2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020
Browse
by subject...
    Schedule
view...
 

21 - 30 of 124 results for: LAW ; Currently searching autumn courses. You can expand your search to include all quarters

LAW 403: Senior Thesis

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

LAW 406: Research Track

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

LAW 411: Directed Professional Writing

Directed professional writing projects involve professional writing, such as motions, briefs, proposed legislation, and congressional testimony, undertaken with the assistance of --- and in collaboration with --- a faculty member. Directed professional writing credit is designed to allow a student, or a small group of students working together, to receive academic credit for their work tackling real-world problems. Only projects supervised by a member of the faculty (tenured, tenure-track, senior lecturer, or professor from practice) may qualify for Directed Professional Writing credit. It will not necessarily be appropriate to require each member of the team to write the number of pages that would be required for an individual directed research project earning the number of units that each team member will earn for the team project. The page length guidelines applicable to individual papers may be considered in determining the appropriate page length, but the faculty supervisor has di more »
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.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 1-4 | Repeatable for credit

LAW 802: TGR: Dissertation

Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 0 | Repeatable for credit

LAW 806Y: Policy Practicum: Justice By Design: Eviction + Debt Collection

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 -- MW 9:30-12:20 -- 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. 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.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 4

LAW 806Z: Policy Practicum: "Every Vote Counts" Voting Verification Project

Client: ACLU of Northern California ( https://www.aclunc.org/). 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 what steps counties must take to contact voters. Prior to the bill's passage, a report by the California Voter Foundation revealed substantial variation in how counties dealt with contacting voters and allowing them to verify mismatched signatures. There haven't yet been any public reports tracking how counties have implemented/are planning to implement the requirements of SB 759. This policy lab will map how the implementation more »
Client: ACLU of Northern California ( https://www.aclunc.org/). 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 what steps counties must take to contact voters. Prior to the bill's passage, a report by the California Voter Foundation revealed substantial variation in how counties dealt with contacting voters and allowing them to verify mismatched signatures. There haven't yet been any public reports tracking how counties have implemented/are planning to implement the requirements of SB 759. This policy lab will map how the implementation of state statutes and guidelines dealing with vote-by-mail signature verification varies between 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 materials. We anticipate the final project will be the results of our county-by-county survey work, plus a report highlighting best practices. The report informs the ACLU of Northern California (pending completion of any final administrative requirements) and a broader audience of California policy-makers, voting rights advocacy groups, and county election officials. Students will research legal and policy frameworks, interview policy makers and state administrative officials, develop targeted policy recommendations, and brief policy makers on recommendations. If you have any questions, please reach out to Tom Westphal (tomwest@stanford.edu) or William Janover (wjanover@stanford.edu).. 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.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2

LAW 807A: Policy Practicum: Federal Indian Law: Yurok Legal Assistance

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.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3
Instructors: Ablavsky, G. (PI)

LAW 807B: Policy Practicum: What we can do to Mitigate Climate Warming

Client: Steyer-Taylor Center for Climate Energy and Finance. We will 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. Beginning with this premise, we ask how individuals and nonprofit organizations and institutions can use their power and authority to mitigate climate change, whether acting on their own or influencing decisions by governments and businesses. We will start by mapping the major sources of GHG emissions and the direct and external costs and benefits of reducing emissions now and in the future. We then examine strategies for reducing them, including voluntary action and influencing government policies, business practices and investment decisions. Among other things, we shall inquire into the role of positive investments in renewable resources and new technologies, an more »
Client: Steyer-Taylor Center for Climate Energy and Finance. We will 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. Beginning with this premise, we ask how individuals and nonprofit organizations and institutions can use their power and authority to mitigate climate change, whether acting on their own or influencing decisions by governments and businesses. We will start by mapping the major sources of GHG emissions and the direct and external costs and benefits of reducing emissions now and in the future. We then examine strategies for reducing them, including voluntary action and influencing government policies, business practices and investment decisions. Among other things, we shall inquire into the role of positive investments in renewable resources and new technologies, and whether refusing to invest in certain enterprises can reduce GHG emissions. We will also look at the influence that residents, employees, consumers, regulators, and other stakeholders may exert, whether acting individually or as part of social movements. The two instructors have considerable knowledge about climate and investment policies, and plan to draw on expertise in ethics, social movements, finance, and other related areas. The mandate of the Stanford Law and Policy Lab is to conduct impartial, evidence-informed policy analysis. Rather than deliver a set of specific recommendations, this practicum seeks to identify and assess the pros and cons of plausible strategies. In addition to a written report, we plan to convene a forum, open to members of the Stanford community, to discuss our findings. Although the Policy Lab practicums are designed mainly for law students, they are open to students from throughout the University. Admission is by petition. Given the scope of work, this practicum may continue into the winter quarter, but students need only commit themselves for the Autumn. Elements use 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.
Terms: Aut | Units: 3

LAW 807D: Policy Practicum: Post-Ferguson Civil Rights Enforcement

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 more »
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.
Terms: Aut, Win | Units: 3 | Repeatable for credit

LAW 881: Externship Companion Seminar

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