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

31 - 40 of 461 results for: LAW

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 more »
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

Clients: Stanford Election Law Project law.stanford.edu/stanford-university-election-law-project/> and the Stanford PACS Program on Democracy and the Internet pacscenter.stanford.edu/research/program-on-democracy-and-the-internet/projects/>. California recently passed SB 759, the "Every Vote Counts Act," to codify requirements allowing voters a chance to fix their ballot in case of a signature mismatch. SB 759 requires elections officials notify voters of mismatched signatures at least 8 days prior to the certification of an election. Ballots would be counted by elections officials if a signature verification statement is returned no later than 5:00 p.m. two days prior to certification. However, the law does not specify in great detail the steps that counties should take to contact voters. Prior to the bill's passage, a report by the California Voter Foundation revealed substantial variation in how counties verified mismatched signatures and contacted affected voters. This Poli more »
Clients: Stanford Election Law Project law.stanford.edu/stanford-university-election-law-project/> and the Stanford PACS Program on Democracy and the Internet pacscenter.stanford.edu/research/program-on-democracy-and-the-internet/projects/>. California recently passed SB 759, the "Every Vote Counts Act," to codify requirements allowing voters a chance to fix their ballot in case of a signature mismatch. SB 759 requires elections officials notify voters of mismatched signatures at least 8 days prior to the certification of an election. Ballots would be counted by elections officials if a signature verification statement is returned no later than 5:00 p.m. two days prior to certification. However, the law does not specify in great detail the steps that counties should take to contact voters. Prior to the bill's passage, a report by the California Voter Foundation revealed substantial variation in how counties verified mismatched signatures and contacted affected voters. This Policy Lab research project will produce the first public report tracking how counties have implemented/are planning to implement the requirements of SB 759. This project maps how the implementation of state statutes and guidelines dealing with vote-by-mail signature verification varies among California counties. Research questions for each county include: (1) What criteria does a signature need to meet to "not appear to be the same" (and therefore result in a ballot being invalidated)? (2) What remedial steps are taken, with regards to SB 759, if an election worker determines there is a "signature mismatch" before the statutory deadline? To answer these questions, students will conduct a survey of county election officials and administrative material and produce a final report with findings and lessons to improve county procedures. Students will research legal and policy frameworks, interview policy makers and state administrative officials, develop targeted policy recommendations, and brief policy makers on recommendations. The final report will be publicly available and will inform California county election officials, state policy-makers, and voting rights advocacy groups. This policy practicum is offered for two to three variable units. Students may elect three units by special arrangement with the instructors. CONSENT APPLICATION: To apply for this course, students must complete and submit a Consent Application Form available on the SLS website (Click Courses at the bottom of the homepage and then click Consent of Instructor Forms). See Consent Application Form for instructions and submission deadline.
Terms: Aut | Units: 2-3

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 807C: Policy Practicum: Donor Advised Funds and Their Critics

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 intro more »
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.
Terms: Win | 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)

LAW 882: Externship, Civil Law

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 Civi more »
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. .
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-12
Instructors: Winn, M. (PI)

LAW 883: Externship, Criminal Law

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 spec more »
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.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 5-12
Instructors: Winn, M. (PI)

LAW 884: Externship, Special Circumstances

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 th more »
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.
Terms: Aut, Win, Spr | Units: 12
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