Podcast category: Legal News

Planet Lex: The Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Podcast

Law Enforcement and Implicit Bias

The increased media coverage of police shootings has coincided with the growing prominence of conversations about race and law enforcement. In this episode of Planet Lex, host Daniel Rodriguez speaks with Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Assistant Professor of Law Destiny Peery about implicit bias, tensions between the police and the communities they serve, and how perceptions of race impact the legal system.

Destiny Peery is an Assistant Professor of Law at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law. Her teaching and research interests focus on law and psychology perspectives on criminal law, discrimination law, the use of social science as evidence, and race and law.

ABA Journal: Modern Law Library

What can past presidential history teach us about today?

The law is not Dallas attorney Talmage Boston’s only love. “I have had a lifelong fascination with the presidency since I was 7 years old, and in recent years have become increasingly fascinated with it, given that so many of our top historians and non-fiction writers are devoting themselves to writing presidential biographies or studying the presidencies of different leaders over the years,” Boston says.

Boston made it his mission to conduct interviews with many of these well-known historians in front of live audiences, focusing the interviews on 20 historically significant presidencies. The edited transcripts of those interviews are compiled in his new book, “Cross-Examining History: A Lawyer Gets Answers from the Experts About Our Presidents.”

In honor of the 2016 election, Boston joins the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles for this episode of The Modern Law Library.  He talks about this labor of love, the importance of considering historical context when judging a president’s actions, and what past history may tell us about the future of the Trump administration.

Lawyer 2 Lawyer

The Use of Body Cameras by Law Enforcement

With a string of recent incidents involving shootings of civilians by police, the question remains as to whether our police officers should be equipped with body cameras to capture police pursuits. Some believe body cameras will improve police and civilian behavior, while others believe that body cameras will hinder a police officer’s privacy, health, and safety.

On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi join Professor Eugene O’Donnell from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Dr. Tod Burke, professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Radford University, as they talk about the pros and cons of body cameras in law enforcement. We will take a look at recent events, transparency and accountability, and the impact body cameras will have on policing.

Eugene O’Donnell is a professor from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Professor O’Donnell began his career as an NYPD officer, receiving 14 department awards for outstanding police service working in Brooklyn. After serving as a summer associate in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, EDNY, while in law school, he went on to become a prosecutor in the Queens District Attorney’s Office and the Brooklyn District Attorney’s Office where he investigated and prosecuted hundreds of cases. He is a nationally recognized expert on policing issues, including the use of force, and has been quoted in hundreds of media stories.

Dr. Tod Burke is a professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Radford University, out of Radford, Virginia. A former Maryland police officer, Dr. Burke’s research interests include school/campus violence, domestic violence, serial and mass murder, and issues in policing and forensic science. Dr. Burke is also the co-author of an introductory criminal justice text titled, Foundations of Criminal Justice (second edition).

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

Lawyer 2 Lawyer

The Electoral College, National Popular Vote, and the Presidential Election

The Electoral College has become somewhat of a controversial talking point when it comes to deciding the presidency. Some have praised the Electoral College citing its creation by our Founding Fathers, while others have produced legislation to abolish the Electoral College in its entirety, favoring electing our president though a national popular vote. On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host J. Craig Williams joins Trent England, director of the Save Our States project and Dr. John R. Koza, originator of the National Popular Vote legislation, as they discuss history of the Electoral College, Electoral College vs. national popular vote, and the great debate over the Electoral College, especially during this presidential election.

Trent England is vice president for strategic initiatives at the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, where he also is the David and Ann Brown Distinguished Fellow for the Advancement of Liberty and directs the Save Our States project. Save Our States is a project of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. Trent also hosts a radio program, The Trent England Show, from 7-9 a.m. every weekday on Oklahoma’s AM 1640, “The Eagle.”

Dr. John R. Koza is lead author of the book Every Vote Equal: A State-Based Plan for Electing the President by National Popular Vote and originator of the National Popular Vote legislation. National Popular Vote Inc. is a non-profit corporation whose specific purpose is to study, analyze and educate the public regarding its proposal to implement a nationwide popular election of the President of the United States. Back in 1966, John published a board game involving Electoral College strategy.

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

Lawyer 2 Lawyer

Gender Discrimination in the Workplace

Across the country, women have been filing class action lawsuits over a male-dominated culture and alleged gender discrimination within the walls of their law firms.

In this episode of  Lawyer 2 Lawyer, hosts J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi join David Sanford, chairman and co-founder of Sanford Heisler, LLP, attorney Kerrie Campbell, a partner in Chadbourne & Parke’s Litigation Department and Caroline Fredrickson, president of the American Constitution Society (ACS), to discuss litigation, the difficulty of proving gender discrimination, legislation, and what the future looks like for equality for women in the workplace.

Attorney David Sanford is chairman and co-founder of Sanford Heisler, LLP.  David was lead counsel representing approximately 7,000 female employees in Velez v. Novartis. After a seven-week trial, Mr. Sanford secured the largest employment verdict in United States history. David is currently representing attorney Kerrie Campbell in her gender discrimination class action lawsuit.

Attorney Kerrie Campbell is a partner in Chadbourne & Parke’s Litigation Department in its Washington, DC office. Over 27 years, Ms. Campbell has built a practice focused on all aspects of consumer product safety, risk management, regulatory compliance and related litigation, and on reputation protection, defamation, libel, product disparagement and First Amendment issues and litigation.  Attorney Campbell is currently involved in litigation against her law firm alleging gender discrimination.

Attorney Caroline Fredrickson is president of the American Constitution Society (ACS). Before joining ACS, Caroline served as the director of the ACLU’s Washington legislative office and as general counsel and legal director of NARAL Pro-Choice America. During the Clinton administration, she served as special assistant to the president for legislative affairs. Caroline is author of “Under the Bus: How Working Women Are Being Run Over” (The New Press, 2015).

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

Lawyer 2 Lawyer

The DEA, Schedule 1, and Marijuana


In a recent decision, the Drug Enforcement Administration ruled that marijuana will remain a Schedule 1 substance under the Controlled Substances Act. Substances in Schedule 1 are determined by the Food and Drug Administration to be drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.  

On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, host J. Craig Williams joins Paul Armentano, deputy director of NORML and Ben Cort, business development manager for the Center for Addiction Recovery and Rehabilitation (CeDAR), to discuss the recent decision by the DEA to keep marijuana on the Schedule 1 list. They will talk impact, the legalization of marijuana, manufacturing marijuana for scientific purposes, and what the future holds on this controversial topic.

Paul Armentano is deputy director of NORML, and the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, and a senior policy advisor at Freedom Leaf, Inc: The Marijuana Legalization Company. He is the co-author of the book “Marijuana is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink?” Paul was also the principal investigator for defense counsel in U.S. v Schweder, the first federal evidentiary since 1973 hearing to challenge the constitutionality of cannabis as a schedule I controlled substance.

Ben Cort is business development manager for the Center for Addiction Recovery and Rehabilitation (CeDAR), part of the University of Colorado Health system. Ben’s passion for recovery, prevention and harm reduction comes from his own struggle with substance abuse. Sober since 1996, Cort is also a junior fellow at the University of Florida’s Drug Policy Institute and serves on the boards of Project SAM (Smart Approaches to Marijuana) and the Stout Street Foundation.

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

Planet Lex: The Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Podcast

The Regulation of Public Corruption

In this episode of Planet Lex, host Daniel Rodriguez speaks with Northwestern Pritzker School of Law Harry R. Horrow Professor in International Law Juliet Sorensen about the pervasiveness and regulation of corruption. Juliet defines public corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain and discusses the challenges of working within the various parameters of both civil causes of action and criminal law to regulate said corruption. Certain forms of malfeasance, like bribery, have been traditionally governed by criminal law while other forms like patronage and nepotism have been grounds for civil actions under the First Amendment but have generally been found not to be either federal, state, or local crimes. Juliet highlights that in a functioning democracy the safeguard against public officials who the electorate disapproves of is voting them out of office. However, if corruption has pervaded a democracy to the extent that voting public officials out of office cannot be done in a free and fair way, then that is an impingement of human rights. She shares that many countries are unable or unwilling to regulate public corruption for a myriad of reasons, including limited resources and weak institutions, and that in some countries the culture of corruption is so pervasive that it becomes incredibly difficult to change. Juliet also analyzes the International Olympic Committee’s decision not to ban Russia from the Rio 2016 Olympic Games and discusses how the McLaren Investigation Report on doping in Russia illustrates abuses of all levels of public office but not necessarily for monetary gain. She closes the interview with an investigation of how the emergency reconstruction phase after major extreme weather events can facilitate corruption and how we can combat this. Finally, she considers the severity of public corruption, domestically or internationally, against other major issues of social policy or criminal law enforcement.

ABA Journal: Modern Law Library

A seismic shift in how the US wages war and what it means for the American public

What is war? Is it a state that is entirely distinct from peace? Has it changed over the years to become something else? In this episode of the Modern Law Library, Georgetown law professor Rosa Books shares the experiences she had in the U.S. government which led her to write her new book, “How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything: Tales from the Pentagon.”

Brooks discusses the post-9/11 changes that shifted the thinking of both the military and the legal community when it came to the laws of war, particularly drone warfare. The military has been the recipient of both more funds and weightier expectations, as it’s called upon to perform tasks which traditionally would have been the province of civilian government and the diplomatic corps. As a state of non-traditional warfare seems to have become a permanent fixture, does the traditional divide between civilian and military justice still make sense? And how can the American public hold the government accountable when an increasing amount of information about its workings is secret?

Lawyer 2 Lawyer

Law Enforcement and the Use of Robots

In July, a sniper, later identified as Micah Xavier Johnson, opened fire at a march against fatal police shootings, held in downtown Dallas, Texas, killing 5 police officers and wounding many others. After a 45 minute gun battle and hours of negotiation with the sniper, who was holed up in a parking garage, Dallas Police Chief David Brown gave an order to his SWAT team to come up with a plan to end the mayhem before more police officers were killed.  

This led to the use of as robot, the Remotec Androx Mark V A-1, manufactured by Northrup Grumman and a pound of C-4 explosive, which was sent in eventually killing the sniper.

Today on Lawyer 2 Lawyer, hosts J. Craig Williams and Bob Ambrogi  join attorney Edward Obayashi, deputy sheriff and legal advisor for the Plumas County Sheriff’s Office and Dr. Peter Asaro,  assistant professor and director of graduate programs for the School of Media Studies at the New School for Public Engagement, as they take a look at the recent tragedy in Dallas,  the use of robots by law enforcement, criticism, ethics, policy, and regulation when it comes to the use of robots.

Attorney Edward Obayashi is deputy sheriff and legal advisor for the Plumas County sheriff’s office and a licensed attorney in the State of California. Ed’s law office specializes in providing law enforcement legal services to California law enforcement agencies and he also serves as the legal advisor and a legal consultant for numerous law enforcement agencies in California. His duties include patrol, investigations, administration, training, and providing legal advice to department management and personnel.

Dr. Peter Asaro is a philosopher of science, technology, and media. Dr. Asaro is assistant professor and director of graduate programs for the School of Media Studies at the New School for Public Engagement in New York City. He is the co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control and has written on lethal robotics from the perspective of just war theory and human rights. Dr. Asaro’s research also examines agency and autonomy, liability and punishment, and privacy and surveillance as it applies to consumer robots, industrial automation, smart buildings, and autonomous vehicles.

Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

Page 4 of 26« First...23456...1020...Last »