Stanford Legal

Artificial Intelligence holds the potential to transform much of our lives and healthcare professions are embracing it for everything from cost savings to diagnostics. But who is to blame when AI assisted healthcare goes wrong? How is the law developing to balance the benefits and risks? In this episode, Pam and Rich are joined by health policy expert Michelle Mello and Neel Guha, a Stanford JD/PhD candidate in computer science, for a discussion on the transformative role of AI in healthcare. They examine AI’s potential to enhance diagnostics and streamline workflows while addressing the ethical, legal, and safety challenges this new technology can bring. The conversation highlights the urgency of adapting regulatory frameworks, the complexities of liability among hospitals, developers, and practitioners, and the need for rigorous testing to ensure patient safety as AI integration in healthcare advances.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Michelle Mello >>> Stanford Law page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Understanding AI in MedicineThe episode begins with a broad introduction to AI's applications in medicine. Neel Guha explains generative AI systems and their rapid advancement, including practical applications like chatbots, imaging, and decision-making tools. Michelle Mello highlights AI's widespread integration, from diagnostic tools like radiological imaging and predictive algorithms to administrative uses that aim to reduce physician burnout.(00:07:04) Chapter 2: The Benefits and Risks of AI in HealthcareThe group explores the advantages of AI in medicine, such as enhanced diagnostic precision, reduced administrative burdens, and improved patient outcomes. Michelle Mello identifies potential risks, like automation bias, where reliance on AI might lead to unchecked errors, highlighting the tension between time-saving tools and maintaining human oversight.(00:08:22) Chapter 3: Legal Challenges and Liability in AI-Driven MedicineThe conversation turns to the legal implications of AI in healthcare. Neel Guha outlines scenarios where AI contributes to patient harm, discussing negligence claims, product liability, and the complexity of determining accountability. Michelle Mello and the hosts analyze how liability standards might evolve, comparing AI's systematic errors to human fallibility and addressing the interplay of human-AI collaboration in preventing mistakes.(00:14:47) Chapter 4: The Challenges of AI and Transparency in Decision-MakingThe group explores parallels between medical and anti-discrimination fields in understanding machine learning's opaque decision-making. Neel Guha delves into the evolution of AI systems from rule-based programming to complex machine learning, emphasizing challenges in identifying points of failure across stakeholders like hospitals, physicians, and developers.(00:17:35) Chapter 5: Regulation and Liability of AI in HealthcareMichelle Mello discusses the regulatory framework for AI as a medical device, comparing outdated 1976-era regulations to modern challenges. The conversation shifts to gaps in tort liability and the risks of developers limiting their liability through contracts. Proposals for redistributing liability to incentivize better private governance are examined alongside the need for robust AI quality assurance akin to crash tests or clinical trials.(00:23:13) Chapter 6: The Road Ahead: Balancing Innovation and SafetyThe speakers analyze the distinct challenges of regulating AI across diverse healthcare environments. Neel Guha and Michelle Mello discuss adapting evaluation practices to align with AI's real-world complexities. Optimism prevails as Michelle highlights AI’s potential to address critical issues like diagnostic delays, advocating for guardrails to ensure safety without stifling innovation. The episode concludes with reflections on Stanford's interdisciplinary approach to these pressing issues.

Matt Platkin, who was the youngest-ever AG in the country when he was appointed in 2022, discusses some of his public safety initiatives such as the ARRIVE Together program, which pairs mental health professionals with law enforcement to improve responses to mental health crises. Among other pressing issues facing New Jersey, Platkin also addresses his state's comprehensive approach to gun violence, which focuses on data-driven crime enforcement, community violence prevention, and legal accountability for firearm manufacturers.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Matt Platkin >>> State of New Jersey Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Role and Challenges of State Attorneys General Show Notes: Host Rich Ford introduces Matt Platkin, Attorney General of New Jersey, and dives into the multifaceted role and responsibilities of state attorneys general, especially in enforcing public safety and overseeing large-scale law enforcement. Platkin shares insights on the expectations and hurdles faced by AGs, highlighting the critical role they play in protecting communities.(00:03:42) Chapter 2: Innovative Crisis Intervention Programs The discussion shifts to the "ARRIVE Together" program, a pioneering mental health and law enforcement collaboration aimed at de-escalating crisis situations. Platkin explains how pairing officers with mental health professionals in crisis response has drastically reduced force incidents and arrests in New Jersey. He also touches on the broader need for mental health resources, noting how training and interdisciplinary cooperation contribute to more effective, compassionate responses.(00:09:10) Chapter 3: Public Health Approaches to Opioid and Gun Crises Platkin outlines New Jersey's proactive strategies to tackle the opioid and gun violence epidemics, focusing on diversion programs, community partnerships, and civil enforcement. He discusses the impactful results of addressing these issues as public health crises, noting the state’s success in reducing both opioid fatalities and gun-related violence through data-driven enforcement, community engagement, and targeted litigation against non-compliant businesses.(00:17:34) Chapter 4: Interstate Coordination and the Role of AGs in Federal LitigationAttorney General Matt Platkin explains the importance of collaboration among state attorneys general, including bipartisan efforts in federal litigation. He shares examples of major joint cases, such as those against Meta and Apple, and discusses how AGs coordinate on issues that transcend state lines, often through bipartisan associations.(00:20:14) Chapter 5: The Evolution and Influence of the New Jersey Supreme CourtPam Karlan asks Platkin about New Jersey’s innovative Supreme Court. Platkin delves into the unique aspects of New Jersey’s government structure, including the influential role of the state Supreme Court in affordable housing and school funding cases. He shares insights on recent judicial reforms and the impact of balanced partisan representation on the court.(00:25:08) Chapter 6: Path to Public Service and Career ReflectionsPlatkin recounts his journey from law school to Attorney General, sharing pivotal moments like working on Cory Booker’s campaign and volunteering in San Antonio. He reflects on how early career risks and public service aspirations shaped his path, highlighting the impact of his experiences on his leadership in New Jersey’s government.

Stanford Law's Daniel Ho and computer science/law student Mirac Suzgun discuss the enduring impact of racially restrictive covenants in real estate with host Rich Ford. Though unenforceable since 1948, these clauses are a lingering reminder of housing segregation and racism in the United States, as Professor Ho's own experience of discovering a covenant barring Asians from purchasing his home highlights. The conversation also looks at legislative efforts to remove the covenants and an innovative AI tool developed by Stanford's RegLab that helps counties identify and redact these covenants, streamlining the process while preserving the historical record.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Dan Ho  >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford’s RegLab >>> Stanford Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to Racial Covenants and AB 1466Host Rich Ford introduces the episode, guests Professor Dan Ho and SLS student Mirac Suzgun, and the topic of racial covenants in real estate. They discuss the persistence of racially restrictive covenants, despite being declared unenforceable by the Supreme Court in Shelley v. Kramer (1948), and highlight California’s AB 1466 law, which aims to address the issue.(00:04:00) Chapter 2: The Role of AI in Redacting Racial CovenantsDan Ho explains how Santa Clara County faced the challenge of identifying and redacting racial covenants from millions of historical deed records. The conversation shifts to the AI tool developed by Stanford’s RegLab, which automates the identification of racially discriminatory language in property documents. Mirac Suzgun elaborates on the stages of the AI tool, including OCR and machine learning, to help counties meet their legal obligations.(00:10:01) Chapter 3: Historical Context and Persistence of Racial CovenantsRich Ford and Dan Ho delve into the history of racial covenants, explaining their rise after the Buchanan decision (1917) and their persistence even after the Shelley v. Kramer ruling. They discuss how these covenants, though unenforceable, served as a community signaling function, reinforcing housing segregation for decades.(00:16:13) Chapter 4: The Legacy of Racial CovenantsRich Ford and Mirac Suzgun discuss the evolution of state-sponsored race segregation and the role of private covenants in perpetuating housing discrimination. They emphasize how these covenants, often embedded in property deeds, remain binding on homeowners, illustrating the historical entrenchment of racial segregation in real estate.(00:18:48) Chapter 5: Uncovering Historical Data and ResponsibilityDan Ho shares findings from a study revealing the prevalence of racial covenants in Santa Clara County. The discussion highlights the significant responsibility of a small number of developers in enforcing these covenants, contrasting this with the example of Joseph Eichler, who resisted such practices and promoted housing reform.(00:23:11) Chapter 6: Utilizing Technology for Social JusticeThe conversation shifts to the innovative tools developed to identify and address racial covenants in property records. The hosts explore the implications of these discoveries for understanding historical injustices and the importance of retaining historical records while advocating for modern social justice initiatives, plus closing remarks.

How are victims of intimate partner violence meant to protect themselves—and, often, their children—without winding up dead, in hospital, or prison? It’s a situation that many find themselves in. Approximately 15 percent of women in the United States are victims of intimate partner violence, according to the National Domestic Violence Hotline. But the legal system is not set up to help them. In this episode the executive director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, Debbie Mukamal, and Stanford Law student Jacqueline Lewittes join Pam and Rich to discuss the Center's new study “Fatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline and Other Stories Touched by Violence,” that offers groundbreaking data and personal stories from women currently in prison because of intimate partner violence. They also touch on the systemic failures in the justice system in handling these complex cases.  Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford Lawyer Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Debbie Mukamal  >>> Stanford Law School PageFatal Peril: Unheard Stories from the IPV-to-Prison Pipeline >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introductions and Goals of the Research Hosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss how the project on women incarcerated for killing their abusers began during the pandemic, sparked by a lack of national data on these cases with Debbie Mukamal and SLS student Jacqueline Lewittes. Mukamal explains how her team's long-standing relationships with the California Department of Corrections facilitated their research access despite COVID-19 restrictions.(00:04:12) Chapter 2: Research Design and Challenges The team outlines the complexities of designing the study, including broadening the focus beyond intimate partner killings and overcoming barriers like accessing reliable court records. They explain how they relied on direct interviews and used validated tools like the Danger Assessment and Composite Abuse Scale to assess the severity of abuse.(00:08:42) Chapter 3: Striking Findings and Legal Implications Explore key findings, including the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries among respondents and the failure of self-defense laws to protect abused women. Jacqueline highlights a specific case that illustrates how memory loss due to abuse complicates self-defense claims, underscoring the systemic legal failures.(00:18:30) Chapter 4: The Role of Intimate Partner Violence in Homicide CasesThe group delves into the startling statistics of women convicted of homicide in connection to intimate partner violence. Debbie Mukamal discusses how nearly 74% of women in their study had experienced abuse at the time of the offense, breaking down the subcategories of cases, from those who killed their abuser to others involving child fatalities.(00:21:25) Chapter 5: Systemic Failures in Protecting Abuse VictimsExamine the various ways in which the legal system fails to protect women who are victims of abuse. From denied protective orders to mistreatment by police and ineffective legal defense, the discussion highlights the failures at multiple levels and the resulting harsh sentences.(00:23:55) Chapter 6: Law Reform and the Impact of Trauma on Legal CulpabilityThis segment focuses on potential legal reforms, including changes to homicide statutes and the need for better understanding of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in abuse survivors. Debbie Mukamal and Pam Karlan discuss the implications of TBI on a woman’s ability to recall facts, and how reforms could better account for their experiences.

Is the president above the law? Is the Electoral College democratic? In this episode, historian Jonathan Gienapp critiques the mainstream use of originalism, arguing that it often neglects crucial historical context, overlooking the complexities of original public understanding. The conversation dives into recent court cases, highlighting tensions between historical interpretation and contemporary judicial practices. This is clearly illustrated in Gienapp’s discussion of the Electoral College—a uniquely American invention. He explains the historical roots of the Electoral College, the Framers' intentions, and the criticisms it faces today. He also sheds light on how the Electoral College emerged as a compromise among less desirable options and the historical context surrounding its establishment, including issues of accountability and regional interests. The conversation also touches on ongoing debates about potential reforms, public sentiment toward a national popular vote, and the challenges of amending the Constitution in today's contentious political landscape. Join us for an enlightening discussion that bridges history with contemporary constitutional debates.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Jonathan Gienapp >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and the Flaws of OriginalismHosts Pam Karlan and Rich Ford discuss the key issues with modern originalism, focusing on how originalists often overlook the historical context necessary to truly capture the Constitution’s original meaning with historian Jonathan Gienapp. Gienapp critiques the flexibility of originalist interpretations, especially when applied to complex constitutional concepts like freedom of speech and executive power.(00:04:33) Chapter 2: Public Meaning vs. Original IntentRich Ford explores the tension between public meaning and original intent in originalist theory. Gienapp explains how, despite attempts to distinguish them, the two often overlap in practice. The discussion highlights the inconsistency in how originalists pick and choose historical evidence to support their interpretations.(00:07:47) Chapter 3: Judicial Interpretation in Practice: Rahimi and Trump CasesPam Karlan brings up recent court cases, including United States v. Rahimi and Trump v. United States, where originalist judges either struggled with historical evidence or avoided it altogether. Gienapp notes the irony of originalists relying on minimal historical analysis when it contradicts their desired outcomes.(00:12:04) Chapter 4: The Framers' Vision of the PresidencyJonathan Gienapp discusses the historical foundations of the American presidency, emphasizing the founding generation's rejection of monarchy and the importance of presidential accountability. He highlights the debate at the Constitutional Convention regarding the balance between a strong executive and ensuring that executive power remains accountable to the people.(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Originalism and Constitutional InterpretationJonathan Gienapp delves into the complexities of originalism as a judicial philosophy. He explains the tension between the rhetoric of originalism and its inconsistent application in Supreme Court decisions. He argues for either a more serious commitment to originalism or a recognition of constitutional pluralism, where history is used alongside other interpretative methods.(00:21:39) Chapter 6: The Origins and Challenges of the Electoral CollegeExploration of the creation of the Electoral College, discussing how it emerged not as a perfect solution but as a compromise to address competing concerns about legislative selection, popular votes, and regional interests. Gienapp examines past and present efforts to reform the Electoral College and explains why it persists despite criticism.

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, Nate Persily forecasts complications along with it.Persily, a Stanford law professor and a leading expert in election law and administration, says the coming election cycle could pose unprecedented challenges for voters and election officials alike. “We are at a stage right now where there's a lot of anxiety about election administration,” he says. “There's a significant share of the population that's completely lost confidence in our system of elections.”With nearly every state having altered its election laws since 2020 and a significant turnover in election administrators, Persily says the stage is set for a potentially bumpy ride this November. As voter confusion and AI-powered disinformation loom overhead, Persily says the integrity of our democracy may well depend on our collective ability to weather this less-than-perfect storm.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Nate Persily >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Challenges Ahead for the November Election Nate Persily outlines the primary concerns for the upcoming election, including voter confusion, changes in election laws, and the pressures faced by election officials.(00:03:27) Chapter 2: Decentralization and Election Administration The panel discusses the challenges of managing a national election run by numerous local jurisdictions, including issues with certification and varying local procedures.(00:05:44)  Chapter 3: The Evolving Election Timeline Persily, Karlan, and Ford explore how election day has expanded into an extended voting period, covering early and mail-in voting, and the implications for counting and certification.(00:17:41) Chapter 4: Technology, Disinformation, and Media Influence Examines the impact of technology and disinformation, including deep fakes and misinformation about voting procedures, and their effects on public trust.(00:23:37) Chapter 5: Building Confidence in the Electoral Process Persily discusses strategies to bolster confidence in the election process, emphasizing support for election officials and the role of local leaders in maintaining trust.

The Supreme Court's latest term was marked by decisions of enormous consequence. However, the way the Court has communicated about these rulings far undersells the gravity they carry.While “expressing itself in extremely modest terms,” Professor Jeffrey Fisher says, the current Supreme Court has “[handed] down decisions that have enormously consequential effects for our democracy, people's rights, and everything in between.” He and Assistant Professor Easha Anand, co-directors of the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, agree that these recent decisions could reshape American law and politics for years to come.In this episode of Stanford Legal with host Pam Karlan, Fisher, and Anand take a critical look at recent Supreme Court rulings on abortion, gun rights, tech platforms, and the power of federal agencies, examining the Court's evolving approach and considering the potential long-term impacts on American democracy and the rule of law.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Jeff Fisher >>> Stanford Law School PageEasha Anand >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Supreme Court Term and Key CasesPam Karlan is joined by Professors Jeff Fisher and Easha Anand to discuss the past term at the Supreme Court, constitutional law and Supreme Court practice, highlighting key cases and themes from the term. They explore how the court's conservative majority shapes the docket and the role of Justices Barrett and Jackson in developing their judicial voices.(00:06:56) Chapter 2: High-Profile Cases: Guns, Abortion, and Administrative LawExamine major cases, including gun rights in Rahimi v. United States and Cargill v. Garland, abortion-related cases, and the pivotal Loper Bright decision affecting the administrative state. They analyze the court's reasoning and the broader implications of these rulings.(00:15:28) Chapter 3: The Court's Evolving Role and MethodologyDiscussion of the broader implications of the Supreme Court's evolving approach to its docket and decision-making processes, particularly in relation to the administrative state and the impact of recent rulings on future cases.(00:19:14) Chapter 4: The Supreme Court and Technology CasesThey delve into the significant technology cases that were brought before the Supreme Court this term. They discuss how the Court addressed state laws from Florida and Texas aimed at restricting content moderation by big tech companies, marking the first time the First Amendment was applied to social media platforms. The discussion highlights the tension between traditional legal frameworks and the evolving digital landscape, with a focus on the implications of these rulings for the future of free speech online.(00:24:10) Chapter 5: Trump and the Supreme Court: Balancing Power and ImmunityThe group explores the complex legal landscape surrounding former President Donald Trump's involvement in Supreme Court cases. Easha Anand provides an in-depth analysis of the Trump v. United States case, where the Court examined the extent of presidential immunity concerning acts related to the 2020 election. The discussion also touches on the broader implications of the Court's rulings on Trump’s legal challenges, including how these decisions might shape future presidential conduct and accountability.(00:29:27) Chapter 6: Supreme Court’s Role in Protecting DemocracyPam Karlan and Jeff Fisher discuss the Supreme Court's role in safeguarding democratic processes. They analyze the Court's reluctance to engage deeply in political matters, such as the January 6th prosecution and political gerrymandering, highlighting the tension between judicial restraint and the need to protect democratic values. The chapter concludes with reflections on the broader implications of these decisions for the future of U.S. democracy, particularly in the context of voting rights and election integrity.

The bedrock of the legal profession is a commitment to upholding the rule of law. Unfortunately, as Stanford Law researchers discover in the complex world of international sanctions, lawyers can often facilitate non-compliance and evasion.It’s been two years since Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. And yet, businesses are still skirting sanctions imposed on Russia. As Erik Jensen, director of the Rule of Law Program at Stanford Law School, and law students Sarah Manney and Kyrylo Korol explore in this episode of Stanford Legal, lawyers could be playing a critical role in enabling Russian Oligarchs’ evasive maneuvers.With hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan, the three guests explore the intricate relationship between legal practice and international sanctions, discussing insights from their research, the ethical responsibilities of lawyers, and potential solutions for safeguarding the rule of law.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Erik Jensen >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and OverviewKyrylo Korol discusses the responsibility of lawyers to uphold democracy and the impact of their actions on the profession. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the topic of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the international response.(00:01:33) Chapter 2: Genesis of the Policy LabErik Jensen explains the inception of the Policy Lab focusing on sanctions against Russia, including the motivation from an S-Term course and subsequent student enthusiasm.(00:03:16) Chapter 3: Kyrylo Korol's Personal MotivationKyrylo Korol shares his dual perspective as a Ukrainian and American lawyer, emphasizing the need to keep the discussion on Russia's war against Ukraine alive and his personal drive to support Ukraine.(00:05:32) Chapter 4: Focus of the Policy LabThe team discusses the main areas of their research, including the role of Russian oligarchs in the war and the involvement of legal professionals in facilitating sanctions evasion.(00:12:57) Chapter 5: Comparative Analysis and Legal FrameworksThe conversation shifts to the comparative study of how different countries regulate lawyers concerning sanctions and money laundering, and the ethical obligations of U.S. lawyers with Sarah Manney.(00:21:25) Chapter 6: Challenges and Implications for the Legal ProfessionThe team delves into the implications of their findings for the legal profession, discussing the balance between upholding legal privileges and preventing abuse, and addressing systemic risks and de-risking issues.

Do courts have the expertise to decide on important environmental law issues? Pam Karlan and Rich Ford speak with environmental law expert Debbie Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford, about recent Supreme Court decisions affecting environmental and administrative law--including the Court's decision to overturn decades of settled law by overturning Chevron. What are the implications of the Court's recent blockbuster environmental decisions--the impact on the Clean Air Act, and broader consequences for regulatory agencies and environmental policies. Tune in to explore how these legal shifts could reshape the landscape of environmental regulation in the United States.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Deborah Sivas >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00)  Chapter 1: Introduction and OverviewPam and Rich welcome Professor Debbie Sivas from Stanford's Environmental Law Clinic. They provide an overview of significant Supreme Court cases impacting environmental and administrative law, highlighting the pivotal Loeb or Wright decision that ended Chevron deference.(00:02:06) Chapter 2: Chevron Deference and Its Implications Explained Discussion on the historical context and implications of Chevron deference, with Debbie Sivas explaining its significance and how its removal might affect future legal interpretations and administrative agency power.(00:09:12) Chapter 3: Expert Opinions vs. Judicial InterpretationsExamination of the Supreme Court's approach to statutory interpretation versus agency expertise, highlighting cases like Ohio against EPA and the challenges posed by the court's stance on scientific and technical matters.(00:16:12) Chapter 4: The Role of the Major Questions Doctrine and Non-Delegation DoctrineAnalysis of the Major Questions Doctrine's impact on regulatory power and the potential resurgence of the Non-Delegation Doctrine, focusing on how these legal principles shape environmental policy and agency authority.(00:18:57) Chapter 5: The Ohio Against EPA Case and Its Broader ImplicationsDetailed discussion on the Ohio against EPA case, its current status, and the implications of the Supreme Court's emergency stay decision on future regulatory actions and environmental protections.

Will the three remaining cases against former president Donald Trump ever get to trial? After Judge Cannon's controversial dismissal of charges in the classified documents case—and the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision—the question is not so obvious. In this episode, criminal law expert David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss these two earthquake decisions, Special Prosecutor Jake Smith's appeal of Judge Cannon's decision, and the ongoing legal battles surrounding Trump.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Sklansky’s Book >>> A Pattern of Violence: How the Law Classifies Crimes and What It Means for Justice (00:00:00) Introduction and OverviewIntroduction to the podcast, Professor David Sklansky, and overview of the topics: Judge Cannon's decision, special master appointment, and Supreme Court's recent decision on immunity.(00:01:43) Judge Cannon's Decision and RationaleDiscussion on Judge Cannon's rationale for dismissing the classified documents case, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and the extraordinary nature of her decision.(00:04:12) Special Counsel Appointment and Historical ContextExamination of the reasoning behind appointing a special counsel, Judge Cannon's strained statutory interpretations, and the long history of appointing special counsels.(00:07:23) Analysis of Previous Controversial RulingsReview of Judge Cannon's earlier controversial ruling about appointing a special master, the 11th Circuit's reversal, and consistency in historical interpretations.(00:13:42) Unitary Executive Theory and AccountabilityDiscussion on the unitary executive theory, potential motivations behind Judge Cannon's rulings, and whether the case is about presidential accountability or diffusing responsibility.(00:21:05) Supreme Court's Immunity Decision and Future ImplicationsAnalysis of the Supreme Court's decision to remand the election interference case, challenges and potential outcomes, and the impact on the Manhattan case involving official acts.

Control of the border and illegal immigration are again in the headlines and the centerpiece of a divisive presidential campaign. Here to help make sense of recent legal successes and failures is immigration law expert Jennifer Chacón, the Bruce Tyson Mitchell Professor of Law at Stanford. The author of the new book, Legal Phantoms: Executive Action and Haunting Failures of Immigration Law, which offers insights into the human stories and governmental challenges shaping contemporary immigration debates, Chacon discusses the complexities of immigration policy,  its intersection with constitutional law, criminal law, and societal perceptions of identity and belonging.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Jennifer Chacón >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Background Pam Karlan introduces the show and today’s guest, Jennifer Chacón, highlighting her research and recent book on immigration law, Legal Phantoms.( 00:02:26) Chapter 2: The Stalemate of Immigration Reform Rich Ford addresses the lack of progress in comprehensive immigration reform. Jennifer Chacón details the initial aim of her research project to study the implementation of Senate Bill 744.The shift in focus to executive actions by President Obama after the bill’s failure, including the Deferred Action for Parents and DACA expansion programs.(00:07:05) Chapter 3: Understanding Deferred ActionJennifer Chacón explains deferred action and its implications for individuals lacking legal status, plus the significance of work authorization and the temporary nature of deferred action programs.(00:10:38) Chapter 4: Personal Stories and Community Impact Jennifer Chacón shares insights from her interviews with long-term residents about their perceptions of border policy and local enforcement and the varied perspectives of immigrants on the issues of border control and local government actions.(00:17:06) Chapter 5: Future of Immigration Reform Rich Ford inquires about potential reforms, and Jennifer Chacón emphasizes the interconnectedness of border policy and long-term resident solutions. They discuss the Biden administration’s recent announcements and their implications. Jennifer Chacón shares her view on the political challenges and ideal legislative changes for addressing immigration issues.

Should presidents be immune from prosecution? If yes, under what circumstances? Stanford Professor Michael McConnell, a former federal judge, joins Pam Karlan for a discussion on presidential immunity, the Constitution, and former president Trump's cases. In this insightful episode, they discuss the implications of the Supreme Court's stance on criminal versus civil liabilities for presidents, the political ramifications of prosecutorial actions, and the historical context of executive power under the U.S. Constitution.

Is legal representation in the U.S. only for the rich and corporations? That's a question that we'll explore in this episode of Stanford Legal with guests David and Nora Freeman Engstrom, two leading authorities on access to justice and the legal profession. They'll explain the roots of the challenge, how unauthorized practice of law rules contribute to the problem, and how to address them. The Engstroms co-direct Stanford Law School's Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession, an academic center working to shape the future of legal services and access to the legal system. This episode delves into some alarming statistics, including the fact that in three-quarters of civil cases in state courts, at least one party is without a lawyer. This alone often leads to unjust outcomes in cases involving debt collection, evictions, family law, and other areas. And that is just part of the problem, as the Engstroms explain.   Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Nora Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageDavid Freeman Engstrom >>> Stanford Law School PageChapter 1: The Access to Justice Crisis in the U.S.(00:00:00) Pam Karlan introduces the episode, discussing the work of David and Nora Freeman Engstrom at Stanford Law School's Deborah Rhode Center on the Legal Profession. This section provides an overview of the access to justice crisis, highlighting the high percentage of cases where individuals lack legal representation and a look at the types of cases predominantly at issue, including debt collection, evictions, mortgage foreclosures, and family law cases.Chapter 2: Understanding the Consequences and Causes of Legal Inaccessibility(00:7:06)  David and Nora Freeman Engstrom explore the broader implications of the lack of legal representation, including the cascade of related legal and financial issues that arise from initial problems like wage garnishment and eviction. They also touch on the hidden legal issues that never make it to court due to individuals' inability to seek legal help.Chapter 3: Exploring Solutions and Technological Impacts on Access to Justice(00:10:07) David and Nora Freeman Engstrom  delve into potential solutions to the access to justice crisis, including the role of technology in both exacerbating and potentially alleviating the problem. They discuss the efficiency of technological tools used by the debt collection industry and the implications for legal access.Chapter 4: The Technology Asymmetry in Debt Collection(00:14:19 )  Pam Karlan and David Freeman Engstrom discuss how debt collectors use automation to exploit legal processes against unrepresented individuals. They highlight the stark disparity between technological access for debt collectors and individual defendants. Engstrom points out the restrictive rules that limit software-driven legal services, exacerbating the access to justice crisis.Chapter 5: The Historical Context and Current Restrictions on Legal Services(00:15:55)  Nora Freeman Engstrom delves into the history of legal service restrictions in the U.S., contrasting it with medical professions. She introduces her research on auto clubs and their provision of legal services in the early 20th century, showing how organized bar associations shut down these alternatives to preserve their monopoly.Chapter 6: Modern Innovations and Future Prospects in Legal Services(00:24:13)  The host and guests discuss recent efforts to relax unauthorized practice of law rules in states like Utah and Arizona. They explore innovative legal service models emerging from these reforms, including tiered services and AI-driven solutions, and their potential to democratize access to legal assistance. The discussion highlights how entities like LegalZoom are now able to hire lawyers and provide more comprehensive services. They also touch on the potential of generative AI to bridge the gap between legal jargon and plain language, making legal assistance more accessible to the public. The chapter concludes with reflections on the promise and challenges of these technological advancements.

In this episode, Rich and Pam discuss the successes and failures of Brown v. Board of Education with their colleague, Rick Banks. Marking the 70th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, they look at its impact on Jim Crow segregation and the ongoing challenges in achieving educational equality in the U.S. Banks offers a critical analysis of the effectiveness of Brown in integrating American primary and secondary education and explores alternative approaches to further racial and socioeconomic integration in schools.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Ralph Richard Banks >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Lawyer online feature >>> Brown v. Board: Success or Failure?(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Significance of Brown vs. Board of EducationIntroduction to the podcast and the topic of Brown vs. Board of Education. Discussion on the transformative impact of Brown on American society and its less effective impact on primary and secondary education.(00:02:36) Chapter 2: Initial Impact and Challenges of BrownExploration of the immediate aftermath of the Brown decision, including the decade of minimal desegregation and the eventual legislative push in the 1960s. Mention of personal anecdotes highlighting the slow progress.(00:06:35) Chapter 3: Massive Resistance and Supreme Court’s RoleDiscussion on the era of massive resistance to desegregation, the role of the Southern Manifesto, and the Supreme Court's strategic avoidance of direct intervention. Examination of the lingering effects of this period on the present educational landscape.(00:10:16) Chapter 4: Socioeconomic Disparities and School SegregationAnalysis of the ongoing economic inequality and its impact on school segregation. Comparison between Northern and Southern school desegregation efforts, with specific examples from Detroit and Charlotte.(00:14:45) Chapter 5: Legal and Structural Barriers to IntegrationExamination of legal decisions such as Milliken and San Antonio vs. Rodriguez that reinforced segregation and funding disparities. Discussion on the narrow scope of Brown and its consequences.(00:18:58) Chapter 6: Integration vs. Educational QualityDebate on the merits of integration versus focusing on educational quality through alternative methods such as charter schools and vouchers. Consideration of the mixed outcomes of these approaches.(00:22:19) Chapter 7: Parental Responsibility and Systemic SolutionsReflection on the burden placed on parents to seek better education through choice programs. Comparison to historical figures who fought for desegregation. Discussion on the need for systemic solutions rather than relying solely on choice.(00:25:02) Chapter 8: Future Directions and Pragmatic SolutionsCall for a mix of approaches to improve education, combining integration efforts with initiatives focused on educational quality. Emphasis on the importance of experimentation, evidence collection, and open-minded evaluation of educational policies.

Criminal law expert and former federal prosecutor David Sklansky joins Pam and Rich to discuss the New York trial and other cases against former president Trump. From state prosecutions to federal cases, they analyze the defense and prosecution strategies and implications of each trial, shedding light on the legal challenges facing Trump, the first current or former president in U.S. history to face criminal charges.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:David Sklansky >>> Stanford Law School Page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Progress and Impact of the New York TrialDiscussion of Donald Trump’s ongoing trial in New York related to hush money payments.Focus on the efficiency of jury selection and trial progress.Analysis of the impact of trial pace on prosecution's case.The role of trial speed in influencing juror perceptions.[00:04:48] Chapter 2: Trump's Response and Gag OrderTrump's response to the trial and constraints of the gag order.Effectiveness of the gag order in curbing Trump's behavior.Discussion on Trump's criminal contempt and its implications.Analysis of potential consequences and judicial response.[00:08:58] Chapter 3: Case Strength/Strategy and Jury Perception Evaluation of the strength of the case and potential challenges.Impact of jury perception on the trial outcome.Insight into trial strategy regarding witness sequencing.Discussion on the prosecution's approach to witness testimony.[00:19:45] Chapter 4: Supreme Court's Role and Case ComplexityDiscussion on the Supreme Court's involvement in pending cases.Analysis of case complexity and its impact on trial timelines.[00:22:56] Chapter 5: Challenges in the Mar-a-Lago Case Examination of challenges and delays in the Mar-a-Lago case.Analysis of trial judge's management and potential trial outcomes.[00:25:49] Chapter 6: Potential Trial Outcomes and Implications Discussion on potential trial outcomes and their implications.Overview of civil cases against Trump and their significance.

Joining Pam and Rich for this discussion are Professor Daniel Ho and RegLab Fellow Christie Lawrence, JD ’24 (MPP, Harvard Kennedy School of Government).Dan is the founding director of Stanford’s RegLab (Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab), which builds high-impact partnerships for data science and responsible AI in the public sector. The RegLab has an extensive track record partnering with government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Department of Labor, and Santa Clara County on prototyping and evaluating AI tools to make government more fair, efficient, and transparent. Building on this work, the RegLab also helps agencies strengthen AI governance and operationalize trustworthy AI principles.Christie, a third-year JD student, worked with RegLab and Stanford’s Innovation Clinic on projects to advise DOL on responsible AI and development practices and to support the work with Prof. Ho on the National AI Advisory Committee, which advises the White House on AI policy. In this interview, we’ll learn about several RegLab projects—and the importance of helping government develop smart AI policy and solutions.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Dan Ho >>> Stanford Law School web page[00:00:00] Chapter 1: Setting the StageMention of the rapid acceleration of technology and the release of ChatGPT.Highlighting the risks associated with AI, such as bias and privacy concerns.Discussion on the relationship between AI and governance, including recent developments in AI policy and governance.Mention of the Biden administration's executive order on AI and its implications.[00:03:04] Chapter 2: The Role of Reg Lab and Collaboration with the IRSExplanation of the Reg Lab and its purpose.Discussion on the need for government agencies to modernize their technology infrastructure.Overview of the collaboration with the IRS to improve tax evasion detection using machine learning.Discovery of disparities in auditing rates and subsequent IRS reforms.Highlighting the intersection of AI, social justice, and government practices.[00:09:12] Chapter 3: Student PerspectiveChristie Lawrence shares her experience working on AI policy at Stanford Law School.Discussion on bridging the gap between policy, law, and technology.Impactful work done by students in collaboration with government agencies.[00:11:38] Chapter 4: AI and Social JusticePam Karlan's experience with AI issues in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.Examples of algorithmic discrimination and its implications for social justice.Discussion on the challenges of addressing AI-related issues in government practices.[00:23:55] Chapter 5: Future DirectionsOptimism about the future of AI governance and the recent executive order's impact.Anticipation of legislative proposals and state-level initiatives in AI regulation.Importance of maintaining an open innovation ecosystem and addressing talent gaps in government agencies.[00:25:55] Chapter 6: Audience Questions 

Professor Easha Anand, co-director of the Stanford Law School Supreme Court Litigation Clinic, joins Professors Pam Karlan and Richard Thompson Ford, along with Gareth Fowler, JD '24, for a discussion about three cases that she argued before the Court this term, the people behind the case titles, and what it takes to represent them at the highest court in the land. Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Easha Anand >>> Stanford Law School Page(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction and Setting the StageEasha Anand shares the story of Mr. Ciavarini and the impact of the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic on restoring his reputation. Hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan introduce the episode and guests Professor Easha Anand and Gareth Fowler, discussing their work with the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.(00:01:52) Chapter 2: Joining the Clinic and the Clinic's Unique ApproachGareth Fowler describes his experience joining the Stanford Supreme Court Litigation Clinic and the process of working on cases as a student. Easha Anand explains the distinctive features of the clinic's model, emphasizing the significant role of students in producing legal work.(00:05:38) Chapter 3: Working on Cases and the Sarbanes-Oxley CaseGareth Fowler discusses the specific cases he worked on during his time at the clinic, including Mendez-Colleen and United States v. Jackson. Easha Anand recounts her experience arguing the case of Murray v. UBS before the Supreme Court and the significance of the outcome for whistleblower protection.(00:15:52) Chapter 4: Insights from Oral ArgumentsEasha Anand reflects on the differences between arguing cases at lower courts versus the Supreme Court, emphasizing the unique challenges and opportunities of Supreme Court advocacy.(00:18:16) Chapter 5: Clinic's Trip to D.C.Gareth Fowler shares his experience attending Supreme Court oral arguments in Washington, D.C., providing insights into the courtroom dynamics and the significance of the proceedings.(00:20:27) Chapter 6: Preparing for Future Cases and Impactful MomentsEasha Anand discusses the upcoming case of Chiavarini and the journey of preparing for oral arguments, highlighting the client's story and the clinic's commitment to justice. Pam Karlan and Easha Anand reflect on the profound impact of their work with clients and the meaningful experiences shared during their collaboration with the Stanford Supreme Court Clinic.[00:24:23] Chapter 7: Audience Question and Answer

Dive into the complex history of America's drug war with George Fisher, former Massachusetts Attorney General and acclaimed scholar of criminal law. In his latest book, "Beware Euphoria," Fisher explores the moral and racial dimensions of drug prohibition, challenging conventional narratives. Join the conversation on Stanford Legal as Fisher discusses the impact of racial justice movements on drug policy, including the legalization of cannabis, offering profound insights into a contentious issue shaping legal and social discourse.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:George Fisher >>> Stanford Law School PageBeware Euphoria: The Moral Roots and Racial Myths of America's War on Drugs(00:00:00) Chapter 1: The Origins of Drug Prohibition Podcast guest, George Fisher, traces the history of drug prohibition, highlighting the departure of cannabis use from medical preservation. He also discusses the 19th-century roots of drug prohibition, particularly the moral concerns driving the anti-drug laws.(00:11:42) Chapter 2: Racial Narratives and Mass IncarcerationRich Ford discusses the common narrative linking mass incarceration to the war on drugs and its alleged racial motivations. Fisher challenges this narrative, arguing that early drug laws were about protecting whites' moral purity rather than targeting people of color. The conversation explores the racial dynamics of early drug laws, emphasizing the racism of indifference rather than explicit targeting.(00:20:20) Chapter 3: Moral Valence of Mind-Altering Drugs Fisher delves into the historical moral perceptions of mind-altering drugs, tracing back to Early Christian notions of reason and morality.He explains why certain drugs, like opium and later marijuana, were seen as threats to moral character, while alcohol was treated differently due to its varied uses.(00:26:15) Chapter 4: Legalization of Marijuana and Racial Justice The conversation shifts to the legalization of marijuana, highlighting its historical bans and recent movements towards legalization. Concerns about the increasing potency of marijuana and its potential backlash are explored, suggesting a need for careful regulation and messaging.(00:30:19) Conclusion: Closing RemarksRich Ford wraps up the conversation with George Fisher discussing insights and emphasizing the importance of discussing the ongoing struggle with drugs and intoxicants.

Pam Karlan and labor law expert and former NLRB chair William Gould IV explore the quickly changing arena of college athletics including the push for student-athlete unionization, the debate over compensation, and other issues at the intersection of sports and academia. From the Dartmouth College men's basketball team's union election to the broader challenges facing university athletics, they discuss the complex issues shaping the law and the future of collegiate sports.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:William Gould IV >>> Stanford Law School PageRecent Q&A with Gould >>> Stanford's Bill Gould on the Dartmouth College Basketball  Union Vote (00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction to the Intersection of Sports and Labor LawPam Karlan introduces the topic of sports law and labor law, highlighting the recent developments in the field and the significance of the intersection between the two areas. Bill and Pam look at an overview of the Dartmouth College men's basketball team unionization case and its implications for the traditional understanding of student-athlete status.(00:02:03) Chapter 2: The Evolving Definition of Student-AthleteWilliam B. Gould IV delves into the historical context of the student-athlete designation, tracing its origins and evolution over time. He discusses the complexities of defining student-athletes within the framework of labor law and examines the factors that have contributed to the recent challenges to this classification.(00:06:49) Chapter 3: Labor Law Considerations in Collegiate AthleticsGould explores the key principles of labor law as they apply to collegiate athletics, emphasizing the factors that determine employee status and the obligations of universities as employers. The chapter addresses issues such as control over athletes, compensation, and the role of collective bargaining in shaping the future of collegiate sports.(00:10:00) Chapter 4: Implications for Intercollegiate SportsKarlan and Gould discuss the broader implications of the Dartmouth case and similar unionization efforts for intercollegiate sports as a whole. They examine the challenges posed by conference realignment, Title IX considerations, and the evolving landscape of athlete compensation, including name, image, and likeness rights.(00:14:23) Chapter 5: Legal and Policy PerspectivesThe conversation shifts to a discussion of the legal and policy considerations surrounding student-athlete rights and the role of the courts in shaping future outcomes. Gould offers insights into the potential impact of Supreme Court decisions and judicial attitudes towards higher education institutions and their treatment of athletes.(00:21:08) Chapter 6: Looking AheadIn the final chapter, Karlan and Gould reflect on the future of collegiate athletics in light of ongoing legal battles and shifting societal norms. They explore potential scenarios for reform and address lingering questions about the balance between academic and athletic pursuits, the role of unions in protecting athlete rights, and the broader implications for labor relations in the sports industry.

When does life begin? In this episode of Stanford Legal, co-hosts Rich Ford and Pam Karlan dig into the recent decision by the Alabama Supreme Court that has sent shockwaves through the fertility treatment community. The ruling, which considers frozen embryos as children under state law, has wide-ranging implications for in vitro fertilization (IVF) practices. Bioethics and law expert Hank Greely joins the discussion, providing insights into the background of the case, its legal implications, and the potential ramifications for IVF clinics and patients in Alabama—and throughout the country. The conversation highlights the intersection of law, medicine, and ethics, revealing the complex challenges surrounding embryo rights and reproductive freedoms.Connect:Episode Transcripts >>> Stanford Legal Podcast WebsiteStanford Legal Podcast >>> LinkedIn PageRich Ford >>>  Twitter/XPam Karlan >>> Stanford Law School PageStanford Law School >>> Twitter/XStanford  Law Magazine >>> Twitter/XLinks:Hank Greely >>> Stanford Law School Page | Twitter/X(00:00:00) Chapter 1: Introduction & The Alabama Supreme Court RulingHank Greely, discussing the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision regarding frozen embryos. He provides background on the Alabama Supreme Court decision and the implications for fertility treatment in the state along with explaining the legal basis of the ruling and the claims brought forth by the plaintiffs.(00:03:43) Chapter 2: Wrongful Death Act & Implications of the DecisionDiscussion on the Alabama Wrongful Death Act and its application to unborn children, including frozen embryos. Exploration of the broader implications of the decision, including ethical and legal concerns.(00:08:21) Chapter 3: Understanding Frozen EmbryosHank Greely explains the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and the concept of frozen embryos, including the harvesting of eggs and the reasons for freezing embryos.(00:14:05) Chapter 4: Legal and Ethical ConcernsAnalysis of the legal and ethical implications of the Alabama decision for IVF clinics and patients. Greely, Karlan, and Ford then discuss the political and legislative responses to the Alabama decision, including potential future actions(00:26:49) Chapter 5: Gender and Control Over ReproductionShow Notes: Discussion on the gender dynamics and control over reproduction highlighted by the Alabama Supreme Court ruling.(00:33:29) Chapter 6: Political Ramifications and PredictionsHank Greely offers his perspective on potential legislative responses and the broader implications for reproductive rights. From congressional bills to grassroots activism, we explore the evolving landscape of reproductive justice. They also explore the political ramifications and the future outlook for fertility treatment.