supply of reliable, low-cost, and clean energy; in turn, they require major capital investments in infrastructure projects, some of which have the features of a natural monopoly and therefore require ongoing economic regulation. The U.S. energy system today is subject to a complex regime of state and federal laws. We will examine the historical role of state-level electric utility regulation, tracing its evolution into the various forms of regulated and deregulated energy markets now in use in the U.S. electricity and natural gas sectors. Contemporary energy law increasingly involves a delicate federalist balance where state and federal regulators share overlapping authority in contested policy areas that are subject to major technological and economic change. Finally, we will interrogate the contested ideals of regulation and competition, which private, non-profit, and governmental stakeholders deploy in legal and political fora to advance private gain and public goods. Students who complete the class will gain a historical understanding of how economic regulation of the energy sector has evolved since the early 20th century, a durable conceptual framework for understanding modern energy law and policy debates, and a practical understanding of energy law designed for future practitioners. Non-law students interested in energy issues are highly encouraged to take this course, as energy law literacy is essential to careers in the sector. Elements used in grading: class participation, short written assignments, and a one-day take-home final exam. Cross-listed with Environment and Resources (ENVRES 226).

Environmental law is critically important and endlessly fascinating. In this course, we will look at the major statutes and policies used, at both the federal and state levels, to protect humans and the environment against exposure to harmful substances, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Superfund, the Resource Conservation & Recovery Act, and laws designed to regulate toxic substances. This class will also examine the challenges of global air pollution, including climate change and ozone depletion. The class will look not only at the substance of these laws and policies, but also at enforcement challenges, alternative legal mechanisms for advancing environmental policies (such as voter initiatives and common-law actions), the role of market mechanisms in addressing environmental problems, and constitutional restrictions on environmental regulation. As part of the class, students will engage in a series of situational case studies designed to provide a better sense of the real-world issues faced by environmental lawyers and to teach students the skills and tactics needed to solve those issues. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Exam.

This course focuses on the pragmatic (more than theoretical) aspects of contemporary land use law and policy, including: the tools and historical/legal foundation of modern land use law; zoning and General Plans; the process of land development; vested property rights and development agreements; eminent domain, regulatory takings, and exactions; redevelopment; growth control, sprawl, housing density, and affordable housing; historic preservation; direct democracy over land use; global warming and climate action plans; and environmental review (CEQA and NEPA). We explore how land use decisions affect environmental quality and how land use decision-making addresses environmental impacts. Special Instructions: Student participation is essential. Roughly four-fifths of the class time will involve a combination of lecture and classroom discussion. The remaining time will engage students in case studies based on actual land use issues and disputes. This class is limited to 20 students selected by consent. Elements used in grading: attendance, class participation, two short writing assignments, an oral presentation, and a final exam. 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.

(Formerly 281) Natural resource management presents extremely difficult and contentious issues of law and public policy. Major debates continue to rage over issues such as the Endangered Species Act, whether the United States should permit drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and how to prevent the overfishing of the oceans. This course will focus on two major aspects of natural-resource management: biodiversity protection (including the Endangered Species Act, ocean fisheries management, and global protection of marine mammals) and public lands in the United States such as national parks and wilderness areas. The course also will examine the National Environmental Protection Act and the effectiveness of environmental impact assessments. Class sessions will include critical examinations of current law and policy and in-depth discussions of situational case studies that force you to consider how you would resolve real-life issues. Students will be expected to participate actively in class discussions. (This course will not examine either water law or energy law in any depth. Several other courses in the Law School deal with energy-law questions.) Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam (open book). This course is taught in conjunction with Law 2516 Natural Resources Law and Policy - South Africa: Field Study (limited enrollment). See Law 2516 for details.

One of the fastest growing economic sectors is the water field, and private water companies are playing an increasingly important role around the world in water management. In many cases, private companies have made important contributions to meeting water needs (e.g., in the development of new technologies and expanding water supplies). In other cases, however, the involvement of private companies has proven controversial (e.g., when private companies have taken over public water supply systems in developing countries such as Bolivia). This course will look at established or emerging businesses in the water sector and the legal, economic, and social issues that they generate. These businesses include investor-owned water utilities, water technology companies (e.g., companies investing in new desalination or water recycling technologies), water-right funds (who directly buy and sell water rights), social impact funds, innovative agricultural operations, water concessionaires, and infrastructure construction companies and investors. Each week will focus on a different business and company. Company executives will attend the class session and discuss their business with the class. In most classes, we will examine (1) the viability and efficacy of the company's business plan, (2) the legal and/or social issues arising from the business' work, and (3) how the business might contribute to improved water management and policy. Each student will be expected to write (1) two short reflection papers during the course of the quarter on businesses that present to the class, and (2) a 10- to15-page paper at the conclusion on the class on either a water company of the student's choice or a policy initiative that can improve the role that business plays in improving water management (either in a particular sector or more generally). Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Cross-listed with Civil & Environmental Engineering (CEE 273B).

This interdisciplinary course integrates the legal, scientific, and policy dimensions of how we characterize and manage resource use and allocation along the California coast. We will use this geographic setting as the vehicle for exploring more generally how agencies, legislatures, and courts resolve resource-use conflicts and the role that scientific information and uncertainty play in the process. Our focus will be on the land-sea interface as we explore contemporary coastal land-use and marine resource decision-making, including coastal pollution, public health, ecosystem management; public access; private development; local community and state infrastructure; natural systems and significant threats; resource extraction; and conservation, mitigation and restoration. Students will learn the fundamental physics, chemistry, and biology of the coastal zone, tools for exploring data collected in the coastal ocean, and the institutional framework that shapes public and private decisions affecting coastal resources. There will be 3 to 4 written assignments addressing policy and science issues during the quarter, as well as a take-home final assignment. Special Instructions: In-class work and discussion is often done in interdisciplinary teams of students from the School of Law, the School of Engineering, the School of Humanities and Sciences, and the School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences. Students are expected to participate in class discussion and 2-3 Saturday field trips. Elements used in grading: Participation, including class session and field trip attendance, writing and quantitative assignments. Cross-listed with Civil & Environmental Engineering (CEE 175A/275A).

While climate change is often considered an 'environmental problem', the risks and opportunities embedded in a changing climate go well beyond the frame of the natural environment. This course will reframe climate as a macroeconomic challenge, one in which multilateral politics, global investment and physical and institutional infrastructure must be understood and reconsidered. Based on scholarly analysis and guest speakers, this interdisciplinary course will frame the arc of climate past, present and future on the pillars of politics, finance and infrastructure. Starting with the policy framework established by past global climate negotiations, the bulk of the course will investigate current innovations at the intersection of finance and policy, including risk metrics, management and disclosure, liability litigation, blended finance, new investment vehicles and intermediaries, and resilience measures. The final sessions will consider the future, taking a look at how future leaders might solve the greatest challenge of our time. Elements used in grading: Students may take the course for 2 units (section 1) or 3 units (section 2). Section 1 and 2 students will both receive grades for attendance, in class participation and guest-speaker questions. Section 1 students will also complete a group presentation on the design of a financial, business, legal or policy intervention with the potential to reduce emissions on a large scale. Section 2 students will be required to write a research paper meeting the Law School's R paper requirements. This class is limited to 30 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (15 students will be selected by lottery) and 15 non-law students by consent of instructor. 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 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. 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.

This course will study how society allocates and protects its most crucial natural resource -- water. The emphasis will be on current legal and policy debates, although we will also examine the history of water development and politics. Although the course will focus on United States law and policy, insights from the course are applicable to water regimes throughout the world, and we will occasionally look at law and policy elsewhere in the world for comparison. Among the many issues that we will consider are: how to allocate water during periods of scarcity (particularly as climate change leads to more extremes); alternative means of responding to the world's growing demands for water (including active conservation); the appropriate role for the market and private companies in meeting society's water needs; protection of threatened groundwater resources; environmental limits on water development (including the U.S. Endangered Species Act and the "public trust" doctrine); constitutional issues in water governance; Indian water rights; protection of water quality; challenges to substantively reforming existing water law; and interstate and international disputes over water. Students will be expected to participate actively in classroom discussions. Elements Used in Grading: Class participation, attendance and final exam.

This course offers an interdisciplinary, graduate-level survey of current and historical efforts to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases in the United States and around the world. Students will read primary legal documents--including statutes, regulations, and court cases--in order to evaluate the forces and institutions shaping American climate policy. Additional perspectives from climate science, economics, and political science will provide context as students analyze the evolution of climate law and policy regimes. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on class attendance, class participation, and either written assignments and an exam (section 01) or a final paper (section 02). 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. Cross-listed with Environment and Resources (ENVRES 222).

The tools of private environmental regulation (e.g., eco-certifications, CSR initiatives, supplier contracts) have become an increasingly important source of governance. But how do they work? How do they arise--why and how can corporations participate in these voluntary measures? How do they regulate firm behavior and how can regulators police the tools themselves? This interdisciplinary seminar examines these questions and more, with readings from traditional legal sources (cases, agreements), as well as from economics, political science, and social psychology. Guest speakers and case studies will add real-world context to our exploration of theory. Elements used in grading: Students may take the course for 2 units (section 1) or 3 units (section 2). Attendance, class participation, and short written assignments will factor into grades for both sections. Section 1 students will also prepare a private governance proposal and presentation. Section 2 students will write a research paper meeting the Law School's R paper requirements. After the term begins, students can transfer from section 1 to section 2, which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructors. Please note that the last two class sessions (May 21 and 28) will have to be rescheduled. Cross-listed with Environment and Resources (ENVRES 228).

This 1-credit, discussion-based seminar will examine the challenge and promise of responding to climate change in democracy. Combining theoretical readings and real-world examples such as California community choice energy programs and the movement for a Green New Deal, we will explore questions including: To transform our fossil-fuel based economy, do we need more democracy or less democracy, and what practically does either of those things mean? What makes federal climate change legislation so hard to achieve? In contrast, why have many sub-federal communities been successful in adopting climate change policies, and what are the benefits and limitations of these local actions? Grades will be based on a series of short reaction papers and class participation. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments. This class will meet 4:15-7:15pm on Mondays - April 20, April 27, and May 4.

This seminar will provide students with the opportunity to hear from faculty at other law schools who are at the cutting edge of research in the areas of climate change and energy. Although it is open to all students, the seminar is designed especially for those with an interest in the field who wish to stay abreast of current issues, work, and ideas. Each class will involve a separate climate or energy scholar presenting their current research. This class will meet every other Monday afternoon from 4:15 to 6:15 during the winter quarter: January 13 , January 27, February 10, February 24, and March 9. It will be a 1-unit Mandatory Pass (MP) class. Elements used in grading include attendance and participation, preparation of written questions for the speakers, and short reflection papers.

This course provides the legal, institutional, and economic background necessary to understand the financing and production of health services in the U.S. We will discuss the Affordable Care Act , health insurance (Medicare and Medicaid, employer-sponsored insurance, the uninsured), the approval process and IP protection for pharmaceuticals, and antitrust policy. We may discuss obesity and wellness, regulation of fraud and abuse, and medical malpractice. The syllabus for this course can be found at https://syllabus.stanford.edu. Cross-listed with Graduate School of Business (MGTECON 331), Health Research & Policy (HRP 391) & Public Policy (PUBLPOL 231). Elements used in grading: Participation, attendance, and final exam.

This workshop seminar will provide students with the opportunity to examine and critique cutting-edge research and work in the field of law and the biosciences presented by different speakers from Stanford and elsewhere. Although it is open to all students, the seminar is designed especially for those with an interest in the field who wish to stay abreast of current issues, work, and ideas. In each class, an academic expert, policy maker, or practitioner will present his or her current research or work and engage in a robust discussion. This class is worth one unit. It will meet five times for 1 hour, 50 minutes per session; students will need to attend at all five sessions and, for each session attended, write a reflection piece of roughly three double-spaced pages, due just before the speaker's presentation. The class is open to first-year Law School students in Winter Quarter. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, and written assignments.

This seminar examines legal, social, and ethical issues arising from advances in the biosciences. This year it will focus on neuroscience. It will examine how neuroscience will affect the law, and society, through improvements in predicting illnesses and behaviors, in "reading minds" through neuroimaging, in understanding responsibility and consciousness, in "treating" criminal behavior, and in cognitive enhancement. Students who have taken the Law and the Biosciences (Genetics) seminar in past years may receive additional credit for taking this year's class. The class is open to 1Ls. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance and final research paper. Cross-listed with Health Research & Policy (HRP 211).

This course examines how the law can be used to improve the public's health. The broad questions explored are: what authority does the government have to regulate in the interest of public health? How are individual rights balanced against this authority? What are the benefits and pitfalls of using laws and litigation to achieve public health goals? The course investigates these questions as they operate in a range of specific contexts, including preventing and controlling infectious diseases; preventing obesity; reducing tobacco use; ensuring access to medical care; reducing firearm injuries; addressing the opioid epidemic; and responding to public health emergencies. In examining these contexts, we will ask and answer questions such as, what do the Constitution and key statutes permit? What makes a good public health law? Where do we see success stories--and failures--in public health law? What ethical and economic arguments justify government intervention to shape individuals' and companies' health-related behaviors? Instruction is through interactive lectures with a significant amount of class discussion and some group exercises. Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Exam. Cross-listed with Medicine (MED 237).

This class will explore timely issues surrounding mental health law. Representative topics include civil commitment proceedings; forced outpatient treatment and hospitalization; mental health in the criminal justice system; guardianship/conservatorship and its alternatives; electroconvulsive therapy (ECT); the Americans with Disabilities Act; the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); and neurodiversity. A variety of stakeholders---clinicians, attorneys, individuals with mental illness or developmental disabilities, and family members---will join us as guest speakers to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the current system and to discuss possible reforms. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from Section 01 (MP/R/F) into Section 02 (H/P/R/F), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructors. Students taking the course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the paper length. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

Asking questions is at the core of the role of an attorney. Whether it is interviewing a potential new client, interrogating a witness in a deposition, or conducting a direct or cross examination at trial, knowing how to ask a question is an essential lawyering skill. We'll explore textual materials and real life case examples in transcripts, videotape, and cinema to determine the principals and best practices for questioning. We'll learn how to prepare for questioning, how to focus, narrow, and broaden an examination, how to obtain key admissions, how to deal with a difficult opponent, when to stop asking, and how to use what's been obtained in court or otherwise to win for your clients. This course will give you the skills and tools needed for the critical roles of understanding your clients and your cases and successfully representing their causes. Class attendance is required. Shanin Specter is a founding partner of Kline & Specter, P.C., in Philadelphia, concentrating in catastrophic injury litigation. He has obtained more than 200 settlements or verdicts in excess of $1 million and is a member of the Inner Circle of Advocates, whose membership is limited to the top 100 plaintiffs' attorneys in the United States. Elements used in grading: assessment of two reaction papers, as well as classwork. This class will meet Tuesdays, 4:15PM - 7:15PM on January 14, 21, and 28.

This seminar will explore the intellectual foundations of the institution of insurance, including the following key questions: How is insurance to be conceived: from a contract perspective? a tort perspective? a private governmental perspective? Correlatively, what are the economic and ethical dimensions of risk classifications and management? How serious are the concerns about moral hazard and adverse selection---core concepts of insurance law? What standards should be used to resolve insurance bad faith claims? And, when a party is sued and the liability insurer controls the party's defense, how should the defense lawyer hired by the insurer navigate---and conceive of---this triangular relationship? The pervasive role of insurance in addressing societal concerns about accidental harm is vitally important but has been remarkably under-examined in the traditional law school curriculum. Special Instructions: Grades will be based on class attendance, class participation, and either several short reflection papers (section (01)) or an independent research paper (section (02)). 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 course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on paper length. Elements used in grading: Class participation, class attendance, reflection papers or research paper. Early drop deadline.

This course covers the legal, public policy, and ethical issues that concern artists, art dealers, auction houses, museums, collectors, and others who comprise the world of visual art. Our focus will be on artists' rights (including copyright, resale royalties, moral rights, and freedom of expression issues), how the markets in art function (such as the artist-dealer relationship, auction rules, and issues faced by collectors), and the legal and ethical rules governing the collection, donation, and display of visual art, particularly for museums and their donors. The course focuses on certain recurrent themes: How do statutes and courts define (or attempt to define) art, and how is art defined differently for different legal purposes? How does the special character of art justify or require different treatment under the law from that accorded other tangible personal property, and how does (and should) the expressive nature of art affect the way it is owned, protected, regulated, or funded? We anticipate having two or three visitors to the class during the quarter, such as a gallery owner, auctioneer, and museum director. In addition, we will also have the students participate in at least one or two interactive negotiation simulation exercises inspired by real situations and controversies in the art world. Graduate students from other departments and schools are welcome to take this course with the permission of the instructors. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, final exam.

This seminar explores the interplay of legal and literary representations in nineteenth and twentieth century American culture. Each week, a novel or story is paired with relevant legal and historical readings. Central themes include the ways literary texts register changes in property law, the law of contracts, intellectual property and legal constructions of race, gender, and privacy, especially as they relate to the maintenance of personal identity, community stability, and linguistic meaning. The terms and stakes of these relationships inform our readings of both fiction and legal texts (often cases). The writers whose work we will consider include James Fenimore Cooper, Herman Melville, Henry James, Nella Larsen, Willa Cather, William Faulkner, and Sherman Alexie. We will also consider the points of contact between literary narrative and narrative in law. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and final paper. Automatic grading penalty waived for writers. Special instructions: Course requirements include class attendance and participation, three short response papers, and two longer papers. For Research "R" credit, students may petition to complete one long paper based on independent research. 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 will examine the interrelationship between legal norms and empire in the history of the United States. Topics in this part will include the Constitution as an imperial document; law and the expansion of the United States in western North America, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii; the Insular Cases; and current debates over extraterritoriality and the War on Terror. Substantial readings will consist of scholarly articles, historical cases, and primary sources, and will be provided online. Requirements for the course include regular class participation and, at the students' election, either response papers or a historiographical essay. Students may also elect to complete a research paper, in which case they will receive 3 units and "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. Cross-listed with History (HISTORY 354F).

In this interdisciplinary seminar we explore the rhetorical underpinnings of legal argument. In the first half of the course, we acquaint ourselves with relevant elements of the rhetorical tradition. In the second half, we analyze a variety of legal texts (both written and oral) with an eye to the use and function of rhetorical principles, as well as the ways form and content are mutually constitutive. This course aims both to increase students' understanding of rhetoric as readers and interpreters of legal texts and to develop students' skills as writers and speakers. Students are be expected to participate in class discussion in addition to completing a series of writing assignments including the rhetorical analysis of legal and non-legal texts and the revision of students' legal writing. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, assignments, final paper. Automatic grading penalty waived for writers. Special Instructions: This course can satisfy the Research "R" requirement. The instructor and the student must agree whether the student will receive "R" credit. For "R" credit, the paper is substantial and is based on independent research. 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.

We know it when we see it. But what kind of knowledge does a smartphone or dashboard camera video offer? We tend to treat certain kinds of video as unmediated representations of reality, even though as sophisticated consumers of media we should know better. Neuroscience, empirical research, and cultural theory all refute this so-called reality effect. But the desire that drives it--the desire for definitive proof of what did or did not happen--arises from very real experience, and is inextricably connected to the legal process. This seminar tracks the legal reception of modern visual representation from confusion about the admissibility of photographs in the late 19th century (is it like a drawing? is it like eyewitness testimony?) to the debate about cameras in the courtroom in the late 20th century (do judges and jurors decide differently when the proceedings are subject to public scrutiny?) to the frequent and strategic deployment of visual media in pretrial and litigation practice today. We will also explore the prominent role of video in today's conversation about policing and race. Course materials range from judicial opinions to film theory to social psychology to presentations by practicing attorneys. Special Instructions: This course can satisfy the Research "R" requirement. The instructor and the student must agree whether the student will receive "R" credit. For "R" credit, the paper is substantial and is based on independent research. 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: Class Participation. Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Automatic grading penalty waived for writers.

Collective myths from a variety of traditions and cultures capture enduring psychological truths about human choices and the human condition. Lawyers at various stages in their careers have their own personal myths, sometimes conscious and sometimes not. These personal myths embody key tendencies that determine or heavily influence each lawyer's personal and professional path. This course uses some salient collective myths as well as modern psychological material to create a powerful backdrop for self-examination and self-development. It offers a space and time for each student to consider his or her own personal and professional direction through the course materials, class interactions, and a series of reflection papers. The course benefits from the collaboration of Ron Tyler, Director of the Criminal Defense Clinic, who will conduct a session focusing on mindfulness practices. Elements used in grading: A series of reflection papers totaling at least 18-pages.

Practicing law is very much a creative enterprise. Effective advocates and counselors provide innovative and thoughtful solutions to complex problems. But there often isn't enough attention devoted in law school either to thinking creatively or to reflecting in a creative way on the issues students confront inside and outside the classroom. This course will respond to this gap by building a bridge between law and the arts, with the goal of helping students hone their ability to think creatively and use disciplined imagination. Law & Creativity will meet twice a week and have dual components designed to inform one another. The first session will be structured as a seminar in which students gather to examine and discuss creative treatments of legal and professional issues in a variety of media (including film, fiction, and nonfiction). The second session will follow the creative-writing workshop model in which students submit their own fiction and creative nonfiction pieces for group discussion. Through the workshop process, students will develop the skills necessary to constructively critique and workshop one another's work, and learn a variety of techniques for improving their own creative writing. Elements used in grading: Class attendance, participation and final paper.

The Legal History Workshop is designed as a forum in which faculty and students from the Law School, the History Department, and elsewhere in the university can discuss some of the best work now being done in the field of legal history. Every other week, an invited speaker will present his or her current research for discussion. In the week prior to a given speaker's presentation, the class will meet as a group to discuss secondary literature relevant to understanding and critiquing the speaker's research. Students will then read the speaker's paper in advance of the following week's workshop presentation. Special Instructions: Students may choose to enroll in one of two sections of the course. In the first, students must write brief responses to each speaker's paper. There will be a total of four speakers, and thus four papers. Guidance will be provided concerning how to frame these response papers, which will be due every two weeks - i.e., on the day before speaker presents. In the second section, students must write a research paper on a legal history topic that they select in consultation with the professors. Students opting to write a research paper will receive an "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 taking the course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the paper length. Enrollment will be limited to 30 students -- 20 from SLS who will be selected by lottery and 10 from H&S. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, assignments and final paper. Cross-listed with History (HISTORY 307A).

This course will examine the implications of psychological theory and research for normative legal theory and for contemporary legal policies, procedures, and practices. The course will draw on contemporary cognitive, social, and clinical psychology to address the concepts of intent, responsibility, deterrence, retribution, morality, and procedural and distributive justice. We will examine evidence law (e.g. eyewitness testimony, polygraphy, expert testimony, psychiatric diagnosis and prediction), procedure (e.g., trial conduct, jury selection, settlement negotiations, alternative dispute resolution), and various topics in criminal law, torts, contracts, property, discrimination, family law, and other areas. We will compare "rational actor" and psychological perspectives on decision making by juries, judges, attorneys, and litigants. 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. Elements used in grading: Series of shorter papers or final independent research paper totaling 28 pages.

This seminar will explore the connections between the arts and questions of law and politics, using several performances from the 2019-2020 Stanford Live season to form the basis of a conversation. Students will attend the multiple performances and discussions before or after each performance. The performances will be on the evenings of 1/15, 1/17, 1/22, 1/29, 2/5, 2/21, 2/22 and 2/26---student must attend at least 6 performances so please confirm your availability before enrolling. Specific meeting times TBD with instructor and the Bing event schedule. The discussions will be a combination of public lectures and exclusive pre or post performance conversations with the artists, artistic directors, and Stanford faculty members. Students will be expected to write four reflection papers over the course of the term. Enrollment limited to 7 law students. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, please submit a short written statement of interest to cparis@law.stanford.edu. Mandatory Pass/Fail, 3 units. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

This is an overview course covering the basics of intellectual property law -- trade secrets, patents, copyrights, and trademarks. This course is designed both for those who are interested in pursuing IP as a career, and those who are looking only for a basic knowledge of the subject. There are no prerequisites, and a scientific background is not required. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam.

This is an overview course covering the basics of intellectual property law -- trade secrets, patents, copyrights, and trademarks, as well as selected other state intellectual property rights. This course is designed both for those who are interested in pursuing IP as a career, and those who are looking only for a basic knowledge of the subject. There are no prerequisites, and a scientific background is not required. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam (4-hour, open-book, in-class final).

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 present for the exploitation of copyrighted works. There are no prerequisites for this class. Elements used in grading: Final Exam (In-School, open book).

Patentable goods and services are increasingly important in today's global information economy, and they frequently cross national borders, physically or electronically. This course will include a comparative examination of the major national patent systems, a survey of the principal international patent treaties, and discussions of related transnational patent issues. We will examine these topics both from the perspective of global patent practitioners -- who face challenges such as securing large international patent portfolios and strategizing multinational patent litigation -- and from the perspective of the academics and policymakers who are engaged in ongoing patent harmonization debates. Prerequisites: Introduction to Intellectual Property or consent of instructor. Elements used in grading: class participation, attendance, and short writing assignments.

In this course we cover the major aspects of patent law, primarily as applied in the United States: patentability (including patentable subject matter, novelty, nonobviousness, enablement, and definiteness); infringement; and remedies. The emphasis is on essential legal principles and a policy analysis of the patent system. The course is designed to be useful both as solid background for non-patent-specialists and for those planning a career in the field. Introduction to Intellectual Property or consent of the instructor is a prerequisite for this course. No technical background is required. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, and final exam.

If you practice in any technology-related area (whether transactions, corporate, 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, Waymo, and Qualcomm). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Final Exam.

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).

This course explores the roots of privacy law, its evolution in the face of rapid technological change, and the challenges to an individual's ability to control third party collection, access, use and disclosure of their personal information. The course covers existing and emerging privacy torts, applicable and proposed privacy legislation and regulations, international norms and extraterritorial application of privacy law such as in the EU's General Data Protection Regulation, and self-regulation of privacy through technological means, contracts or other means. We will discuss all of these things, as well as incorporate developments in the news, from the perspective of the various privacy stakeholders--consumers, regulators and business. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

This seminar provides an in depth look at modern government surveillance law, policies and practices. It is taught by Richard Salgado, director of law enforcement and information security at Google and a former prosecutor at the U.S. Department of Justice's Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and Todd Hinnen, a partner at Perkins Coie and a former head of U.S. Department of Justice's National Security Division. The course will cover the technology, law and policy of government surveillance of the Internet and other communications technologies. We will focus on U.S. government surveillance for national security, criminal law enforcement and public safety purposes, and its relationship with other jurisdictions. Technologies and practices covered will include wiretapping, stored data collection and mining, location tracking and developing eavesdropping techniques. Legal regimes will include the Fourth Amendment, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the USA Freedom Act, USA Patriot Act, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the CLOUD Act and CALEA among others. Elements used in grading: Two papers, timely submission of topics and outlines, and class participation.

This course will examine the theoretical foundations and common law development of the range of tort remedies designed to afford protection to the interests in personality. Defamation, the right of privacy, and claims of emotional distress and harassment will receive particular attention, along with the constitutional defenses to these claims, based on the First Amendment, and recent issues novel to the internet era. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

All copyrights today are international, and copyright litigation and licensing increasingly require a general understanding of foreign copyright law and of the international copyright system. This course will focus on the counselling considerations that surround the exploitation of US-based music, film, literature, software and other copyrighted works in foreign markets, and of foreign works in US markets, through licensing, litigation, or both. The course will survey the principal legal systems and international treaty arrangements for the protection of copyrighted works as well as the procedural questions that lie at the threshold of protection. Elements used in grading: class participation and two problem sets, one mid-course and the other at the end of the course.

Computational Law is an innovative approach to Legal Informatics concerned with the representation of regulations in computable form. From a practical perspective, Computational Law is important as the basis for computer systems capable of performing useful legal calculations, such as compliance checking, legal planning, and regulatory analysis. In this course, we look at the theory of Computational Law, we review relevant technology and applications, we discuss the prospects and problems of Computational Law, and we examine its philosophical and legal implications. Elements used in grading: Work in the course consists of reading, class discussion, practical exercises, and a final project. Cross-listed with Computer Science (CS 204). This class is limited to 30 students (LAW 4019 & CS 204 combined). Interested students should enroll as early as possible in Axess to reserve a spot in the class. (http://complaw.stanford.edu/)

The internet has enabled new forms of innovation, content production and political participation that are transforming our economy, society and democratic system. Technical, legal and economic choices will affect whether the Internet can realize its potential or not. Communications law - the law that governs both the physical infrastructures for communications services such as cable and telephone networks as well as the communication services which are provided over these infrastructures - has become one of the most important arenas in which choices affecting the future of the information society are made. The debates over network neutrality or the right ways to foster broadband deployment are examples of this trend. At the same time, the Internet's ability to support a variety of different communications services such as telephony, information services or video over the same physical network infrastructure challenges the existing communications law, which is based on the assumption that different physical infrastructures offer different communications services. What can regulators and legislators do to allow the Internet to realize its economic, social, cultural, and political potential? How can we foster the deployment of more broadband networks? And how can policymakers allow applications like Internet telephony and traditional telephony to coexist without giving one an unfair advantage over the other? The course will address how current law deals with these questions, but also explore what regulators and legislators may do to better deal with the challenges posed by the Internet. The course is mostly focused on the US, but highlights developments elsewhere where appropriate. Special Instructions: Students may take Communications Law: Internet and Telephony and Communications Law: Broadcast and Cable Television in any order (neither is a prerequisite for the other). There are no prerequisites for this course. No technical background is required. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, final exam.

This skill-based course examines the core requirements and strategies for drafting and prosecuting a patent application before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). The class brings in real inventors and patent examiners to give students a real-world experience of developing a patent, understanding patentability, building patent portfolios, and getting a patent application prosecuted through the patent office. Students will interact with inventors in a startup-type environment and help the startup protect the IP in its technology -- through interactions with the inventors to identify and develop concepts and draft corresponding patent applications, and through interactions with the PTO to get the patents assessed against prior art and eventually granted. The course is open to all students, regardless of your technical (or non-technical) undergraduate background. All you require is an interest in technology or patent law. This class will give you a solid understanding of what patents are, provide real-life experience in identifying and helping companies protect the IP in their technologies, and help you understand the mechanics of patent structure and development, all of which will be helpful experience and background for students interested in pursuing any technology-based litigation or transactional practices. Students are evaluated on participation, in-class and take-home exercises, and projects relating to the drafting and prosecution of a patent application.

Trade secret protection has become one of the most important issues in intellectual property today. Technology becomes more important to industry every day, but information can be downloaded and shared more easily than ever before. The law has to strike a balance between encouraging and protecting commercial investment in research, and preserving an individual's right to change employment or to compete directly against a former employer. In addition to examining the law and the theory of trade secret protection, we will emphasize the practical aspects of protecting information as a trade secret. We will discuss the challenges and issues involved in litigating trade secret cases, creating corporate programs to protect trade secrets, and the increasingly important subject of protecting trade secrets internationally. We will feature several guest speakers, including individuals from the FBI, the Department of Justice, the judiciary, in-house counsel, and a forensic discovery specialist, each of whom will address trade secret law and practice from their own unique perspective. We will highlight topics of current interest, such as non-competition agreements, trade secrets and the Internet, and cybercrime, and will discuss in detail some of the most prominent trade secret cases of the past several years. The class will be of interest to students who expect to practice intellectual property law as well as to students who expect to be involved in corporate transactions and labor law. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam.

In recent years, Internet platforms like Facebook, Google, or Twitter have increasingly come under fire. Top executives from these companies have testified before Congress about their role in spreading misinformation in the 2016 elections. With the increased scrutiny come diverse calls for change. They include asking the platforms to self-regulate, asking regulators to address the platforms' growing market power, or asking Congress to adopt laws regulating various aspects of the platforms' behavior. The seminar explores the many ways in which Internet platforms shape free expression online and asks what public responsibilities these private companies do and should have. By interrogating the structural role that these companies play in society -- are they quasi-state actors? are they the press? are they monopolies? -- we will assess how the platforms contribute to (or possibly mitigate) key social problems. We will critically examine constitutional and statutory laws, like the First Amendment, CDA 230, and antitrust law to evaluate whether and how they facilitate or constrain possible solutions. And with the benefit of guest speakers from academia and policy sectors, we will draw our own conclusions about how to best ensure platform accountability. tl;dr: If you want to work at a tech law firm, in-house at a tech company, in a regulatory position vis-a-vis the tech sector, or are generally interested in critical questions around the role of Internet platforms in society and their impact on free expression online, this class is for you. We hope to see your application! Special Instructions: Enrollment will be limited to 15 students from both SLS and H&S. Experience with First Amendment doctrine is helpful, but not required. Grades will be based on class attendance, class participation, and either a number of shorter reflection papers (section (01)) or an independent research paper (section (02)). 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 course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on paper length. Elements used in grading: Class participation, class attendance, reflection papers or research paper. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit the Consent Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms).

Even just a generation ago, interest in "artificial intelligence" (AI) was largely confined to academic computer science, philosophy, engineering research and development efforts, and science fiction. Today the term is widely understood to encompass not only long-term efforts to simulate the kind of general intelligence humans reflect, but also fast-evolving technologies (such as elaborate convolutional neural networks leveraging vast amounts of data) increasingly affecting finance, transportation, health care, national security, advertising and social media, and a variety of other fields. Conceived for students with interest in law, business, public policy, design, and ethics, this highly interactive course surveys current and emerging legal and policy problems related to how law structures humanity's relationship to artificially-constructed intelligence. To deepen students' understanding of current and medium-term problems in this area, the course explores definitions and foundational concepts associated with "artificial intelligence," likely directions for the evolution of AI, and different types of legally-relevant concerns raised by those developments and by the use of existing versions of AI. We will consider distinct settings where regulation of AI is emerging as a challenge or topic of interest, including autonomous vehicles, autonomous weapons, AI in social media/communications platforms, and systemic AI safety problems; doctrines and legal provisions relevant to the development, control, and deployment of AI such as the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation; the connection between the legal treatment of manufactured intelligence and related bodies of existing law, such as administrative law, torts, constitutional principles, criminal justice, and international law; and new legal arrangements that could affect the development and use of AI. We will also cover topics associated with the development and design of AI as they relate to the legal system, such as measuring algorithmic bias and explainability of AI models. Cross-cutting themes will include: how law affects the way important societal decisions are justified, the balance of power and responsibility between humans and machines in different settings, the incorporation of multiple values into AI decision making frameworks, the interplay of norms and formal law, the technical complexities that may arise as society scales deployment of AI systems, and similarities and differences to other domains of human activity raising regulatory trade-offs and affected by technological change. Note: The course is designed both for students who want a survey of the field and lack any technical knowledge, as well as for students who want to gain tools and ideas to deepen their existing interest or background in the topic. Students with longer-term interest in or experience with the subject are welcome to do a more technically-oriented paper or project in connection with this class. But technical knowledge or familiarity with AI is not a prerequisite, as various optional readings and some in-class material will help provide necessary background. Requirements: The course involves a mix of lectures, in-class activities, and student-led discussion and presentations. Requirements include attendance, participation in planning and conducting at least one student-led group presentation or discussion, two short 3-5 pp. response papers for other class sessions, and either an exam or a 25-30 pp. research paper. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. CONSENT APPLICATION: We will try to accommodate as many people as possible with interest in the course. But to facilitate planning and confirm your level of interest, please fill out an application (available at https://bit.ly/2MJIem9) by September 4, 2019. Applications received after September 4, 2019 will be considered on a rolling basis if space is available. The application is also available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms).

In our hyper-networked world dominated by digital gatekeepers, tech policy implicates the law, business, engineering and --- perhaps foremost --- society. Effective lawyering in the field must be multi-dimensional and incorporate economic, technological, societal and historical perspectives on the issues. This reading group will put these principles into action by examining current tech policy issues through these lenses. Past offerings of the reading group examined breaking issues such as Facebook and Cambridge Analytica (data collection and use); Uber and the Arizona pedestrian death (testing of AI); Amazon and antitrust (competition online); Apple and iPhone encryption (privacy vs. security); and LinkedIn and public user data (platform control and data ownership). Some possible topics this year include AI and facial recognition; social networks and political advertising; and Google, Apple and digital competition. The reading group does not require a technology background --- just interest in gaining a deeper understanding of the issues. It will meet every other week starting week 1 (weeks 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9) on Thursdays, 6:30PM to 8:30PM. Grading (MP/R/F) will be based on attendance and class participation. Enrollment will be limited to 10 students, with consent of the instructor. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a short Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). Applications are due by December 15, though earlier submissions are welcome.

Recent advances in computing may place us at the threshold of a unique turning point in human history. Soon we are likely to entrust management of our environment, economy, security, infrastructure, food production, healthcare, and to a large degree even our personal activities, to artificially intelligent computer systems. The prospect of "turning over the keys" to increasingly autonomous systems raises many complex and troubling questions. How will society respond as versatile robots and machine-learning systems displace an ever-expanding spectrum of blue- and white-collar workers? Will the benefits of this technological revolution be broadly distributed or accrue to a lucky few? How can we ensure that these systems are free of algorithmic bias and respect human ethical principles? What role will they play in our system of justice and the practice of law? How will they be used or abused in democratic societies and autocratic regimes? Will they alter the geopolitical balance of power, and change the nature of warfare? The goal of CS22a is to equip students with the intellectual tools, ethical foundation, and psychological framework to successfully navigate the coming age of intelligent machines. Elements used in grading: Attendance. Cross-listed with Computer Science (CS 22A) and International Policy (INTLPOL 200).

Taught by a team of law and engineering faculty, this unique interdisciplinary course will empower students across the University to work together and exercise leadership on critically important debates at the intersection of law and digital technology. Designed as an accessible survey, the course will equip students with two powerful bases of knowledge: (i) a working technical grasp of key digital technologies (e.g., AI and machine learning, internet structure, encryption, blockchain); and (ii) basic fluency in the key legal frameworks implicated by each (e.g., privacy, cybersecurity, anti-discrimination, free speech, torts, procedural fairness). Substantively, the course will be organized into modules focused on distinct law-tech intersections, including: platform regulation, speech, and intermediary liability; algorithmic bias and civil rights; autonomous systems, safety, and tort liability; "smart" contracting; data privacy and consumer protection; "legal tech," litigation, and access to justice; government use of AI; and encryption and criminal procedure. Each module will be explored via a mix of technical and legal instruction, case study discussions, in-class practical exercises, and guest speakers from industry, government, academe, and civil society. Law students will emerge from the course with a basic understanding of core digital technologies and related legal frameworks and a roadmap of curricular and career pathways one might follow to pursue each area further. Students from elsewhere in the University, from engineering to business to the social sciences and beyond, will emerge with an enhanced capacity to critically assess the legal and policy implications of new digital technologies and the ways society can work to ensure those technologies serve the public good. All students will learn to work together across disciplinary divides to solve technical, legal, and practical problems. There are no course prerequisites, and no prior legal or technical training will be assumed. Students will be responsible for short discussion papers or a final paper. After the term begins, students electing the final paper option can transfer from section 1 to section 2, which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. This class is cross-listed in the University and undergraduates and graduates are eligible to take it. Consent Application for Non-Law Students: We will try to accommodate all students interested in the course. But to facilitate planning and confirm interest, please fill out a consent application (https://forms.gle/hLAQ7JUm2jFTWQzE9) by March 13, 2020. Applications received after March 13 will be considered on a rolling basis. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation; Written Assignments or Final Paper. Cross-listed with Computer Science (CS 481).

The collection, use and marketing of personal data are ubiquitous in the digital age. This seminar will explore the diverse legal regimes regulating personal data--including privacy, property and security--and the imperfect nature of their protections. Legal rules are rapidly evolving to address, if not resolve, the inevitable conflicts between privacy, property and security in relation to personal data. Laws have been enacted and new ones are under consideration at the national, state and even municipal levels, as well as around the world. Norms are emerging to guide these conflicts in the operation of business. Technology is evolving that can facilitate the protection, or accelerate the exploitation, of personal data. At the heart of all these developments is the question, who owns and controls personal data in the digital age. The same piece of data may in different hands raise different expectations. As an example, A may have a privacy expectation that her purchase from an online marketplace is no one's business but her own. B, the app that served as intermediary between the buyer and seller, may have a property or contract expectation that it owns the metadata and other information about A's buying habits. C, a government agency, may have a security interest in collecting or unearthing the details of A's purchase of particular items. This same triad of interests is implicated across a wide variety of highly sensitive personal data, such as location information, facial recognition and medical results. This seminar will explore these data rules, norms, technologies and conflicts through three sessions of lecture and interactive exercises addressed to privacy, property and security, respectively; four sessions devoted to presentations from leading representatives of consumer, corporate and government interests, with questioning by students in the class; and two sessions devoted to discussion of student answers to problem sets, focusing on an exploration of the privacy-property-security conflict and on forward-looking solutions to the protection of personal data. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, final research 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.

Examination of recent developments in computing technology and platforms through the lenses of philosophy, public policy, social science, and engineering. Course is organized around four main units: algorithmic decision-making and bias; data privacy and civil liberties; artificial intelligence and autonomous systems; and the power of private computing platforms. Each unit considers the promise, perils, rights, and responsibilities at play in technological developments. Prerequisite: CS106A. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, coding assignments, and final exam. Cross-listed with Communication (COMM 180), Computer Science (CS 182), Ethics in Society (ETHICSOC 182), Philosophy (PHIL 82), Political Science (POLISCI 182), Public Policy (PUBLPOL 182).

Internet platforms like Google and Facebook play an enormous role in our online speech and information environment today. This class will review the intermediary liability laws that shape platforms' decisions about online content, and examine how successfully those laws achieve their goals. Students will be encouraged to think pragmatically about the legal, operational, and product design choices platforms may make in response to particular laws, drawing on the instructor's experience handling such questions as Associate General Counsel at Google. Readings and discussions will focus primarily on current US law, with some attention to European laws and to proposed or pending legislation. Important themes of the class include Constitutional and human rights constraints on intermediary liability laws; legal limits (or lack thereof) on platforms' enforcement of privatized speech rules under their Community Guidelines or Terms of Service; global enforcement of national laws requiring platforms to remove content; and connections between platform liability and other areas of law such as consumer protection or privacy. Students will be responsible for three written assignments. The longest will be a final paper of 15 pages. The other two will both be short responses to the week's reading. Up to three students, with consent of instructor, will have the option to write an independent research paper for 3 units. After the term begins, students (max 3) accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. Students will be graded based on Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, and a Final Paper. Admission to the class is based on lottery, but in admitting students from the waitlist the instructor may prioritize based on students' degree programs.

This course aims to give students a solid understanding of the most common types of attacks used in cybercrime and cyberwarfare. Taught by a long-time cybersecurity practitioner, a recovering cyberlaw litigator, and a group of hearty, motivated TAs, each session will begin with a lecture covering the basics of an area of technology and how that technology has been misused in the past. Students will then complete a lab section, with the guidance of the instructor and assistants, where they attack a known insecure system using techniques and tools seen in the field. Each week, there will be a second lecture on the legal and policy impacts of the technologies and techniques we cover. By the end of the course, students are expected to have a basic understanding of some of the most common offensive techniques in use today as well as a comprehensive overview of the most important aspects of cyberpolicy and law. No computer science background is required. All students must have access to a Windows, Mac OS X or Linux laptop. Students must enroll in the lecture as well as one Computer Lab (Lab meets 50 minutes once a week). Special Instructions: This class is limited to 120 students with 30 spots for SLS students. If more than 30 SLS students wish to enroll, instructor permission is required. Elements used in grading: Class participation, written assignments, take-home midterm, and a final exam. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 268). Law students see INTLPOL listing for Computer Lab section meeting times.

Advances in machine learning, big data, networked communications, and computing are transforming our world and fueling calls for regulation. This course--a joint venture of a Stanford law professor and a former Member of the European Parliament and leading voice on tech regulation--offers a global perspective on the profound legal and governance challenges posed by the new digital technologies. Students will emerge with an understanding of how tech is reshaping the global distribution of political authority, rights, and resources, the existing state of law and regulation in the U.S., Europe, China, and elsewhere, and the new democratic governance models that are emerging in response. Each class session will feature one or more distinguished speakers from around the world drawn from the ranks of government officials, judges, activists, and academics who work in the fields of human rights, privacy, free speech, trade, and national security. There are no course prerequisites, whether in law or otherwise. Students will be responsible for one-page responses to each week's readings and a research paper to be turned in at the spring paper deadline. Students can take the course for 2 or 3 units, depending on research paper length. This class is cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 253) and undergraduates and graduates are eligible to take it. Stanford Non-Law students may enroll in INTLPOL 253 directly in Axess. Non-law students wishing to enroll in LAW 4050 should complete the Non-Law Student Add Request form available at https://law.stanford.edu/education/courses/non-law-students/ for a permission number to enroll. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

The U.S. and the European Union (which comprises 28 European states and 500 million people) have the largest bilateral trade relationship in the world. Over 50% of the world's GDP is generated on the Transatlantic Marketplace. U.S. companies rely on the EU market for more than half of their global foreign profits, and U.S. investment in the EU is currently three times greater than U.S. investment in the whole of Asia. In recent years, this has tremendously heightened the need for a sound understanding of the legal system of the EU, especially for business and technology lawyers. Responding to this need, this course will, first, examine the internationally unique legal system of the EU as such, as it is applicable to any field of substantive and procedural EU law. Thus, we will look at the legal nature and the different sources of EU law and its relationship with the national law of the EU Member States, including European human rights and fundamental rights protection standards. We will cover the relevant EU law enforcement actions including state liability issues for breach of EU law as well as the jurisdiction of both European Courts and relevant remedies in national courts. Secondly, we will explore the legal framework governing business activities in the EU, from the perspective of a business entity as an internationally operating actor in a European business environment. In this context, we will focus on the most essential fields of EU business law, i.e. (a) the four fundamental economic freedoms of the European Internal Market for goods, services, capital, and persons (enterprises, workforce, immigration), including the legal and economic implications of Brexit, (b) EU competition (antitrust) law, and (c) the new digital European Internal Market and EU data protection and privacy laws. Special attention will be given to the question how companies established outside the EU can efficiently use EU business law to pursue their interests in the EU. Additional study and research opportunities for students in EU law, building on this course, can be found on the SLS EU Law Initiatives website (law.stanford.edu/transatlantic-technology-law-forum/european-union-law-initiatives). Special Instructions: After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Grades for students enrolled in section (01) will be based on writing assignments. Students taking the course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the paper length. Elements used in grading: Writing assignments or research paper.

Lawyers are increasingly asked to advise clients with global operations: Twitter reacts to free speech limitations in Turkey, governments around the world regulate Facebook's user data, Nike weighs the legal risk from factory fires in Bangladesh, investors consider spending billions in China without legal protections common elsewhere, companies worry about the consequences of being complicit in human rights violations, governments threaten to expropriate intellectual and real property, and US litigators face court rulings abroad that may conflict with the orders of US courts. What legal problems arise when firms go global? Through a series of case studies, we put you in the driver's seat and ask you to consider the challenges of doing business around the world, subject to multiple and sometimes inconsistent national laws. We will examine how treaties, international agreements, and informal norms can constrain or supplement national laws and review the risks of doing business in nations whose laws are ineffective or unreliable. We also consider some of the costs of globalization. We'll hear from current or former general counsel from global firms such as Intel and G.E. Special Instructions: Students who take this course have priority in the lottery for field study trips organized by the law school in September and during Spring Break. Elements used in grading: a short paper, class participation, and written assignments. This class is open to ALL students (except 1Ls), and is not limited to students enrolled in the Global Quarter.

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, 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, classes will meet for the live negotiations on one Thursday evening (DLA Palo Alto Office, 2000 University Avenue) at 7:00 PM (10/17), and three Saturday mornings and one Sunday morning at 10:30 AM (10/5, 10/12, 10/26 and 11/10) in the San Francisco office of DLA Piper (555 Mission Street; close to Montgomery St. BART station). [The Sunday class is scheduled to accommodate the MPRE exam on Saturday, 11/9] Due to the Thursday, Saturday and Sunday classes, this class will conclude on November 11. 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. A primer on basic negotiations skills will be offered at a time TBD as an alternative for students who have not had a prior negotiations class or experience. 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 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.

This course provides a rigorous introduction to the law, theory and practice of international commercial arbitration. International commercial arbitration which has become the default means of settling international disputes and with clients increasingly involved in international business transactions and cross-border activity, is a rapidly growing practice area in law firms of every size. The practice is peripatetic, with many international arbitration lawyers basing themselves in law firms in New York, Washington D.C., Paris, Hong Kong, Singapore, and other major world commercial centers. The course will deal with the internationalist elements of the subject matter, but also examine international commercial arbitration from an American perspective. Students can expect to review both foreign and US commentaries, statutes and case law. The course will comprise of five main topics: (1) an introduction to the field of international commercial arbitration; (2) the agreement to arbitrate; (3) the arbitrators; (4) the arbitration process; and (5) the arbitral award. The intent is to provide a strong academic understanding of the various theories and principles, but with a strong practical bent. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Final Exam.

This seminar examines the challenges of managing and resolving intractable political and violent intergroup and international conflicts. Employing an interdisciplinary approach drawing on social psychology, political science, game theory, and international law, the course identifies various strategic, psychological, and structural barriers that can impede the achievement of efficient solutions to conflicts. We will explore a conceptual framework for conflict management and resolution that draws not only on theoretical insights, but also builds on historical examples and practical experience in the realm of conflict resolution. This approach examines the need for the parties to conflicts to address the following questions in order to have prospects of creating peaceful relationships: (1) how can the parties to conflict develop a vision of a mutually bearable shared future; (2) how can parties develop trust in the enemy; (3) how can each side be persuaded, as part of a negotiated settlement, to accept losses that it will find very painful; and (4) how do we overcome the perceptions of injustice that each side are likely to have towards any compromise solution? We will consider both particular conflicts, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the South African transition to majority rule, as well as cross-cutting issues, such as the role international legal rules play in facilitating or impeding conflict resolution, the ways intragroup dynamics affect intergroup conflict resolution efforts, and the role of transitional justice mechanisms to address atrocities following civil wars. Special Instructions: Section 01: Grades will be based on class participation, written assignments, and a final exam. Section 02: Up to five students, with consent of the instructor, will have the option to write an independent research paper for Research (R) credit in lieu of some of the written assignments and final exam for Section 01. After the term begins, students (max 5) accepted into the course can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. This class is limited to 20 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (12 students will be selected by lottery) and eight non-law students by consent of instructor. This class is cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 250) and Psychology (PSYCH 383).

This course offers an introduction to the theory and practice of human rights. We will examine major sources of international human rights law---including treaties, customary international law, and national law---as well as the institutions in which human rights are contested, adjudicated, and enforced. Key situses of human rights activity include multilateral organizations, like the United Nations Security Council and Human Rights Council; international, regional, and national courts and tribunals; and quasi-judicial treaty bodies, like the U.N. Committee Against Torture. This degree of jurisdictional redundancy offers an opportunity to explore questions of institutional design and interaction as well as processes of normative diffusion. The course will also consider the role of non-state actors---including non-governmental organizations, corporations, terrorist organizations, and ordinary individuals---in promoting and violating human rights. In addition to this survey of the human rights ecosystem, the course will engage some of the fundamental theoretical debates underlying the international human rights project with a focus on perennial questions of legitimacy, justiciability, compliance, and efficacy. Finally, we will explore a range of threats and challenges to the promotion of human rights---both perennial and novel---including economic under-development, terrorism, national security over-reach, patriarchy, and racism. We will read case law originating from all over the world, including the United States. Special Instructions: Students have the option to write a long research paper in lieu of the final exam with consent of instructor. 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: Class participation; exam or final long research paper. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 355).

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. This course will cover four broad areas: (I) the historical and policy origins of international investment law; (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. The course uses materials from international investment treaty texts, case law, and commentaries to enable students to evaluate and apply legal doctrine to future situations. Students will produce a variety of writing assignments such as case commentaries and short "briefs," and will serve as discussion facilitators along with the instructors. 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: Class participation, attendance and paper(s).

This course provides a general introduction to international law and its role in today's complex and interdependent world. We will begin by considering fundamental questions about the nature of international law, such as: the origins of international law in the sovereign equality of states; the sources of international law (including treaties and customary international law); the subjects of international law; principles of state responsibility; the bases upon which states may exercise jurisdiction; and the global governance challenges arising from the absence of assured mechanisms for the interpretation or enforcement of international law. We will then examine the operation of international law in the U.S. legal system. In the second half of the course, we will look at a series of contemporary international law topics and issues, including international dispute resolution, international human rights law, the law governing coercion and the use of armed force, the law of armed conflict, international environmental law, and international criminal law. Throughout, we will consider current issues and problems arising in the international arena and the extent to which international law affects the behavior of states. This course provides a general grounding in public international law and a foundation for more advanced or specialized international law courses. Elements used in grading: Class participation, optional paper, and final exam. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 350).

This course will survey the law and policy of modern international trade agreements, with an emphasis on the treaty network of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and certain other arrangements to which the United States is a party, as well as U.S. laws governing "unfair trade practices" such as subsidization and dumping. Topics will include the political economy of the treaty framework, the relationship between international and domestic law, bilateralism versus multilateralism, the current crisis in the WTO dispute resolution system and its origins, and the possible tensions between international trade law and domestic regulation. Particular attention will also be directed to the current trade row with China and the imposition of trade restrictions on national security grounds by the Trump administration. 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: Class participation, attendance and written assignments or research paper.

(Formerly Law 679) We will seek to determine a useful meaning of the notion of the rule of law, to identify a credible measurement of adherence, and to explore the importance of the rule of law in terms of economic, socio-political and human development. We will focus on accountable government and private actors; just laws; open processes for the enactment, administration and enforcement of laws and impartial dispute resolution. Readings will include the works of philosophers, political theorists and jurists from the 17th to the 21st century as well as contemporary scholars. This seminar will feature experts in the field as guest lectures and requires three reaction papers from all participants. Elements used in grading: Class participation and reaction papers.

With more than a billion people living on less than $2 a day, global poverty is one of the biggest challenges currently facing humanity. Even though those who suffer the most are located in the developing world, many of the policies, economic opportunities, and legal actions that offer the biggest potential for global poverty alleviation are made in the United States. This course will provide an introduction to the study of global poverty. What causes poverty? Why have some parts of the developing world done better at alleviating poverty than other parts? Can the world ever be free of poverty, as the World Bank's official motto suggests? And most importantly, what can aspiring lawyers do to improve the condition of the world's impoverished? These are some of the questions this course is designed to address. This course is designed especially for future lawyers and policymakers who seek a deeper understanding of the developing world. After a brief overview that will familiarize students with the major concepts and empirical debates in poverty and development studies, we will examine a variety of 'causes' of poverty, from poor governance to lack of economic opportunity to the role of society. Since this course is just as much about what can be done, we shall also consider applied approaches to poverty alleviation. These types of interventions include political/legal reforms such as anti-corruption initiatives, 'rule of law' interventions, right to information programs, privatization, and community-driven development models; economic solutions such as cash transfers and microfinance; and technological approaches such as new methods for measuring policy impact and the application of new technologies for state identification and distribution programs. In addition to more typical scholarly readings, students will review poverty alleviation policy proposals and contracts made by various stakeholders (academics, NGOs, states, international bodies, etc.). Grading is based on participation, a presentation of research or a proposal, and, in consultation with the professor, a research paper. The research paper may be a group project (Section 01) graded MP/R/F or an individual in-depth research proposal either of which could be the basis for future field research (Section 02) graded H/P/R/F. Students approved for Section 01 or Section 02 may receive R credit. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from Section 01 into Section 02 with consent of the instructor. Automatic grading penalty waived for research paper. This course is taught in conjunction with the India Field Study component (Law 5026). Students may enroll for this course alone or for both this course and Law 5026 with consent of the instructor (12 students will come to India). See Law 5026 for application instructions. 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. Cross-listed with International Policy Studies (INTLPOL 281).

This is the India Field Study component of Global Poverty and the Law (Law 5025). For details, see course description for Law 5025. Corruption is one of the most difficult challenges facing societies across the developing world. Why is corruption so pervasive and what can be done to address it? During spring break 2019, this course will be held in Delhi, India and will consist of conversations with lawyers, politicians, scholars, leaders in civil society, and senior bureaucrats who are active in anti-corruption efforts. Students will also meet frontline bureaucrats (i.e., cops and government teachers) who will share their own perspectives about the problem. Enrollment is limited to 12 students. PLEASE NOTE: Students will need a passport and a visa to travel to India. Students will be required to attend two dinner meetings during the Winter Quarter in preparation for the trip. Elements used in grading: class participation and short writing assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website. See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

This course will provide an overview of the field of Jewish Law and will seek to provide a few case studies of topics in Jewish Law. All the readings are in English and this course presupposes no background in Jewish Law. Jewish Law is the world's oldest complex legal systems with distinct and idiosyncratic approaches to family, commercial, ritual and many other areas of law. It also has developed an elaborate "conflicts of law" sub-literature focusing on when should Jewish Law apply and when should some other legal system apply, reflecting the long history of the Jewish community in the diaspora as a minority. In this course, we will consider how Jewish law approaches a number of specific topics and we will ponder as well the proper interaction between Jewish law and secular legal norms, Jewish Law and changes in technology, Jewish law and sovereignty, Jewish Law and Bioethics and Jewish law and Family. Other topics will be added as we all see fit. Students who are interested in making a presentation on an area of their choice are welcome to do so. The course will seek to include an optional supplementary "field trip" to see a rabbinical court in action in California. The Learning Outcomes provided by this court include the following: Students who take this course will: 1. Exhibit knowledge and understanding of key concepts in substantive law, procedural law, and legal thought in Jewish Law. 2. Demonstrate facility with legal analysis and reasoning in the Jewish Legal tradition and will demonstrate the ability to conduct legal research in Jewish Law. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Final Paper. Cross-listed with Jewish Studies (JEWISHST 265).

To mount a response to threats to peace and security, should states act unilaterally, seek to build ad hoc coalitions of the willing, or work through multilateral institutions? What are the benefits and risks of global cooperation? This seminar interrogates these questions by examining the role that international organizations play in responding to global threats in the modern era. The first section focuses on the advent of the modern global institutional architecture, considering its historical context, theoretical underpinnings, sources of legitimacy and power (or lack thereof), and the role of regional, subnational, and nongovernmental actors. The second section considers the efficacy of global institutions in responding to transnational threats through recent case studies, including the Syrian civil war, the Paris Climate Accord, the Iran Nuclear Deal, and 2014-2016 Ebola outbreak in West Africa. The final section explores the future of the liberal world order and its institutions, and considers alternative models of global cooperation. For LAW 5039, students may enroll for two units (Section 01) or students may write a long policy memo for an additional unit of credit. Students electing to write the long policy memo may enroll for three units (Section 02). Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, written assignments, and a final presentation. This class is capped at 20 students. Please contact instructor for consent to enroll. Students accepted in LAW 5039 should contact the SLS Registrar's for permission to enroll in the class in Axess. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 217).

Registration for this class took place in Spring 2019. Enrollment in the class is currently closed. South Africa's transition to democracy in 1994 marked the formal end of the comprehensive political, economic, and social system of racial subordination known as apartheid. The country has changed dramatically since then, as the government has built several million new housing units, created social welfare systems, and created an array of government and private sector programs to combat discrimination and redress the effects of subordination. Yet the country remains among the most unequal in the world, with 64% of black South Africans living below the poverty line, compared to 1% of whites. Most non-white South Africans receive poor education, live in substandard housing, and have limited employment opportunities. In the last five years, discontent with the pace of economic and social transformation has boiled over. In 2015, university campuses erupted in protests. Students' demands quickly expanded from the removal of statutes of white colonizers to wider "decolonization" of university faculty and curricula and the expansion of access to higher education. "Born-free" student activists are now calling for faster, more radical transformation not just of campuses but of the society as a whole; many denounce what they see as the Mandela generation's overly conciliatory approach to white privilege in the economy, society, and interpersonal relations. Since 2018 there is new dynamism at the top, too: many South Africans believe that their new President, Cyril Ramaphosa, will curtail corruption and expand redistributive economic and social policies. This course provides an opportunity to engage South Africa at this exciting historical moment, through intensive study during a week at Stanford and meetings with lawyers, activists, community members, and possibly students, journalists, and politicians during a week in Cape Town. We will focus on how lawyers are struggling for social justice and economic and social transformation--sometimes through ambitious arguments using South Africa's highly progressive constitution, but more often by supporting social movements day to day. Our learning will be grounded in specific cases, such as of the shackdwellers movement Abahlali baseMjondolo; Equal Education, an organization of high school-age students; and pioneering class actions on behalf of injured gold miners. These will enable us to explore various ways law and lawyers fit into social change, the challenges and rewards of such work, and how their perspectives overlap with and diverge from those of their clients. At the same time, we will draw connections between this work and the grand debates and historical arc described above. While comparing South Africa with the United States will not be a primary purpose of the course, we may well see interesting parallels and divergences, and will have some space to discuss those, among ourselves and perhaps with our South African interlocutors. The format of the course will be unusual: We will return to campus before the Fall quarter and spend the week of September 9 preparing intensively at Stanford. We will meet daily for approximately three hours of discussion, collaborative exercises, and some lecturing, as well as read assigned material outside class. We will (a) learn some essential background on apartheid; current legal, political, economic, and social conditions; and our case studies; (b) begin to analyze legal activism methods and the challenges of transformation; and (c) prepare topics and specific questions for our meetings in South Africa, which students will lead. The following weekend we will fly to Cape Town, where we will spend the week of September 16 learning from visits to organizations and communities, and possibly one or two museums or other sites, as well as from discussions with a range of South Africans. We will return the weekend before the Fall quarter begins. Stanford Law School is committed to equal access to field study courses regardless of financial situation. The School covers nearly all expenses during the trip, but students must pay for their own transportation to and from South Africa. Students who qualify for financial aid can receive a supplemental award to cover those transportation costs. Elements use in grading: The course grade will be based on a series of short papers (one or more of which may be due after our return), active in-class engagement with the assigned materials, and preparation for and participation in interviews during the trip, and. The course is open to rising 2Ls and 3Ls. 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.

Corruption is a global problem. Although data suggests that there are places that accumulate more harmful practices than Latin American countries, Latin America is perceived as a champion of corruption. This macro vision may hide the distinctive characteristics of each country, as Latin America is a patchwork of idiosyncrasies regarding corruption. However, Latin American countries are narrowing their differences to closer patterns at a considerable pace. Latin America is facing an unprecedented chapter in its history against corruption due to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and other international organizations' recommendations, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the US federal law that addresses accounting transparency requirements for companies that negotiate bonds in the US), and other constraints related to economic globalization. This course will present students with the theoretical literature that aims to explain corruption in Latin America, the technical constraints that have recently reshaped its practices, and the latest most significant cases. From the petty bribery that is essential for people to gain access to basic needs, to the sophisticated structure that is the mainstay of organized crime, corruption embodies an enormous range of different practices. Risk and uncertainty, information asymmetry, and contract enforceability are traditional barriers to the development of ethical business in Latin America in general. However, recent episodes in Latin America have demonstrated that corruption involving politicians and public procurement concretizes huge entry barriers to the free market. One of the aims of this course is to show how this kind of corruption is incorporated within the design of legal statutes and the practices of institutions. Some of the questions raised by this course will address issues including the following: what companies and institutions can do to improve fair trading in Latin America and stop the vicious cycle of corruption; how successful they might be considering Latin America's social and political environment; what challenges are introduced by the Foreign Corruption Practices Act; how political austerity in Latin America relates to the ability to inspect areas that are vulnerable to corruption and criminality; what the recent plea-bargain cases in Latin America, especially Brazil, show about hands-on experience with corruption; and how this knowledge can prepare lawyers to prevent their clients from falling into the same path-dependent dangers. The course is designed for JD candidates and LLM students, but graduate students from other departments are most welcome. Legal jargon is not expected. We will learn through seminar-style discussions and lectures. Elements used in grading are class participation, attendance, and a few reaction papers.

The Afghanistan Legal Education Project (ALEP) Seminar is only open to student preselected in spring 2019. The ALEP Seminar will begin with an intensive bootcamp taught by ALEP leadership and members of the law faculty at American University of Afghanistan (AUAF). We will explore the Afghan sociopolitical and legal context, rule of law efforts and challenges in Afghanistan, and the role of legal education in legal development. Participants will learn from Afghan law professors about Shari'a law, customary law, Afghan civil law, and the challenges presented by Afghanistan's pluralistic legal system in preparation to work on legal curriculum to be taught at AUAF. The bootcamp, held in Asia, will be highly participatory and requires full attendance. During the remainder of the quarter, participants will receive training in curriculum creation and organizational development in preparation for authoring an Afghan legal textbook and assuming ALEP programmatic responsibilities. Consent Process: Only students selected in spring 2019 have consent to take the ALEP Seminar. Their names will be given to the Registrar, who will automatically enroll them in the course in fall 2019. Elements used in grading: Grading is based on mandatory attendance of the bootcamp, participation, assignments, and authoring a new chapter and/or revision of an existing textbook chapter. Note: Regular deadline for submission of R-Paper to be waived for ALEP Seminar.

Students who participate in the Afghanistan Legal Education Seminar in the fall quarter will continue their work in the Advanced Seminar in the winter or spring quarter. Only students selected for the Afghanistan Legal Education Project (ALEP) in spring 2018 may participate. Students will author textbook chapters, assume programmatic responsibilities, and meet regularly as a team and individually with the ALEP faculty. Note: Regular deadline for submission of R-Paper to be waived for Advanced ALEP Seminar. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

The State-Building and the Rule of Law Seminar is centrally concerned with bridging theory and practice. The seminar introduces the key theories relevant to state-building generally, and strengthening the rule of law in particular. This course explores the multidisciplinary nature of development --- through readings, lectures, guest lectures, case studies, and seminar discussions --- and asks how lawyers fit in and contribute to the process? The set of developing countries considered within the scope of this workshop is broad. It includes, among others, states engaged in post-conflict reconstruction, e.g., Cambodia, Timor Leste, Rwanda, Iraq, Sierra Leone; states still in conflict, e.g., Afghanistan, Somalia; the poorest states of the world that may not fall neatly into the categories of conflict or post-conflict, e.g., Nepal, Haiti; least developed states that are not marked by high levels of violent conflict at all, e.g., Bhutan; and more developed states at critical stages of transition, e.g., Tunisia, Georgia, Hungary. Grading is based on participation, a presentation of research or a proposal, and, in consultation with the professor, a research paper. The research paper may be a group project (Section 01) graded MP/R/F or an individual in-depth research proposal either of which could be the basis for future field research (Section 02) graded H/P/R/F. Students approved for Section 01 or Section 02 may receive EL credit or R credit. Automatic grading penalty waived for submission of the final work products. CONSENT APPLICATION: The seminar is open by consent to up to sixteen (16) JD, SPILS, and LLM students, and graduate students from other departments within Stanford University. This course is taught in conjunction with the India Field Study component (Law 5026). Students may enroll for this course alone or for both this course and Law 5026 with consent of the instructor (12 students will come to India). 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. Cross-listed with International Policy (INTLPOL 352).

Students who participate in the State-Building and Rule of Law Seminar in the fall quarter may seek consent to continue their work in the Advanced Seminar in winter or spring quarter. Six students per quarter will be allowed to participate. Students will work on individual applied or scholarly research projects developed in collaboration with the professor, and meet regularly as a group to discuss shared research challenges and issues. There may be funds available for fieldwork necessary to complete applied research projects. Determinations will be made by the professor and Rule of Law Program. Students may write a paper for Research credit with instructor consent. 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. Automatic grading penalty waived for submission of the final work products. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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. See Foreign Legal Study Program at https://law.stanford.edu/education/only-at-sls/global-initiative/foreign-legal-studies-program/ for details. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory evaluation of course work at the exchange institution.

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 every other week in the fall, winter, and spring quarters, and (we expect) most quarters over the following two years. Students may sign up for as many quarters they wish, and will receive one credit for each quarter they are enrolled. Each session will be devoted to presentations of one or two student works-in-progress. Every student is expected to present his or her own work at least once over the quarters she or he is enrolled in the Workshop, and to provide constructive oral feedback on others' work. 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. Barbara Fried (bfried@stanford.edu) or Prof. Bernadette Meyler (bmeyler@law.stanford.edu). Attendance is mandatory (except of course for 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 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. Classes will be held at one of the professor's home. The specific location will be sent to students prior to the first class meeting.

Is there a "canon" of American legal scholarship? And if so, how does it shape our understanding of, or the way we talk about, the law today? In many other academic disciplines, a central element of any course of advanced study is an encounter with a "canon" of some sort. This is a core set of texts that are perceived as foundational, and that are commonly used as reference points for scholarly advances. In other disciplines, the canon can be an object of emulation or criticism. Indeed, the very idea of a "canon" of legal scholarly is often subject to contestation, e.g., given the barriers women and minority scholars have faced. Drawing on the model of those foundational courses in other disciplines, this seminar aims to provide students with a working knowledge of a set of scholarly writings that can plausibly be characterized as an American "canon." At the same time, the seminar aims to elicit from students a critical engagement with this putative "canon." Particular attention is paid to the manner in which the canon either includes or marginalizes certain voices. Hence, one part of the seminar involves reading material that might be part of an expanded, more diversely populated canon. The seminar is designed for two kinds of student. First, it is a useful course of study for students either interested in academia or those thinking about whether academia might be the right path for them (and indeed, the seminar is modeled on a course at Chicago designed for prospective academics, or those considering that path). Second, the course is a chance to take a deeper dive into ideas that lurk behind many first-course private-law and public-law courses. During the seminar, students will read and discuss a range of texts, many drawn from Fisher and Kennedy's The Canon of American Legal Thought. Students will be asked to write response papers and to lead discussion on certain readings. The precise set-up of the course will depend, however, on enrollment. Finally, students will also have the option of doing a longer paper for additional credit (section 02). After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from section 01 (2 units) into section 02 (3 units) with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: class participation, short papers, and optional final research paper. Paper extensions will be granted with instructor permission. No automatic grading penalty for late papers.

When you have finished law school, you will (hopefully) have mastered a good deal of legal doctrine (many of you will review and/or sharpen your mastery of particular rules when you study for the Bar) and mastered a number of skills you will need to fulfill professional roles. (Hopefully, you will learn particular advocacy skills if you will be an advocate; writing skills that will help you whether you draft contracts or legislation, briefs or executive summaries, client letters; and, particularly in the Experiential Learning courses, skills that will help you exercise prudent judgment, collaborate with others, work both efficaciously and empathetically in a diverse world.). The claim that underlies this course is that your "classroom" courses here at SLS -- and at pretty much any of the academically ambitious schools that most of you considered attending -- had both a text (the doctrines and policies in the particular subject area that you were studying) and a "sub-text" (the concepts and themes that recurred across a wide range, maybe all, of your courses.) The goal of this course is to highlight these recurring themes (and remind you or illuminate for you just how often you confronted or will confront these issues), to discuss more overtly and directly the distinct approaches to each of these recurring issues than you might have discussed them before, and to expose you to some ways of approaching these issues that might be less familiar to you. In discussing these issues, we will draw on the insights offered by a wide array of "schools" of legal thought, including, but not limited to, libertarianism, Law and Economics, Legal Realism, Critical Legal Studies, Critical Race Theory, a variety of Feminist Legal Theories (anti-subordination feminism, "cultural" feminism), Langdellian Formalism and neo-Formalism, Law and Society. So, for instance, we will discuss some or all of the following issues: 1. Ways in which legal pronouncements are framed (the tension between the use of rules and standards; between default and mandatory rules); 2. Remedial options and remedial mechanisms (the choice between inalienable entitlements, injunctions, damages, restitution, and distinct forms of punishment; between sliding remedial scales and binary outcome-determinative rules; conduct regulation and output/outcome goals; public enforcement v. mixed public/private enforcement v. private enforcement with differing degrees of collectivization of individual complaints); 3. Issues in the interpretation of both private and public legal texts (textualism, intent-based originalism, flexible purposivism) and distinct theories of why or in what ways texts may be either incomplete or "dated," with some special attention to how to interpret texts that appear to delegate authority (to another decision maker, to a future decision maker) to make narrow, concrete decisions; 4. The interplay between substance and procedure (and its relationship to creating a gap between the law on the books and the law in action; the degree to which substantive rules are framed in the way that they are because rule makers are anticipating procedural barriers to enforcing alternative rules); 5. Institutional competence issues; 6. Alternative visions of human behavior and motivation (individualistic rational choice models with "thin," generally materialistic goals v. thicker rational choice models v. individualistic models influenced by psychologists, advancing richer views of how people process information and form tastes and/or sociological models, focused more on group influence, group maintenance and group conflict); 7. Some recurring substantive issues (how we define operative assent and how we define normatively meaningful consent; how we deal with problems of incommensurable values or deny the possibility of incommensurability; when we do or don't believe people are adequately empowered by "exit" -- finding another provider in a market or subjecting ourselves to a different political body that will make the rules that govern us -- and when we believe power must be exercised politically/collectively; when we believe principal/agent problems are serious and how we think they are "solved"; battles between anti-classification and anti-subordination views of antidiscrimination norms) and 8. The origins of law and the impact of law (is law significantly autonomous or responsive to other social forces (where "social forces" might or might not be understood in significant part in terms of distinctions in power by race, class, gender, LGBTQ status etc.) and to the ideological predispositions of those who articulate it? Is law -- and most particularly the judge-made law we (over?) emphasize in law school -- effectual in achieving social change?) Special Instructions: This class is limited to 30 students. 3Ls/Advanced Degree students will receive first preference, followed by 2Ls and then 1Ls. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on reaction papers and class participation; there may be formal class presentations as well (depending on class size) that would also figure into grading.

In this course, we will examine some of the central questions in philosophy of law, including: What is law? How do we determine the content of laws? What is the proper role of judges in interpreting the law? Do laws have moral content? What is authority? What gives law its authority? Must we obey the law? If so, why? How can we justify the law? How should we understand and respond to unjust laws? What is punishment? What is punishment for? What, if anything, justifies punishment by the state? What is enough punishment? What is too much punishment? What does justice require under non-ideal conditions? There will be a 50-minute mandatory TA session (Date and Time TBA). Law students have the option to write an independent research paper for R credit with instructor consent. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Elements used in grading: discussion questions, midterm paper, final paper abstract, final paper presentation, final paper, attendance. Cross-listed with Ethics in Society (ETHICSOC 175W) and Philosophy (PHIL 175W/PHIL 275W).

Workshop will provide students with a structured opportunity to write a research paper on any aspect of feminist legal theory/feminism and the law (broadly defined) that interests them. Students are expected to formulate a research topic by week 4. Paper should be as long as needed to communicate central ideas and no longer. In general, students should aim for 25 - 30 pages in length. We will meet by Zoom as a class four times during the quarter. Students will present possible research topics in classes #1 and #2 for feedback, and update their progress in class #3. Depending on student interest, we will also discuss major themes in feminist legal theory, and current legal topics that relate to feminist concerns. Instructor is available for consultation throughout the quarter, and will review outlines or drafts if students wish. No prerequisites. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Class meets Thursday, 2:00PM to 4:00PM on April 2, April 16, April 30, and May 14. CONSENT: Interested students may apply to enroll in the seminar by sending a statement of interest to Barbara Fried at bfried@stanford.edu.

This course will explore issues involving professional responsibility. Topics will include the role of advocates, the adversary system, the conditions of practice, diversity, candor, and confidentiality, conflicts of interest, lawyer-client relationships, regulatory structures, access to justice, pro bono service, and legal education. Special Instructions: Grades will be based on class participation and (1) short reflection essays on the readings and a short research paper or (2) a long paper. A maximum of 10 students will be permitted to write the long paper for R credit. After the term begins, 10 students can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of the instructor. If more than 10 students apply to write a long paper for R credit, a lottery will be run to determine the 10 students accepted in section (02). This class is designated as fulfilling the Ethics requirement (and the R requirement with instructor consent). Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, and either long paper or short reflection essays on the readings and short research paper.

This course will deal with selected aspects of the history, organization, economics, ethics, and possible futures of the legal profession in the United States. Likely topics will include, in addition to the ABA's Model Rules of Professional Conduct: demographic changes in the profession, the evolution of law firms, bar associations, and law schools from the early twentieth century to the present; the development of corporate law, personal injury, mass torts, prosecutorial and criminal defense practices, and the "public-interest" bar; the dominant professional ethic of adversary-advocacy, and its critics; the regulation of lawyers; the economics of the market for legal services; the organization and culture of law firm practice; the role of the role of the lawyer as counselor; and the export of American lawyering models abroad. 8-hour self-scheduled take-home examination, with option of writing a research paper. Special Instructions: Students have the option to write a long research paper in lieu of the final exam with consent of instructor. 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: Class participation, attendance, final paper or final exam.

This course uses a study of plaintiffs' lawyers as a vehicle to explore many of the most controversial and important issues at the intersection of tort law, civil procedure, and legal ethics. Specifically, in this course, we will study who personal injury lawyers are, how they find clients, how they fund litigation, and how they usher complex cases to conclusion. In so doing, we will address: the role and regulation of lawyers; the use and abuse of the contingency fee; the legality and normative consequences of solicitation and attorney advertising; the propriety of secret settlements, NDAs, and expansive protective orders; the rise and impact of "alternative litigation finance"; and the vexing issues posed by class actions, aggregate actions, consolidated actions, and multidistrict litigations (MDLs). The final segment of the course will involve a series of case studies, where students will test their knowledge of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and have the opportunity to see the course's themes echoed and expressed in recent real-world controversies. Importantly, though the course is nominally focused on "the plaintiffs' lawyer," it does not just equip students to practice on one side of the "v." Rather, through our grounded and contextualized study of legal ethics, advanced civil procedure, the legal profession, and contemporary legal practice, students will acquire tools to litigate cases of all stripes and for both sides. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, and reflection papers.

Ever since the global financial crisis, legal media have focused on the contraction of the corporate legal services sector. But today, partners at the top tier of big corporate law firms -- "big law" -- are earning huge profits and job prospects for graduates of top law schools interested in the corporate sector are bright. Although some commentators continue to predict that demand for corporate legal services will contract in the mid- to long-term, it seems more likely that demand for high-end legal analysis will persist if not increase in the foreseeable future. The question is who (or what) is going to perform that work, in what organizational setting, with what technological assistance, and in what part of the world. This seminar will address the key dimensions of change in the "big law" market and how changes in the delivery of corporate legal services may affect legal careers, gender equality, diversity, and work-life balance. Topics include the increased power of Fortune 100 General Counsel, new organizational models for delivering corporate legal services, the response of large law firms to new market factors, the expanding role of information technology in the delivery of corporate legal services, third-party litigation financing, changing legal markets outside the US, the evolution of global law firms, the effects of changes in law firm organization on women and lawyers of color, and the effects of changes in the legal market on legal careers. Course materials will include books and journal articles, media reports, blog posts and guest lectures. Special Instructions: You may write a series of short reaction papers on 4 of the topics we will cover at the seminar sessions. Students electing this option will be graded on a Mandatory Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis and receive 2 units of credit. Alternatively, you may write a single research paper on a topic of your choice related to the evolution and future of Big Law. This will satisfy the Law School's Research requirement. These papers will be graded on an Honors/Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis. Students taking the seminar for R credit can take the seminar for either 2 or 3 units of credit (section 02), depending on the project. After the term begins, students registered 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: Attendance, Class Participation, Four commentaries or one research paper.

Administrative agencies interpret statutes, promulgate regulations, and adjudicate disputes, thereby affecting vast areas of life -- from employment to food and drug safety, from the environment to energy markets, and from telecommunications to immigration. This course surveys the law of the administrative state, considering rationales for delegation to administrative agencies, procedural and substantive constraints on agency decision-making, and the judicial review of agency actions. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, assignments, final exam. Attendance is required to retain a seat in class. 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.

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 the size of holes in Swiss cheese, 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 over 200 years ago, and changed almost 50 years ago from a cabinet-level department to a government corporation. On the newer side, there is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was established in 2011 to protect consumers in the financial arena and faces considerable scrutiny on constitutional and other grounds. 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) 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 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. This course will be capped at 65 students, randomly selected.

This course examines various aspects of the Fourteenth Amendment, with special attention paid to equal protection and substantive due process. We will examine many contested constitutional questions, including, for example: How did gay and lesbian relationships go so quickly from being subject to criminal prohibition to being eligible for marriage? What justifies the Supreme Court's striking down a law mandating segregated schools, when it had upheld an analogous law half a century earlier? Must the law treat all individuals identically, or may and should it grant special protections to members of historically disadvantaged groups? To what sources might (and should) a judge look to give content to vague constitutional terms like "equal protection" and "due process"? How can we distinguish "law" from "politics" in this area? Readings will include judicial opinions and some scholarly commentary. Class discussion will be supplemented with group exercises of various sorts. Elements used in grading: Class participation and exam.

This course examines various aspects of the Fourteenth Amendment, with special attention paid to equal protection and substantive due process. We will examine many contested constitutional questions, including, for example: How did gay and lesbian relationships go so quickly from being subject to criminal prohibition to being eligible for marriage? What justifies the Supreme Court's striking down a law mandating segregated schools, when it had upheld an analogous law half a century earlier? Must the law treat all individuals identically, or may and should it grant special protections to members of historically disadvantaged groups? To what sources might (and should) a judge look to give content to vague constitutional terms like "equal protection" and "due process"? How can we distinguish "law" from "politics" in this area? Readings will include judicial opinions and some scholarly commentary. Class discussion will be supplemented with group exercises of various sorts. Elements used in grading: Class participation and exam.

Topics in this course will include equal protection standards, employment, family, reproductive rights, sexual harassment, rape, domestic violence, pornography, sexual orientation, diversity in the profession, and intersections with race, ethnicity, class, and sexual orientation. Special attention will be given to reproductive justice issues, and students (with the exception of 1Ls) who wish to give special attention to this topic may seek an extra unit of credit for directed research (see Directed Research Petition on the SLS Registrar's Office website). Materials will include cases, commentary, problems, and media portrayals. Special Instructions: Course requirements will include class participation and either (1) a long paper, which will satisfy the research requirement or (2) short weekly reflection papers on the assigned readings, and a short final research paper. Students writing reflection papers will form teams and each member will be responsible for writing comments on one classmate's paper each week. There will be no final examination. A maximum of 10 students will be permitted to write the long paper for R credit. All students interested in R credit should pre-register by lottery for Law 307-0-02. Students who do not receive a spot in section 02 may enroll in section 01. Open to students from other schools with the consent of the instructor. To apply for this course, non-Law students must complete a Non-Law Student Course Add Request Form available on the SLS Registrar's Office website. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, reflection papers, and final paper.

The guiding question of this course will be how we should think about the role of the U.S. Constitution in American law and American life. In considering this issue, we will address debates about constitutional interpretation (including both originalism and living constitutionalism), the nature and features of constitutional change within the American context, the role of federalism and the separation of powers in the constitutional scheme, and the nature of American constitutionalism as opposed to English and continental European models. We will tackle these debates in the context of some specific contemporary controversies about the Constitution, including: How do the civil rights movement and other social movements impact our understanding of the Constitution?; Does the Constitution reject a European-style inquisitorial process in favor of an Anglo-American vision of due process?; How important is consensus within the Supreme Court to establishing the legitimacy of constitutional meanings?; Why do we have nine Supreme Court justices, and; What is the Constitution, and how much does it include outside of the written document? Throughout we will be contemplating the extent to which our interpretation of the constitution depends on our vision of American democracy and the good society. Requirements for the course include regular class participation and either four response papers or a substantial research paper; students who take the research paper option will receive two or three units and '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. Special Instructions: This class is limited to 16 students by lottery. If applicable, openings will be filled from the waitlist in waitlist order. Four additional spots may be reserved for 2Ls at the discretion of the instructor. If determined by the instructor, four 2Ls will be admitted from the waitlist in waitlist order. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation; Response Papers or Final Paper. Cross-listed with English (ENGLISH 350D).

This course will consider one of the newest intellectual currents within American Legal Theory -- Critical Race Theory. Emerging during the 1980s, critical race scholars made many controversial claims about law and legal education -- among them that race and racial inequality suffused American law and society, that structural racial subordination remained endemic, and that both liberal and critical legal theories marginalized the voices of racial minorities. Course readings will be taken from both classic works of Critical Race Theory and newer interventions in the field, as well as scholarship criticizing or otherwise engaging with Critical Race Theory from outside or at the margins of the field. Meeting dates: The class will meet 7:15PM to 9:15PM on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (January 7, 8, and 9), and the following Monday and Tuesday (January 13 and 14). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.

The course begins with readings setting forth the intellectual and experiential background of the framing, including common law and natural rights theory, republicanism, economic & political scientific ideas, and colonial and post-Independence experience. We then study large parts of the debates at the Constitutional Convention, primarily using Madison's Notes. Major topics are the principle of representation, the extent and enumeration of national powers, the construction of the executive and judicial branches, and slavery. Next come the ratification debates, including readings from antifederalist writers, The Federalist, and speeches in ratification conventions. We conclude with the addition of the Bill of Rights. Classes consist of a combination of lecture and extensive participation by students. Elements used in grading: Class participation, In-class exam, supplemented by short take-home essay. Cross-listed with History (HISTORY 153).

This is a survey course of disability rights law, with an emphasis on federal and state statutes and case law. Areas of concentration include employment, government services, public accommodations, education, housing, mental health treatment and involuntary commitment, and personal autonomy. We will review such statutes as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Rehabilitation Act (Sec. 504), Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the Fair Housing Act Amendments. The course examines disability from a civil and human rights perspective. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on class participation (50%), and either TBA (50%) - Section 01 or a long independent research paper (50%) - Section 02. The student must consult with the instructor on the paper's topic, scope and format. 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. Automatic grading penalty waived for submission of research paper. Non-law students may enroll with instructor consent.

The objective of this course is to explore the increasing ethical challenges in a world in which technology, global risks, and societal developments are accelerating faster than our understanding and the law can keep pace. We will unravel the factors contributing to the seemingly pervasive failure of ethics today among organizations and leaders across all sectors: business, government, non-profit, and academia. A framework for ethical decision-making underpins the course. There is significant space for personal reflection and forming your own views on a wide range of issues. Prominent guest speakers will attend certain sessions interactively. The relationships among ethics and technology, culture, leadership, law, and global risks (inequality, privacy, financial system meltdown, cyber-terrorism, climate change, etc.) will inform discussion. A broad range of international topics might include: designer genetics; civilian space travel (Elon Musk's Mars plans); social media (e.g. Facebook Cambridge Analytica, on-line sex trafficking, monopolies); new devices (e.g. Amazon Alexa in hotel rooms); free speech on University campuses; opioid addiction; AI (from racism to the work challenge and beyond); corporate and financial sector scandals (Theranos, Wells Fargo fraudulent account creation, Volkswagen emissions testing manipulation); new corporate challenges (e.g. Google selling drones to the military and Facebook's new Libra crypto currency); and non-profit sector ethics challenges (e.g. NGOs engagement with ISIS and sexual misconduct in humanitarian aid (Oxfam case)). Final project in lieu of exam on a topic of student's choice. Attendance required. Class participation important (with multiple opportunities to earn participation credit beyond speaking in class). Strong emphasis on rigorous analysis, critical thinking and testing ideas in real-world contexts. Please note that this course will require one make-up evening session on a Wednesday or Thursday in lieu of the final class session the first week of June, and two one-hour extensions to Monday class sessions as a make-up for May 11, so the course will end before Memorial Day. Students wishing to take the course who are unable to sign up within the enrollment limit should contact Dr. Susan Liautaud at susanl1@stanford.edu. The course offers credit toward Public Policy core requirements (if taken in combination with PUBLPOL 103E or PUBLPOL 103F), and Science, Technology and Society majors and satisfies the undergraduate Ways of Thinking--Ethical Reasoning requirement. The course is open to undergraduate and graduate students. Undergraduates will not be at a disadvantage. Everyone will be challenged. Distinguished Career Institute Fellows are welcome and should contact Dr. Susan Liautaud directly at susanl1@stanford.edu. *Students taking the course for Ways credit and Public Policy majors taking the course to complete the core requirements must obtain a letter grade. Other students may take the course for a letter grade or C/NC. Students seeking credit for other majors should consult their departments. NOTE: This course does NOT meet the SLS Ethics requirement. CONSENT APPLICATION: Interested SLS students may apply to enroll in this class by sending a request to Dr. Susan Liautaud at susanl1@stanford.edu. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, and Final Paper. Cross-listed with Public Policy (PUBLPOL 134, PUBLPOL 234).

Workplace issues have become one of the fastest-growing areas of state and federal law. Employment-related lawsuits filed in federal court have tripled in volume in the past decade, and now account for a tenth of all civil cases. Many state courts have experienced a similar burgeoning of their employment law caseloads. This course examines this diverse, rewarding, and rapidly evolving area of legal practice by considering the diverse array of laws and institutions that regulate the employment relationship. The focus of the course is on laws that affect employees in non-unionized settings, such as protections against dismissal without cause, wage and hour restrictions, workplace privacy, covenants not to compete, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and mandatory arbitration of employment disputes. The course does not cover either Employment Discrimination or Labor Law, both of which are offered as separate courses. Special Instructions: Regular, punctual attendance is required. If you expect (or are unexpectedly forced) to miss more than two classes, please consult with the instructor as soon as possible, as exceptions will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Early Add/Drop Deadline: Add/Drop decisions must be made the first week of class. Exceptions are at the instructor's discretion and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

This survey course provides a foundation in the constitutional principles governing the regulation and rights of noncitizens and the immigration statute that governs the admission and removal of noncitizens. The course also explores contemporary issues related to immigrants' rights and immigration reform, including major Trump administration actions especially in the area of border enforcement and asylum rights. We will analyze other current areas issues such as immigration detention; the intersection of criminal and immigration law; state and local regulation of immigrants; constitutional limits on 'alienage' discrimination; and the right to Article III judicial review of removal orders. The course draws on the instructor's decades of experience litigating constitutional and civil rights issues on behalf of noncitizens while at the ACLU and his more recent service as a senior immigration policy advisor in the Obama administration. Guest speakers may be invited for some topics. No prior course or background in immigration law is expected. Elements used in grading: Class participation and attendance (10%), final exam (90%).

This course will examine the responsibilities and challenges for those who occupy leadership roles, with particular emphasis on those seeking to use law as a vehicle for social and organizational change. Topics will include characteristics and styles of leadership, organizational dynamics, forms of influence, decision making, conflict management, innovation, diversity, ethical responsibilities, scandal, civil and human rights, and public interest law. Materials will include cutting-edge research, case histories, problems, exercises, and media clips. Class sessions will include visitors who have occupied leadership roles. Requirements will include class participation, and either short written weekly reflection papers (2 to 3 pages and a short research paper (about 3-5 pages) or (2) a long paper (approximately 26-30 pages). After the term begins, students can transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Paper.

This course will provide an overview of the field of federal Indian law. It will consider the origins and scope of tribal sovereignty as recognized under federal law, as well as current federal law on tribal criminal and civil jurisdiction. It will also explore the division of authority between tribal, federal, and state governments; federal statutory schemes governing Natives and Native nations; and constitutional issues affecting Natives. Additional current legal issues which may be covered based on class selection include Native land claims, gaming, family law, religious and cultural rights, and natural resources. The course includes an optional supplementary trip to the Yurok Reservation in northern California in early May. Students enrolled in Federal Indian Law who wish to seek an extra unit of credit may concurrently enroll in Federal Indian Law: Historiographical Readings in Federal Law and Policy (1 unit/Mandatory P/R/F) with instructor consent. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Final Exam.

This course explores theoretical, historical, and legal policy questions at the intersection of race, group identity, and national security. Recent political events have thrust the relationship between race, religion, nationality, immigration status, and national security into the limelight, although the questions themselves are not new. How do national security threats affect the formation of racial identity within the United States, and how does race affect our understanding of national security? What is the proper role of courts in addressing challenges to national security policy affecting minority communities? This seminar aspires to understand contemporary policy questions in light of a broader theoretical, historical, and legal context. Class attendance and robust participation in discussion is required. There are two options for assignments in this course. You can either write 4 response papers throughout the course, or a single 18-20 page research paper related broadly to the themes of the course (for R credit). Those who choose the research paper option will be expected to discuss and submit an outline of their research paper while the course is in session and to submit the final paper in accordance with standard law school requirements. 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: Attendance, Class Participation, Response Papers or Research Paper.

This course is intended to give students a basic understanding of the themes in the legal regulation of elections and politics. We will cover all the major Supreme Court cases on topics of voting rights, reapportionment/redistricting, ballot access, regulation of political parties, campaign finance, and the 2000 presidential election controversy. The course pays particular attention to competing political philosophies and empirical assumptions that underlie the Court's reasoning while still focusing on the cases as litigation tools used to serve political ends. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam. Cross-listed with Communication (COMM 361) International Policy (INTLPOL 351), and Political Science (POLISCI 327C).

Statutory law is the dominant source of contemporary law, and it is the form of law that lawyers are likely to confront most often in almost any area of practice. It is also an area of vibrant intellectual debate, as scholars, Supreme Court justices, and others debate the methods and aims of statutory interpretation. This course will stress both the practical and theoretical dimensions of interpretation. Students will learn and apply the methods of statutory interpretation. We will also spend considerable time on contemporary controversies, such as debates about textualist, purposive and dynamic interpretation; about the use of legislative history and canons of construction; about the special interpretive problems that arise in the context of direct democracy; and about the democratic and constitutional foundations of statutory interpretation itself. Readings will draw from political science as well as law. Elements used in grading: Class participation and final exam.

This seminar will focus on how the law regulates sexuality. We will approach the material as an exercise in advanced constitutional law, exploring how courts have used--or might use--federal or state constitutional provisions to address issues regarding a wide array of issues involving sexuality. The core of the class will relate to contemporary controversies concerning sexual orientation and gender identity (including, for example, how sexual orientation and gender identity are defined, regulation of sexual conduct, marriage and parenting rights of same-sex couples, and religious liberty debates, among others). But we will also discuss other issues, including polygamy/polyamory and asexuality. We will maintain an interdisciplinary focus throughout as we consider how social, cultural, and political forces shape, and are shaped by, legal doctrine. All students taking the seminar for 2 units will either write a final research paper of approximately 18 pages (for R credit) or a take a final exam. Students who wish to write a longer R paper (approx. 26 pages) may enroll in the seminar for 3 units. 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 course for R credit can take the course for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the paper length. Elements used in grading: Class participation; and paper or exam.

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.

This course is a survey of the law of labor relations; it is designed to provide the student with an acquaintance with the more important problems of labor law but not with a comprehensive coverage of the entire field. In particular, the course will focus upon the historical development of labor law, problems relating to union organization, recognition, and the duty to bargain collectively. The course will also examine some aspects of arbitration and the law relating to the enforcement of collective bargaining as well as non-union arbitration. The course will include some discussion of the relationship between law and politics in administrative agencies. Elements used in grading: Final Exam.

This two-credit seminar will explore the theory and practice of "originalism" -- the idea that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of the meaning of its text to those who had authority to enact it. This is a controversial approach (as are the others) and we will read and consider critics as well as proponents, so that students can make up their own minds. The first part of the seminar will be devoted to the theory: how it works, what are its justifications, what are its flaws, the various versions. The remainder will be devoted to specific applications. Because there are far more topics than we have time to cover, students will vote on the first day for which topics we will take up. Among the choices are: executive power, speech and press, liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment, equality under the Fourteenth Amendment, gun rights, searches and seizures, and freedom of religion. Two students will assist in leading class discussions. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based 20% on participation and 80% on papers. Students will have the choice of one longer research paper or three shorter reflection papers. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer from Section 01 into Section 02 (long research paper), which meets the R requirement, with consent of 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.

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.

TRIGGER WARNING: Over the past several years the issue of campus sexual assault and harassment has exploded into the public discourse. Multiple studies have reinforced the finding that between 20-25% of college women (and a similar proportion of students identifying as transgender and gender-nonconforming, as well as approximately 10% of male students) experience sexual assault carried out through force or while the victim was incapacitated during their time in college. Fraternities have been found to be associated with an increased risk of female sexual assault on campus. Vulnerable students and those from marginalized groups are often found to be at increased risk. This is also a significant problem in k12 education. Sexual harassment rates are even higher. Survivors have come forward across the country with harrowing stories of assault followed by what they describe as an insensitive or indifferent response from college administrators. These survivors have launched one of the most successful, and surprising, social movements in recent memory. As a result, the federal government under President Obama stepped up its civil rights enforcement in this area, with over 300 colleges and universities under investigation for allegedly mishandling student sexual assault complaints as of the end of that administration. At the same time, the Obama administration's heightened response led to a series of high-profile lawsuits by accused students who assert that they were falsely accused or subjected to mishandled investigations that lacked sufficient due process protections. The one thing that survivors and accused students appear to agree on is that colleges are not handling these matters appropriately and appeared to be more concerned with protection the institutional brand than with stopping rape or protecting student rights. Colleges have meanwhile complained of being whipsawed between survivors, accused students, interest groups, and enforcement authorities. In an about-face that many found shocking, the Trump Administration rescinded all of the Obama-era guidance on the subject of sexual harassment and has promulgated new proposed regulations that would offer significantly greater protection to accused students and to institutions and commensurately less protection to survivors. An increasingly partisan Congress has been unable to pass legislation addressing the issue.This course focuses on the legal, policy, and political issues surrounding sexual assault and harassment on college campuses. Each week we will read, dissect, compare and critique a set of readings that include social science, history, literature, legal, policy, journalism, and narrative explorations of the topic of campus sexual assault. We will explore the history of gender-based violence and the efforts to implement legal protections for survivors in the educational context. We will also study the basic legal frameworks governing campus assault, focusing on the relevant federal laws such as Title IX and the Clery Act. We will critically explore the ways that responses to this violence have varied by the race, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, and other characteristics of parties and institutions. We will hear from guest speakers who are actively involved in shaping policy and advocating in this area, including lawyers, activists, journalists, and policymakers. This year we will also host special guest speaker Chanel Miller, author of the bestselling memoir Know My Name. The subject matter of this course is sensitive, and students are expected to treat the material with maturity. Much of the reading and subject matter may be upsetting and/or triggering for students who identify as survivors. There is no therapeutic component for this course, although supportive campus resources and Title IX staff are available for those who need them. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on class attendance, class participation, and either several short reflection papers and a class presentation (section 01) or an independent research paper or project and class presentation (section 02). 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. Enrollment is by INSTRUCTOR PERMISSION. Access the consent form here feminist.stanford.edu/academics/undergraduate-program/forms or email etsurkov@stanford.edu to request a form via email. Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis until the class is full. Demand for the class is high and participation is capped at 18. The class usually fills quickly, so make sure to apply early. Cross-listed with Feminist, Gender and Sexuality Studies ( FEMGEN 143) and Sociology ( SOC 188).

Associated with the Center for Philanthropy and Civil Society (PACS). Year-long workshop for doctoral students and advanced undergraduates writing senior theses on the nature of civil society or philanthropy. Focus is on pursuit of progressive research and writing contributing to the current scholarly knowledge of the nonprofit sector and philanthropy. Accomplished in a large part through peer review. Readings include recent scholarship in aforementioned fields. May be repeated for credit for a maximum of 3 units. Cross-listed with Education (EDUC 374), Political Science (POLISCI 334) and Sociology (SOC 374).

This course will familiarize students with major, and/or emerging legal and constitutional issues concerning the U.S. Senate. In so doing, it will examine: 1) the Senate's nature as a complex legal institution, and 2) the issue of the Senate's legitimacy in the context of the current and largely unprecedented criticism of the Senate from all parts of the political spectrum. This first portion of the course will consider institutional-legitimacy issues facing the Senate, including the appointment of senators to fill vacancies as well as disputes concerning Senate rules and procedures such as the filibuster and holds. The second part of the course will explore how the Senate interfaces with the Constitution and the Supreme Court. It will examine how senators should regard the issue of constitutionality in voting on legislation, be it campaign-finance reform, internet decency, or health care. This part of the course will also consider how senators should approach proposed constitutional amendments. The final portion of the course will review the wide range of issues that have emerged in recent years regarding the constitutional relationship between the Senate and the Executive Branch, including the increasingly acrimonious issue of the standard to apply to executive appointments under the advice and consent power. Particular emphasis on this part of the course will be given to issues that have gained greater prominence since 9/11, including the relationship between enacted, constitutional legislation and the presidential assertion of Article II powers, as well as the Senate's abdication of its Article I war-declaration power. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance; and final exam or final research paper.

This is a seminar for students with some background and interest in immigration and administrative law based on prior coursework, clinic enrollment, academic study, or other experience who want to engage in an examination of the administrative process for pursuing reform. The course will examine some of the current contested immigration policy changes and consider the mechanisms for achieving positive reform in light of administrative law and practice. The goal is to identify strategies and mechanisms for future reform that would further the protections of non-citizens during a period of global hostility to migrants. One significant part of the course will be contributing to a project that tracks and catalogues all the immigration policy changes of the Trump administration. Students will also develop proposals for future non-legislative reform through administrative action. The seminar will examine the federal administrative process from a theoretical, doctrinal, and practical perspective based on selected readings, guest speakers, and the instructor's experience as senior immigration policy advisor in the Obama administration at the Department of Homeland Security and as founder and former director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project. Requirements: Some prior exposure to immigration law or practice in a work, clinical, professional, academic, or other setting. Elements used in grading: Grades will be based on class attendance, class participation, and either writing assignments (Section 01) or, with the instructor's permission, an independent research paper (Section 02). A very limited number of students may be permitted to write the long research paper for R credit but only with the prior specific approval of the instructor. Students accepted into the course may be eligible to transfer from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement, with consent of 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.

This seminar explores the legal and historical dimensions of the American constitutional amendment process as well as its current and potential role in our political system and public debate. The principal focus will be on Article V of the Constiution but we will also briefly examine the way in which the Constitution is said by some to be "amendable" (and to have already been "amended") through alternate means apart from Article V. The seminar will enable students both critically to evaluate the myriad aspects of constitutional amendments and conventions using proper source material and to develop their own proposals for potential amendments. The first part of the course will first explore the origins of Article V, including background on the comparative amendability of other written constitutions, the adoption of the Bill of Rights, and the apparent unamendability of the provision in Article V requiring equal representation of the states in the Senate. We will then review the history of efforts--both successful and unsuccessful--to amend the Constitution, such as the early corrective amendments to the post-Civil War Reconstruction amendments, the Progressive Era amendments (e.g., the switch to the direct election of Senators), and the modern voting-related amendments. This section will also consider views about when and how it is proper or "appropriate" to amend the Constitution, the standard that members of Congress should employ in voting on proposed amendments, and the history of calls for constitutional conventions to amend the Constitution. The second part of the course will explore the current possibility of a constitutional convention or conventions being called independently of Congressional initiative including the question of whether the scope of such a convention could be limited. We will then examine the relatively recent and current proposals and advocacy for and against constitutional amendments across the political spectrum. For this portion of the course, we will particularly consider the balanced budget amendment, the state veto amendment, the victims' rights amendment, and the elimination of the direct election of Senators, from the conservative side of that spectrum. We will then particularly highlight the movement to overturn Citizens United by amendment, the elimination of the electoral college amendment, the proposal to overturn Heller (right to bear arms) by amendment, and the current effort to revive and ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, all mostly associated with the progressive or liberal side of the spectrum. For the final seminar, students will be asked to give in class their opinion of Article V and whether it is too easy or difficult (or just right) in terms of allowing amendments. Each student will also be asked briefly to propose and defend an amendment that that student believes should be added to the Constitution. After the term begins, students accepted into the course can transfer, with consent of the instructor, from section (01) into section (02), which meets the R requirement. Elements used in grading: class attendance, participation, class presentations, and final paper.

This course, which will be cotaught by Monika Bickert from Facebook, will cover contemporary challenges to democracy presented by the Internet. Topics will include disinformation, polarization, hate speech, media transformation, election integrity, and legal regulation of internet platforms in the U.S. and abroad. Guest speakers from academia and industry will present on these topics in each class session, followed by a discussion. Students will be responsible for one-page papers each week on the readings and a research paper to be turned in at the fall paper deadline. Students can take the class for either 2 or 3 units, depending on the research paper length. This class is crosslisted in the university and undergraduates are eligible to take it. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Cross-listed with Communication (COMM 153B/253B) and International Policy (INTLPOL 323).

Introduction to the constitutional protections for freedom of speech, press, and expressive association. All the major Supreme Court cases dealing with issues such as incitement, libel, hate speech, obscenity, commercial speech, and campaign finance. There are no prerequisites, but a basic understanding of American government would be useful. This course is crosslisted in the university and undergraduates are eligible to take it. Elements used in grading: Law students will be evaluated based on class participation and a final exam. Non-law students will be evaluated on class participation, a midterm and final exam, and nonlaw students will participate in a moot court on a hypothetical case. Non-law students will also have an additional one hour discussion section each week led by a teaching assistant. Cross-listed with Communication (COMM 151, COMM 251) and Political Science (POLISCI 125P).

This mini-course revisits the core elements that have traditionally defined family law: gender, sexuality and reproduction. Historically, family law had two main functions. It created a framework for bearing and raising children, and organized the children's parents' coupledom. Gender, sexuality and reproduction were closely interwoven and subject to certain expectations. Sex was only allowed in the context of marriage, which formed the gateway to reproduction. Children born outside of wedlock had inferior rights. Women were placed under their husband's control to ensure their sexual fidelity. From the 1960's on, societal changes shook the traditional conception of the family to its foundations. Women gained economic independence and started challenging their traditional role in the family. Birth control cut the ties between sexuality and reproduction. The position of marriage as the sole seat of both coupledom and childbearing started to erode. The disconnection of gender, sexuality and reproduction opened family law up to new questions. Why should marriage only be possible between a man and a woman? Can children have more than two legal parents? What is the extent of the reproductive rights of women and men? Is marriage still a relevant legal concept? These and other questions are tackled from a comparative law angle, comparing the approach in the United States and other Western jurisdictions. Students are asked to reflect on the various responses to contemporary family law issues across the Western world. The focus is on general tendencies, not on technicalities. Grades will be based on regular attendance, active class participation and one short response paper. This class will meet the first three weeks of the quarter on Thursday, January 9, 16, and 23.

This advanced course will combine theory and practice, drawing from new academic research as well as recent litigation and events. It will explore a series of subjects, including the following: agency design and staffing; the White House's role in agency action; current agency rulemaking and adjudicatory practices; latest issues in the reviewability of agency action and inaction; modern applications of Vermont Yankee, Chevron, and State Farm; state administrative law; and preemption. Requirements will include multiple writing assignments (including very short reading reflections, a draft comment and reflection on an open regulatory proceeding or attendance at and reflection on an agency adjudication, and a 10-15 page paper on a relevant topic). Students must have taken Administrative Law or receive permission of the instructor. 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 (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.

Modern government is bureaucratic government. In the words of Justice Jackson, the rise of the administrative state is likely "the most significant legal trend of the last century and perhaps more values today are affected by [agency] decisions than by those of all the courts." This seminar will survey the major ways in which law and political science have grappled with bureaucratic governance. How do we understand the rise of the administrative state? Why are bureaucracies designed the way they are? How do bureaucracies work in the face of legal and political constraints? And what avenues are there for meaningful regulatory reform? The class is cross-listed in political science and the law school and course enrollment will be by consent of instructor. Students will be responsible for writing short reflection papers and a research paper. Students may take the course for either 3, 4, or 5 units, depending on the paper length. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. Admission based on application. Instructor consent required. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply, please complete the following webform by February 28, 2020: https://forms.gle/ZBtFE5Xdh2UwBEHb8. Cross-listed with Political Science (POLISCI 228C/428C).

This workshop will be offered to students who were enrolled in the Spring 2020 Education Advocacy Clinic (which was cancelled). The workshop will consider historical legal and policy efforts to ensure that all children have a right to equal educational opportunity and it will look to the future of educational rights advocacy. This workshop will draw from past civil rights work, the experience of the Youth & Education Law Project, and the best thinking on how to move forward. Specific topics may include racial equality in schools, educational resource equity, equal opportunity for students with disabilities, Native American students, and other historically disadvantaged populations, and standards-based reform and expanded school choice as approaches to educational equity. There will be a weekly 2-hour, on-line seminar and discussion. All students will be required to write weekly reflection papers. Students may opt to write a 10-page final paper for an additional unit (3 units - section 02) or an extended 25-page research paper for an additional two units (4 units - section 02). After the term begins, students enrolled in the course can transfer from section 01 (2 units) into section 02 (3 or 4 units) with consent of the instructor. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments, Final Paper. This class will meet once a week for two hours. Day and time TBD by instructors.

This class will be a hybrid between a group seminar and independent research projects. The seminar will meet over Zoom every other week to cover basic topics in constitutional law, potentially including interpretive methods, federalism and the separation of powers, emergency constitutionalism, and comparative constitutional law. During the alternating weeks, students will meet individually with the instructor over Zoom to discuss readings they are doing independently, either with the aim of working toward a research project or with the goal of exploring different areas of Constitutional Law. Students may opt either to write five shorter responses papers on readings they complete during the quarter or a final research paper (which will count for 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. No automatic grading penalty for late papers. Elements used in grading: 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.

This course will provide a broad overview of the scholarly field known as "law and economics." The focus will be on how legal rules and institutions can correct market failures. We will discuss the economic function of contracts and, when contracts fail or are not feasible, the role of legal remedies to resolve disputes. We will also discuss at some length the choice between encouraging private parties to initiate legal actions to correct externalities and governmental actors, such as regulatory authorities. Extensive attention will be given to the economics of litigation, and to how private incentives to bring lawsuits differ from the social value of litigation. The economic motive to commit crimes, and the optimal governmental response to crime, will be studied in depth. Specific topics within the preceding broad themes include: the Coase Theorem; the tradeoff between the certainty and severity of punishment; the choice between ex ante and ex post sanctions; negligence versus strict liability; property rules; remedies for breach of contract; and the American rule versus the English rule for allocating litigation costs. There is no formal economics prerequisite to take this course, though some prior training in economics will be helpful. Elements used in grading: Final exam (open-book) plus three short take-home problems during the quarter. Cross-listed with Public Policy (PUBLPOL 302B). (For students interested in a shorter introduction to economic analysis of law, see Law 7503, "Introduction to Law and Economics," which is a one-unit course also offered during the winter quarter that is graded on a mandatory pass-fail basis.)

This course will introduce students to the "law and economics" way of thinking about the legal system. It is designed primarily for students who have little or no prior training in economics and who are unlikely to take more advanced courses in the field (such as the 3 unit Law 7502, "Economic Analysis of Law"). This class will meet for six 1.5 hour sessions during the first part of the quarter. We will focus on the core bodies of law taught to first-year law students: tort law, contract law, property law, criminal law, and civil procedure. For each of these bodies of law, the economic approach will be described in non-technical terms and then this approach will be used to examine a key case or key issue within that body of law. First-year law students are especially welcome in this course. There are no prerequisites to take this course. Elements used in grading: Two short take-home exercises (graded on a mandatory pass-fail basis).

This seminar will examine current research by lawyers and economists on a variety of topics in law and economics. Several sessions of the seminar will consist of an invited speaker, usually from another university, who will discuss his or her current research. Representative of these sessions have been discussions of compensation for government regulations and takings, liability rules for controlling accidents, the definition of markets in antitrust analysis, the role of the government as a controlling shareholder, and optimal drug patent length. Special Instructions: You may write a series of short commentaries on the guest speakers' papers, of which there will be four. Students electing this option will be graded on a Mandatory Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis and receive 2 units of credit. Alternatively, you may write a single research paper on a law and economics topic of your choice. This will satisfy the Law School's Research requirement. These papers will be graded on an Honors/Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis. (You may write a single longer paper for two quarters if you enroll in the Seminar in the Autumn as well.) Students taking the seminar for R credit can take the seminar for either 2 or 3 units of credit, depending on the paper length. 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. There is no formal economics prerequisite to take this seminar, though students doing the longer research papers typically have some prior training in economics. Students may take both Law and Economics Seminar I and Law and Economics Seminar II in either order (neither is a prerequisite for the other). Elements used in grading: Four commentaries or one research paper. Cross-listed with Economics (ECON 354). 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.

Stanford graduates will play important roles in solving many of today's and tomorrow's major societal problems--in areas such as education, health, energy, and domestic and global poverty--that call for actions by nonprofit, business, and hybrid organizations as well as governments. This course teaches skills and bodies of knowledge relevant to these roles, covering topics such as designing, implementing, scaling, and evaluating social strategies; systems thinking; decision making under risk; psychological biases that adversely affect people's decisions; and methods for influencing behavior. You will work in teams to apply these concepts and tools to actual problems, with teams choosing whatever problem interests them. To address the problems, you will do a mixture of online research and ethnographic field work. To facilitate the ethnography, it is preferable to choose a problem that occurs on campus or nearby, such as bike safety; electric scooter safety; food waste; free speech and protection from harmful speech; other issues of diversity and inclusion; problems faced by first generation students, disabled students, or other groups of students; stress; alcohol and cannabis use; smoking and vaping. The course may be of interest to students in Law and Policy Lab practicums who wish to broaden their policy analysis skills. The class is limited to 32 students, with priority given to students who register on or before the last day of the autumn quarter in the following order: Law School, MPP program, Sustainability Science and Practice Program, IPS program. After that date, any remaining places will be filled on a first-come, first-served basis. Students other than law students must seek the consent of the instructor.

Empirical legal studies have become popular in the U.S. and are now spreading to non-U.S. law faculties as well. Usually the term applies to analyses of quantitative data and the researcher relies on data collected by others. But the term "empirical" properly encompasses both qualitative and quantitative data, including interviews, legal documents, survey research and experimental results. Analysts interested in using such data need to understand how they were collected, in order to decide what data can appropriately be used to answer different kinds of questions. Often to answer the questions of interest, a researcher needs to collect new data, which poses challenging questions about how to design an empirical research study. Answering these questions appropriately is important to ensure publication in a peer-reviewed journal, which is becoming increasingly important to legal academia. This seminar will introduce students to the wide range of research methods that can be used to answer empirical questions, provide a framework for choosing among methods, and explain how to use the methods. The project for the quarter is to design an empirical research study on a topic of your choice. Special Instructions: JD students can take the class for 3-4 units. SPILS students must take this class for 4 units. Students taking the course for 4 units must attend the additional session on Thursday, which is optional for others. 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. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, class presentation, written assignments and final paper.

Drawing inferences from quantitative data lies at the heart of many legal and policy decisions. This course provides the tools, concepts, and framework for lawyers to become sophisticated consumers of quantitative evidence and social science. The course will begin with an overview of basic statistical concepts that will bring everyone to the point where they can read and evaluate empirical studies. We will then focus on a number of empirical debates -- for example, does the death penalty deter murder, do concealed handgun laws influence crime -- as a springboard to teach the logic and terminology of statistical/econometric evaluation of law and policy (regression, statistical significance, identification). No background, beyond high school algebra, is assumed. Anyone who 1) will work in litigation (whether corporate, securities, antitrust, employment discrimination, environmental law) or in public policy, 2) wants to be a better citizen or 3) wants to understand the challenges of establishing causal relationships, and who doesn't already have a strong understanding of statistics will find this course useful. Elements Used in Grading: Attendance, written assignments, response papers, and a final project. To avoid math phobias and fears about ringers from the econ or stats departments, the course is graded as a mandatory pass-fail course.

Empirical Legal Studies uses data to inform legal and policy debates. Traditional empirical legal scholarship uses methods such as observational studies and experiments to examine the effects of various policies or legal decisions. More recently, advancements in technology have given rise to a new strand of research that uses tools such as machine learning and natural language processing to study legally relevant datasets at a large scale ("Big Data"). This seminar will present a range of topics that highlight current empirical legal scholarship in these areas. A theme of the course will be comparing and contrasting traditional empirical approaches with the techniques emerging from machine learning and big data. During roughly half of the sessions, we will host a guest speaker who will present an ongoing empirical research project. Familiarity with data science or statistics is not required. Special Instructions: You may write a series of short commentaries on the guest speakers' papers, of which there will be four. Students electing this option will be graded on a Mandatory Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis and receive 2 units of credit. Alternatively, you may write a single empirical research paper on a legal topic of your choice. This will satisfy the Law School's Research requirement. These papers will be graded on an Honors/Pass/Restricted Credit/Fail basis. Students taking the seminar for R credit can take the seminar for either 2 or 3 units of credit (section 02), depending on the project. 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. There is no formal prerequisite to take this seminar, though students doing the longer research papers typically have some prior training in statistics. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Four commentaries or one research paper.

This course will help students to develop the professional management skills that are essential for a successful legal career. The course will focus on team dynamics and leadership; influence and managing up; effectively communicating with clients, colleagues, other parties and tribunals; and managing expectations and unexpected adversity. For the final paper, students will have the option to write a reflection paper on one of the topics covered in class or create a professional development plan outlining the substantive knowledge, professional skills, and business focus the student intends to develop in order to build a fulfilling law practice. Assignments and simulations will demonstrate and model various skills, and instructors will provide real-time feedback to students on class exercises. The course does not focus on any particular type of practice (private sector, public interest, etc.), or substantive legal area. Elements used in grading: Class participation and attendance, course exercises and 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.

Accounting is the language of business. In this course, we will learn basic accounting principles. We will focus on recent changes in accounting standards, such as changes to revenue recognition principles, that are likely to create difficulties for companies in the coming years. For example, we will consider how these changes affect contractual language and financial covenants. In this regard, this class differs significantly from a typical introductory accounting class and is more transactional-focused. 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. Please note that we focus on financial accounting principles--we will not cover tax law. Elements used in grading: Written Assignments. This class runs from January 27th through February 24th and will only meet on two Fridays (2/7 and 2/14). This class is open to ALL students, and is not limited to students enrolled in the Global Quarter. This class does not overlap with Global Capital Markets (students can take both).

Effective client representation increasingly calls for lawyers with skill within a broad range of alternative dispute resolution processes. In this course, you will have the opportunity to observe two day-long ADR processes being handled by Bay Area third-party neutral practitioners at the U.S.D.C. for Northern California and JAMS. Students in the class will meet three times to review relevant law and policy, and to discuss observed cases, including a factual and legal analysis of the observed cases, the practice skills of the respective counsel and mediators, and any ethical issues noted. Grades will be based on seminar participation and two short papers. Co- or Prerequisites: Mediation or ADR. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance and 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.

Career development is embedded in life development. This course offers a space and time for each student to consider both through course materials, class interactions, and a series of reflection papers. The course includes one class facilitated in collaboration with the Office of Career Services focusing on a formal assessment via one or more psychological tests offered to each student. The materials for other class meetings are thought provoking works that have proven to be salient for considering career and life direction. Images and material from alchemy that embody what many consider to be a primary set of symbols for personal transformation provide a backdrop for the course. The course benefits from the collaboration of Michael Guasperini, a mythologist and lawyer whose primary vocation is working intimately with lawyers and firms during periods of personal and institutional transition. Mr. Guasperini has deep experience with the personal lives of hundreds of lawyers at various ages and levels of professional development, providing a valuable and practical perspective for self-reflection. Elements used in grading: Written Assignments (reflection papers).

Lawyers are often called upon to help design systems for preventing, managing, and resolving conflicts that support or supplant existing legal structures. The crisis of September 11 led Congress to pass a law creating the September 11 Fund; a California Supreme Court challenge to its method of resolving health care disputes led Kaiser Permanente to reform its arbitration system; years of atrocities committed against the people of South Africa, Chile, and many other countries led to the formation of truth commissions. Lawyers often lead the design 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. The class will meet on one Saturday. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments, and final paper. Attendance at the first class is mandatory.

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: Oct. 18th. (4:00 -- 9p.m.), Oct 19th. (9 -- 5:00) and Oct. 27th. (9 -- 5:00). Elements used in grading: Class attendance, participation and final paper.

This course is designed to prepare law students for research in practice and clerkships. The course will review sources of legal authority and how this material is used, organized, published, indexed, and kept current. Students will accomplish the following learning objectives: 1) find and evaluate legal research sources and use them effectively, with particular emphasis on cost-effective research; 2) build research skills in primary and secondary U.S. legal sources; and 3) learn strategies and methods to approach and effectively use both familiar and unfamiliar legal research databases and tools. Learning legal research requires a hands-on approach, so students will complete in-class exercises, homework assignments, and a final project, 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 instructors.

This course offers comprehensive preparation for practice of the transactional lawyer. Students will learn the foundational tools necessary to write clear, effective, plain language business contracts and analyze other transactional writings used to manage and document complex business transactions. The course provides interactive lectures and a wide range of realistic drafting and research exercises, completed both inside and outside of class, both individually and collaboratively. These exercises help students improve their research, analysis, drafting, and editing skills and develop sensitivity to the expectations of attorneys and clients with whom they will be working. Students will learn the research and analytical tools necessary 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 first week of class. Corporations (Law 1013) is a prerequisite for all but LLM (CGP) students. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments, and final paper. Please consult the syllabus for paper and assignment deadlines.

Building on the skills developed in Federal Litigation, this course will give students additional practice with legal analysis, argument structure, and writing in the pre-trial context. Students will draft a predictive office memo, an e-mail memo, and memorandum in support of a motion for summary judgment. Students also will complete short writing exercises in class to practice skills such as omitting surplus words, preferring active voice, using concrete words, punctuating carefully, etc. The goals of this class are to help students organize facts and legal rules and analysis in a succinct and logical way, to deepen their understanding of legal reasoning and writing, and to hone their advocacy skills. The course should appeal to students interested in litigation practice and those wishing to strengthen their writing. 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. Elements used in grading: Written work, class participation, and attendance

This course covers the foundations of drafting contracts in a modern commercial setting, primarily through weekly hands-on writing exercises that illustrate business problems commonly found in today's technology transactions law practice. Topics to be addressed will include basic contract anatomy, common clause ambiguities, structuring for readable "flow", and drafting-for-negotiation techniques. Final examination will involve crafting a full-length technology license agreement from a rough term sheet that appears to have been pecked out on some sort of mobile device. No prior business law coursework, intellectual property background, or martial arts proficiency required. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments, Final Exam.

As law is practiced today, attorneys are far more likely to participate in multiple mediations than trial. Mediation has become the preferred approach to conflict resolution in most states and many parts of the world. With the assistance of a mediator, parties can reach agreements at any stage in a dispute, in some cases avoiding litigation altogether, in other cases agreeing just before trial or when the case is on appeal. The course goals are to understand the nature of conflict and principles of conflict management, to develop the oral and written communication skills essential to effective mediation, to evaluate various mediation models and mediator styles, to practice all of the phases of a mediation and appropriate use of caucus, to consider the policy and ethical implications of the expanding use of mediation, and to develop the skills necessary to represent clients in mediation. The class methodology is highly experiential, with more than half of the class consisting of practice from the perspective of client, advocate and mediator. The course also includes readings and discussions, brief interactive lectures, demonstrations and videotaped sessions. Each student receives individual feedback from an experienced Bay Area mediator and develops skills that will be useful in client development, interviewing, counseling, fact development and legal analysis, negotiation and a variety of contexts beyond mediation. You are encouraged to apply if you have taken (or are concurrently taking) the basic negotiation class or its equivalent in studies or experience. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance at all classes, and 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.

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. Autumn term will be dedicated to brief writing and completion of the written portion of the Competition; the oral argument portion of the Competition will be 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 only a few class meetings, including a guest lecture on ethics, which can be recorded. In addition, there are individually scheduled conferences. In Winter term, there are optional class meetings and practice arguments. Participation in the oral argument competition is mandatory, which includes attendance at the semifinal and final arguments. The preliminary rounds are held in the evening; the semifinal and final rounds are in the late afternoon. Prior to the Competition itself, materials and lectures are provided on research, brief writing, and oral advocacy techniques. 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 an actual case. The first draft of the brief is reviewed and critiqued by the course instructors. The course instructors and the Moot Court Board Presidents score the final draft of the brief. The course also offers digital recording and critiques of practice oral arguments. Panels of judges and local attorneys serve as judges who score the oral argument portion of the Competition. 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: In order 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. 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. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory completion of appellate brief and oral arguments.

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. Autumn term will be dedicated to brief writing and completion of the written portion of the Competition; the oral argument portion of the Competition will be 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 only a few class meetings, including a guest lecture on ethics, which can be recorded. In addition, there are individually scheduled conferences. In Winter term, there are optional class meetings and practice arguments. Participation in the oral argument competition is mandatory, which includes attendance at the semifinal and final arguments. The preliminary rounds are held in the evening; the semifinal and final rounds are in the late afternoon. Prior to the Competition itself, materials and lectures are provided on research, brief writing, and oral advocacy techniques. 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 an actual case. The first draft of the brief is reviewed and critiqued by the course instructors. The course instructors and the Moot Court Board Presidents score the final draft of the brief. The course also offers digital recording and critiques of practice oral arguments. Panels of judges and local attorneys serve as judges who score the oral argument portion of the Competition. 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: In order 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. 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. Elements used in grading: Satisfactory completion of appellate brief and oral arguments.

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.

We can read any number of books about negotiation, but how do the concepts and principles play out in the real world? This dinner colloquium will meet with distinguished negotiators working in a variety of fields to reflect on and draw lessons from their deep and diverse experience. Guests for last year spoke on: studio and talent perspectives in entertainment negotiations; working relationship between inside and outside transactional counsel in technology M&A; prosecution and defense perspectives on negotiating in the criminal justice system; and public policy negotiation on gun law issues. For each session, students will read a background piece on issues in the selected area of legal practice and submit a discussion question to facilitate a discussion with the guests on client counseling, factual and legal analysis, negotiation and conflict resolution options, and collaboration. Pre-Requisite: Negotiation Seminar or substantial equivalent. Schedule: Monday, 5:30-8:00pm. There will be an organizing class on March 30, 5:30-6p, plus four presentation/dinner discussion sessions in April and May. Elements used in grading: Class participation, assignments and attendance.

This course will provide the building blocks for negotiating and resolving intractable conflicts around the world. How do we negotiate effectively under conditions of uncertainty and distrust? How can we build effective working relationships even when there is a history of enmity, violence, or spoilers at the table? The goal of this course is to develop each student¿s personal negotiation tool box to effectively analyze, prepare for, and participate in, negotiations that take place in complex settings around the globe. We will learn by doing. The course emphasizes experiential learning and negotiation simulations, as well as case studies and engaging directly with professionals in the field. Students will have opportunities to reflect on their experiences, provide one another with direct feedback, and receive feedback from instructors and expert guest speakers. The course focuses on conflict settings in the international arena (including natural resource management and extractive industries, ceasefire negotiations, and peace agreements), but students will develop skills to help them be effective in any complex negotiation setting from their local communities to the workplace. The course is designed for students who have already taken Basic Negotiation, but students who have not taken Basic Negotiation may still be admitted if they attend an intensive bootcamp in basic negotiation theory and methods the first Saturday of spring quarter. This course is open to cross-registration by graduate students in a variety of departments and programs. SPILS students and International Policy Studies students are especially encouraged to enroll. Grading Criteria: The seminar requires that students attend all classes, do the assigned reading, prepare for and actively participate in class and simulations, and write a series of short assignments. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit the Consent Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms).

Advanced negotiation courses are designed to take students beyond the two-party, lawyer-client negotiations that were the focus of the Negotiation Seminar, to examine many facets of negotiation complexity, both in terms of the participants and topics. This section of Advanced Negotiation will focus on two-party and multi-party environmental policy negotiations, working in teams, group decision-making, coalition management, and negotiating on behalf of organizations to solve complex problems in environmental policy. The goals of the class are twofold, for students (1) to acquire an added theoretical base beyond what was covered in the Negotiation Seminar through which to analyze (in terms of law and facts), prepare for, participate in and facilitate more complex, multiparty negotiations, and (2) to expand skills through deeper examination of various actual negotiation cases and complex simulations, including ethical responsibilities to the client and the public, opportunities for leadership, and collaboration. Special Instructions: Attendance at and participation in the simulations is required. Passing is dependent upon active preparation and participation, submission of four assigned short reflection papers, and completion of a selected case analysis (a completed or ongoing environmental policy dialogue). Prerequisite: Negotiation Seminar (Law 7821) or its substantial equivalent. Advanced degree students (and graduate students in other departments and programs) are encouraged to enroll. The course is designed for students who have already taken a basic negotiation seminar, but students who have not taken Negotiation may still be admitted if they attend an intensive bootcamp in basic negotiation theory and methods the first Saturday of winter quarter, January 11. Elements used in grading: Class participation and engagement, including simulations; attendance; preparation for and contributions to discussion; four short written assignments; and a 10 page case analysis.

Advanced Negotiation takes students beyond the two-party, lawyer-client negotiations that were the focus of the Negotiation Seminar. This course, Advanced Negotiation: Transactions, places the student in more difficult and more nuanced transactional simulations, working as individuals, lawyer-client pairs, and teams to negotiate on behalf of private, public and nonprofit firms. Simulations will include joint ventures (domestic and cross-border), different stage venture capital agreements, supply agreements, an airline reorganization, and multi-party private sector/government negotiations. We will have guest lawyers share their practice experience. The goals of the class include developing a designer's mindset for strategic preparation and client counseling on both facts and law, and tactical adjustments to changing scenarios; ethical responsibilities; deeper analysis and work on the persuasive elements (oral and written) of negotiation; coalition formation and management; and, ultimately, improved confidence and competence. Special Instructions: Attendance at and participation in all simulations and debriefing sessions is required. Passing is dependent upon this active participation, and a series of short papers. Prerequisite: Negotiation Seminar or its substantial equivalent, as assessed by the instructor. This class is limited to 20 students, 16 from SLS selected by lottery, with an effort to have 4 non-law students by consent of instructor. Elements used in grading: attendance, participation in both the negotiations and the debriefings, thorough and meaningful preparation, and all other assigned work.

Building on the skills developed in Federal Litigation, this simulation course will give students the unique opportunity to argue and judge pretrial motions from actual federal court cases. The instructor will provide the written briefs, and each week half the class will argue and half the class will judge a motion. Preparation will require reading the cases cited in the briefs and coming to class ready either to present an argument (attorneys) or interrogate counsel (judges). Students will critique each other both orally and in writing, and the instructor will provide oral critiques of all arguments. The goals of this class are: to train students to argue in court; to provide them with a chance to polish their public speaking skills and practice thinking on their feet; to prepare students to engage in challenging dialogue with both colleagues and future clients; and to improve self-confidence. Thus, while the context of the course is litigation, the objectives are much broader than the mastery of litigation technique. This course is not open to first year Law School students. Priority will be given to those students who commit to taking the class if given consent to enroll. Please indicate your commitment on the consent form. 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. Elements used in grading: Class attendance, participation, and preparation. This course was taught successfully on Zoom last Spring and, in all likelihood, will be taught remotely this year. Given that many courts are currently using this format, and may continue to do so post-pandemic, we will also address issues specific to virtual arguments.

This course orients advanced degree students to a range of legal writing genres used by lawyers in practice in American law offices and before American courts. At the core of these genres are the techniques of legal research, objective and persuasive legal writing, and related legal analysis in a litigation context. The course presents students with realistic legal writing scenarios that they address in and out of class. Students perform legal research and analysis as they complete assignments designed to incorporate methods that American lawyers use to analyze typical legal problems while advocating on behalf of a hypothetical client in a litigation matter. This class is limited to Advanced Degree Students. Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Attendance, Written Assignments.

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, expert 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 seven weeks of the Autumn Quarter with two classes (one lecture and one workshop) per week on most weeks from 4:15-9:00 PM (these usually occur on M, W, or Th), plus the final weekend of jury trials, Saturday and Sunday November 16 and 17. Each day's ending time will vary; most sessions will end before 9:00 PM. For details, please refer to the 2019 Trial Advocacy Workshop Schedule at https://tinyurl.com/TrialAd2019. 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 Tim Hallahan, Judge Sallie Kim and Sara Peters. Tim has taught similar programs at Harvard Law School, the University of San Francisco School of Law, Berkeley Law, the California Continuing Education of the Bar, and in private and public interest law firms around the country. 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. Special Instructions: If you haven't taken Evidence you must contact Tim Hallahan 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 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.

(Formerly Law 733) 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.

This course is designed to explore issues of professional identity for students transitioning into the legal profession. It will begin in the spring quarter and continue into the fall quarter, and will require the writing of a paper. Elements used in grading: Final Paper.

The Spanish for Lawyers course offers students the opportunity to enhance existing Spanish communication skills in legal practice. The course will emphasize speaking and listening comprehension through in-class presentations and dialogue. Students will also be given assignments to be completed outside of class. The course will introduce Spanish legal terminology in areas such as immigration, consumer protection, criminal, employment, housing and family law. Students will learn how to apply these language skills as future legal practitioners interacting with clients who possess limited English proficiency. Native or fluent guest participants will expose students to legal terminology, concepts and dialects from various Spanish-speaking countries. The goal of the class is to enable students to, at a minimum, conduct intake interviews with a Spanish-speaking client without the assistance of an interpreter in a culturally competent fashion. Class instruction will take place exclusively 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 already have familiarity with the essentials of Spanish grammar and can engage in basic verbal communication. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

This course will bring the Instructor's decades of experience in high-stakes legal writing to bear on the drafting of appellate briefs: what's good, what's bad; what works, what doesn't; and how to get from here (your frustratingly blank computer screen) to there (a finished brief that assists, persuades, and impresses appellate judges). Through a combination of lectures, discussion, selected readings, and writing exercises (both individual and collaborative), we will cover most of the key topics in appellate writing, including: The differences between appellate and trial-court writing; How appellate judges think, and how to give them what they need; Basic appellate procedure; The pervasive influence that the standard of review has on everything in the brief; Identifying and articulating winning issues and themes (and the difference between the two); Framing appellate issues to advantage your client and neutralize your opponent's best arguments; Getting your arms around the trial-court record; The components of an appellate brief, their purposes, and what it takes to make each component successful; Crafting a narrative that grips the imagination; Structuring appellate arguments; Constructing great headings and subheadings; Writing clear, graceful, properly constructed sentences devoid of brain-killing ambiguities; Linking the entire brief together--using headings, paragraphs, sentences, and individual words--so that it seems to flow effortlessly from point to point to reach the seemingly ineluctable conclusion that your client should win; Lessons from scientific studies of cognition and reading; Cultivating the critical distance you need to edit your own writing; Editing other lawyers' writing effectively; Obtaining discretionary appellate review; and Typography and layout. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Public-interest litigation is often an uphill battle. Lawyers and clients representing public interests have difficulty prevailing even when their fact patterns are sympathetic, often because the law is either undeveloped or unsupportive. Yet when public-interest litigation does succeed it can change the legal landscape and galvanize social movements. This class will focus on the research and writing skills necessary to litigate public-interest lawsuits. The class will employ briefs from important public-interest cases and other readings to unpack the rhetorical and analytical tools needed to persuade judges across the ideological spectrum. Students will also learn how to conduct advanced legal research; develop tools for constitutional, statutory, and case law interpretation; and hone their ability to be clear and creative. Students will practice the skills they learn by preparing multiple drafts of two pleadings in a single case, and will receive detailed feedback on their writing from the instructor and their peers. Grading will be based on a Mandatory P/R/F system, taking into account writing as well as class participation. SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Students on the waitlist for the course will be admitted if spots are available on the basis of priority. Early drop deadline: Students may not drop this course after first week of class. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignments.

This is a seminar that uses U.S. history to examine canonical civil rights law. We will investigate the historical context behind the enactment of particular laws and judicial decisions. We will also discuss the meaning and implications of the term "civil rights law." Readings will include cases, law review articles, primary sources, and history articles. The seminar will focus upon African-American legal history. 14th Amendment is not a prerequisite for the seminar. Requirements for the course include regular class participation and, at the students' election, either response papers or a historiographical essay. Students may also elect to complete a research paper with the instructor's approval, in which case they will receive 3 units and "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. Automatic grading penalty waived for submission of research paper. This class is limited to 16 students, with an effort made to have students from SLS (10 students) and 6 non-law students by consent of instructor. 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 (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline. Cross-listed with History (HISTORY 361D).

This one-credit course is designed to support students undertaking public policy analysis projects in the Policy Lab and in other policy-based courses. The course will help students gain facility with basic policy methods and approaches common to public policy research and Policy Lab projects. The core session of the course consists of three hours of classroom instruction on a Saturday morning (the Saturday at the end of the first week of classes) with emphasis on 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. The afternoon session offers three hours of instruction focused on designing and evaluating programs to improve individuals' lives (for example programs aimed at reducing homelessness or opioid addiction). Then, during the early part of the term, students may choose at least two topics from among a series of short workshops including (1) interviewing 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) charting, graphing, and visualizing data, and (5) policy writing. 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. 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, Performance, Class Participation.

This course seeks to explore a simple question: what lies beyond graduation? Within that question are a myriad of complexities. What does it mean to be an associate or a partner in a law firm? Should I do litigation or transactional work, such as public finance, whatever that is? Should I become a prosecutor or a public defender or criminal defense attorney? Should I go in-house and in what size place? Should I leave the law behind and pursue business or other opportunities? Those are not the only questions. To add an overlay that we all must address directly or indirectly, how is my being a person of color relevant to my decision and my success? In a world in which diversity is said to matter, as a person who is not of color, should I take that into account? What about being a woman or LGBTQ in the workplace? Or, what about being a woman or man who wishes to have a family? How does that (or should that) impact my decision? These are just some of the issues that will be explored. They will be explored each week in classes lead by different guests who will be law school graduates practicing law at law firms as associates and partners, practicing as prosecutors and criminal defense lawyers, in-house counsel, counsel for start-ups, and law school graduates who have left the law. The course will require the writing of a paper and grades will also depend on class attendance. Attendance, Class Participation, Final Paper.

Lawyers mediate most litigated cases, even those never filed in court. Lawyers mediate in commercial transactions, and as part of everything they do with other lawyers, clients, staff, the government, and their families. Do you want to be in the majority of lawyers who are constantly mediating, but never take a single mediation course? This course is a quick immersion in mediation advocacy, and mediation. It is intended for those who want to avoid being entirely unprepared for an essential part of legal practice. It is also intended for those who want to take a first step to see if mediation interests them. The two days of class will be an interactive exploration of the strategies, tactics and theories of mediation, and mediation advocacy. Class will include: 1) a concise overview of mediation approaches and theories, 2) skills exercises, 3) multiple mediation role plays, and 4) individualized video review. Together these will allow students to think about, practice, and experiment with, the most effective approaches to mediation advocacy and mediation. The course will be taught by Michael Dickstein, full-time mediator of complex cases across the U.S. and Canada for over twenty years, and former partner in a leading firm, who practiced litigation, transactional, employment, and environmental law. Elements used in grading: Attendance, Class Participation, Written Assignment. In Winter Quarter, this class will meet February 21, 3:00PM-7:00PM and February 22, 9:00AM-4:00PM. In Spring Quarter, this class will meet May 8, 3:00PM-7:00PM and May 9, 9:45AM-4:45PM. 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.

This is a skills-based seminar covering the drafting, editing and negotiating of intellectual property and technology transaction agreements after a company has received early rounds of financing. Students will acquire the foundational tools necessary to write clear, effective, plain-language provisions into agreements that memorialize a bargain between parties in different contexts and based on realistic situations. Students analyze documents to learn how to protect clients' interests and will apply knowledge gleaned in other law courses to practice from the perspective of an in-house transactions counsel at a company, counsel in a technology transfer office within a university, or as an associate at a law firm handling technology licensing and commercial transactions. Students will structure, negotiate and edit agreements with a focus on helping clients achieve their goals while mitigating legal risk. The course will include in-class discussion as well as hands-on drafting (done at home and in class), along with sessions of facilitated negotiation. These exercises are designed to help students improve their critical thinking, due diligence, analysis, drafting, and editing skills which deepens an understanding as to the expectations of attorneys and clients with whom they will be working and supporting respectively. Issues related to ethics in transactional practice will also be addressed. Grades will be based on class attendance, participation, negotiation skills acquired, and the expansive editing of a final written contract, with drafting exercises weighted by level of complexity. Students may elect credit for either experiential learning (EL) or professional writing (PW) for this course. Prerequisite: Completed Corporations (LAW 1013). This class is limited to 15 students by lottery. Any student admitted to the class that has not completed Corporations may be instructed to drop the class at the first class meeting.

The seminar on corporate governance meets in the Autumn and Spring 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 and 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, largely in the Spring 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 key topics reviewed in the previous week's session. Students may also be asked to prepare presentations. The class will be graded H/P/R/F in Autumn Quarter and Spring 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.

The Environmental Law & Policy Colloquium offers students the opportunity to learn about cutting-edge legal topics related to environmental law, broadly defined to include, among other areas, pollution control, natural resources management, and energy development. The colloquium meets in two quarters. During the autumn quarter, students will learn about core concepts that underlie the administration of environmental law, exploring ideas from economics, philosophy, natural science, and law. In the autumn quarter, students will begin to develop a capstone research paper on a contemporary environmental law issue. During the spring quarter, the students will write and present their research papers. Elements used in grading include attendance and participation, problem sets, small writing assignments, and a final paper. This course is required for students in the Environmental Law & Policy LL.M. Program. All other students are welcome but will need instructor permission to enroll.

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 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 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. Topics in the Spring quarter will be selected based on students' interests, as well as pressing policy concerns in international commerce, such as climate change and national security.

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 with leading experts in the field, including Stanford faculty, visiting scholars, technology and IP lawyers, entrepreneurs, and executives from Silicon Valley technology companies. For organizational purposes, the course is divided into units reflecting different areas of law and technology. Each begins with a keystone lecture that introduces students to the unit's doctrinal and theoretical themes. After the keystone lecture, each unit includes one or more topical lectures taught by experts representing a diverse cross-section of viewpoints from academia, legal practice, and business. 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 papers dealing with the units' themes. 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.

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.

The writing of a work of original scholarship in the area of research that each student chooses is necessary requirement of the JSM degree. During the winter quarter students are expected to submit two draft chapters: 1) any chapter of the fellow's choice in early February; and 2) a draft of the empirical research result's chapter in early March. During the spring quarter students are expected to finalize their research project, and write and submit their final thesis. Towards that end, students must complete and submit a draft of the whole thesis in early April. The final version, revised in response to the adviser's comments, must be submitted by the end of the quarter. The exact dates will be informed in advance by the teaching fellow. Elements used in grading: Thesis. This course is exclusive to SPILS students. The thesis is required for JSM graduation.

This is a mandatory course for SPILS Fellows as part of the program's core curriculum. Its main goal is to offer students an interdisciplinary perspective about socio-legal research, and research tools for implementing their individual research projects. This Winter term workshop will complement the Research Design for Empirical Legal Studies Seminar taken in the Autumn by 1) expanding and elaborating on some of the methods analyzed during the seminar; and 2) assisting students in using such methods towards their individual research project. The workshop will consist of specialized sessions, most of them tailored towards the work of empirical research that occurs after the data collection phase. During the quarter the fellows are expected to submit drafts of different chapters of their thesis and present their preliminary findings in class. If appropriate, the workshop may also include group and/or individual sessions designed to address the very specific needs of the research undertaken by the SPILS Fellows. Elements used in grading: Class participation, attendance, written assignments and final presentations. Enrollment is restricted to SPILS fellows. The seminar is required for JSM graduation.

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. but optional for the SPILS and Exchange Program students. Open to LL.M., SPILS and SLS Exchange Program students only. The class starts on August 27 and runs through September 18. Final exam will be scheduled on Friday, September 20. Elements used in grading: class attendance, participation, short written assignment, and final exam.

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. In addition, we will delve into some more personal ethical issues that reflect on why students have chosen law as a profession and how lawyers compose careers that promote or frustrate those goals. At the start of each session (starting with the second session) there will be a brief quiz on the material that was covered in the readings and discussion of the prior session. During the period of the course, students will also be responsible for submitting one reflection paper (three-to-five pages) based on a prompt that will be circulated after each of the first six sessions (one paper for the entire course). These papers will be due by 11:59 on the last day the class meets. Grades will be based on the quizzes and the paper submitted, with the instructor retaining the right to take class participation into account. Attendance is mandatory and students must seek instructor approval for any absences not due to illness. This course is offered to international graduate students only. It is taught on an accelerated basis over the course of three weeks between orientation and the beginning of the Fall Quarter classes. Thus, the course meets on average nine hours per week. The exact meeting times will be set once the graduate students' schedules are set. Elements used in grading: Attendance, class participation, quizzes and written memo. Limited to LLMs, JSMs and exchange students. Required for LLMs.

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.