24 Burst results for "Stanford Law School"
Public Health Officials Are Increasingly Facing Threats
"Threats for me and my family and harassing my daughters to the point where I have to get security is just I mean, it's amazing I wouldn't have imagined in my wildest dreams. That people who object to things that are pure public health principles are so set against it and don't like what you and I say it, namely in the word of science. That they actually threaten you. That's Dr Anthony Fauci, the nation's leading expert on infectious diseases, speaking to CNN's Sanjay Gupta, about threats he and his family have received because of his work. And Dr Fauci is not alone. Public health officials across the US are also receiving threats from people who are against the policies they put forth to combat the corona virus. Things like recommendations to wear masks and practice social distancing. Michelle Mellow is a professor of law and a professor of medicine at Stanford, and she's been researching this exact topic. Michelle, Welcome to the show. Happy to be here. Shall you wrote an article about the attacks on public health officials during covert 19. What was it that prompted you to even look into this? Well, it happens that one of my bosses that Stanford is married to our Santa Clara County local health officer here in the Bay Area, So I do have a personal connection to somebody who's experienced these kind of attacks. Tell us a little bit about what kinds of attacks were talking about. All across the country. We've really seen a number of things that made your audience seem pretty shocking and are unusual even in the American context we have seen, you know the usual Internet trawling, but the attacks have taken on a highly personal and almost violent dimension. Across the country. We've seen health officer subject to dock, saying the exposure of their personal information like their addresses or loved ones, names on the Internet. Angry and sometimes armed protestors showing up at their private residences, vandalism of their offices and homes, lots of harassing telephone calls and even death threats to the point of having to have private security details assigned to their families. Michelle, one of the things that prompted me. I'd saw the research here and then saw that Dr Anthony Fauci has needed to get his own extra private security because I believed his family had been threatened. Are we primarily talking about high profile figures like that, Or are we talking about? Anyone who's sort of on the front lines dealing with Corona virus cases. In particular, we're talking about people who ordinarily are about his low profile. As you can get local public health is thean visible angel that keeps us all healthy. But most of us until this pandemic you never heard of or seen our local health officer. They have been in the news lately on television and newspaper a lot, so they're no longer such private figures. But these are not high profile figures. They're not national figures. In most cases, they're not. They don't have a political agenda. There are doctors trying to do their jobs. Who are making these threats. Well, it comes from a variety of quarters. Ah, leader in Catalyst in this movement has been the anti vaccination movement here in the U. S. That has all of a sudden pivoted from their usual agenda of attacking public figures who advocate vaccination to going after health officers who are advocating masking and the extension of state home or business closure orders, But it's not on ly these groups. They've been joined by thousands of people across the country who are just really disgruntled and incredibly stressed. By the long term economic impact and social isolation that has stemmed from public health orders during the pandemic. Medical professionals are take a Hippocratic oath to serve whoever it is that needs their help. So like this, this feels like doctors and nurses didn't necessarily sign up to be. In such a political battle, You know, it's interesting the politicization of first responders because those on the front lines were actually caring for covert patients have been politicized as heroes in this pandemic. But the same groups of individuals, doctors and nurses who are working in the public health sector have been demonised as villains. They're all working toward the same goals, and we need to understand that, although they execute their objectives in different ways, they're all working towards a single and so are we. So it's really striking to me that there's been this polarization and how folks have viewed First responders and public health doctor's Michelle. Stick with us. We'll be back in a moment. This is the take away. On the next. All of it, looking for a job thinking about switching to a new one will discuss how to navigate the remote workforce in our series, the future of work, and we meet the director of the new documentary Boy State, which goes inside the weeklong mock government exercise that gathers more than 1000 high schoolers to create their own state government. I'm Alison Stewart. Join me for all of it weekdays at noon. We're back and you're listening to the takeaway. I'm tansy. No Vega. Michelle Mellow is on the line with me. She's a professor of law and a professor of medicine at Stanford, and we're talking about recent threats against public health officials all around the country. Michelle. Have we heard anything from the Trump Administration or other politicians at any level of government about this? Because recently in New Jersey, there was a federal judge whose family was attacked. Now there are talks of increasing protections for federal judges. And I'm wondering if this is now transferring over to medical professionals and health professionals. Well, yet we have to distinguish between medical professionals who are on the frontline response like the ones who are working in hospitals and the ones I'm talking about. Are those were working in public health departments. I'm not aware of specific problems involving the folks who are working in hospitals other than nobody wants to stand next to them at the grocery store. But the public health officials really have had to have protection stepped up. Unfortunately, most of our elected officials to the extent that they're speaking to this issue at all have been joining in the attacks. You know, there are folks who are making their name for themselves politically. By joining in the chorus of attacks against public health officials. In some cases, their own public health officers, you know, saying things like their anti Democratic their tyrannical when in reality, those same health officers are the only people in that state who can issue these orders. They're executing. Planning done by other elected officials, who then sort of hide behind this rhetoric, So it really is, in my view, despicable that instead of offering support to these hardworking, underpaid under attack health officers State and local officials. And in some cases, congressmen and the president have joined in the attacks, and the president himself has been the foam enter and chief here Retweeting such statements as everyone is lying. The CDC media Democrats are doctors, everyone we're told to trust That kind of statement fans the flames. Michelle did your research show whether or not there was a difference in health officers who are in red states versus blue states or our folks that work in these positions across the board, subject to this type of harassment. You know, we really have seen it in all kinds of communities. Certainly there is a red and blue divide in willingness to accept public health measures like masking and to the extent that you're leading a community that's more red than blue. You might have a larger segment of the population going after you. But some of the people who have been under attack are in heavily blue communities were actually most of the population really supports what they're doing. Polling is very much in their favor. But there is a vocal extreme of vocal minority that is dominating attention. Is there anything that public health officials Khun do to protect themselves? You know, to protect themselves. Many of them do need security details, and they need elected officials to stand up and indicate that when these actions crossed the line into illegal forms of harassment, they'll be subject to prosecution in terms of self defense strategies. You know, I think it may be late in the game for this, but there are some things that I think We know help to cultivate public trust and buy in to coerce of public health legal measures. Polling shows us that when people feel that they have a say in public health policy agendas when quote unquote people like me can influence agendas in public health policy, they're more likely to accept laws, even the ones that they don't love. So I think there are opportunities for some health officers to double down on the transparency and candor in their public communications. We do have examples of where this has been done Extraordinary. Well. I think it helps to humanize health officers to telegraph that they're really struggling with these decisions. They don't take them lightly, and also that they have the support of consultation of a number of other people. Well, they're not acting alone and imposing these orders. Do you know of any health officers who have decided to leave? Ah, the job as a result of this because it doesn't feel like you know, the virus is not going away. Assume as many of us would have liked, and people are going to have to make policies and an implement policies until we've got some clarity on where what the next phase of this is so have folks that you know, decided to leave their jobs as a result. Absolutely. I think the count is up near 30. Now, health officers who have either resigned or been forced out by their elected officials since the start of the disease pandemic because of the politicization of their orders. And that includes Oxiris Barbeau, who was the New York City health commissioner. It includes Nicole Quick, the health commissioner of Orange County are most affected County in California. In terms of covert cases it includes West Virginia health officer for the state had the slam so lots of folks who are dealing very, very difficult situation simply, it's just not reasonable to expect them to go on month after month. In this kind of climate, especially when they're not getting any support from other officials mentioned Oxygen's Barbeau and I know that was a big issue here in New York, particularly because she clashed with Mayor Bill de Blasio. Are we seeing a lot of that? A CZ? Well, just internally among Officers and public health officials, and also just, you know, the other officials that they're dealing with. It feels like I don't know if that was very specific to New York City politics or if that's also happening across the board. I think that is happening in a lot of communities. Yes, where you have a schism between elected branches of government that represent communities that have a particular ideological bent and help officers who have been serving you know for many, many administrations many many years and you are You're acting on the science a TTE this point of the pandemic. People are fed up with the science. They want a balance of between health concerns and economic and other concerns. And again. Some health officers have been very good at explaining how public health orders balanced. Those concerns and others who are maybe less transparent, really have been confronted by a lot of attacks from Ah, elsewhere in government. But, you know, responding to local political pressures themselves you mentioned earlier. We we are having to differentiate between threatening health officers and health officials and making and threatening frontline workers like doctors and nurses. But Our doctors and nurses subject to any type of politicization and threats right now, because of the role that they what they could possibly represent, or have they gotten off Have they sort of not been in the cross hairs? If you will. You know, I'm not aware of those kinds of attacks. I think it's more just that What we hear from them is the difficulty that they have in their personal lives Because people know they work with sick people. They don't want to be around him. They don't want to be around their kids. So it's the usual story in any pandemic, where You're the child of somebody who's working with an affected patient. Nobody wants their kid in school with you. I think that causes some difficulties for them, but it's a different quality and caliber of attack than what we've been talking about with public health officers. Michelle Mellow is a professor of law at Stanford Law School and a professor of medicine at Stanford University. School of Medicine. Michelle. Thanks so much, Thank you.
Leadership During Difficult Times
"Guest on this episode of the strategic is Keith Hennessy. These days he teaches at the Stanford Graduate School of Business Stanford Law School and his leadership fellow at the Bush Institute where he's teaching our leadership program sessions during the Bush administration. Though Keith was the assistant to the president for economic policy was the director of the National Economic Council during the financial crisis in two thousand seven and two thousand eight so those days Keith was working around the clock to blunt the impact of that financial crisis on on our economy. So we thought it'd be interesting today to hear about that experience while we're reacting to the cove in nineteen pandemic. That's happening right now. Keith thank you so much for taking time while your social distancing to call in happy to help hello from Palo Alto California. Well first off. Can you paint a picture of what it's like to be a decision maker in government during a time like this because I know right now? I'm watching the news. And there's just a constant stream of information things are changing by the minute and some of it is is fact some of it is conjecture. Some of it is somewhere in between. What's that stream of information like inside the White House and in our government? Yeah well an advantage. You have when you're working in the White House is that you get you. Get the best information that's out there. I always joke that one of the wonderful privileges. You can pick up the phone call pretty much anyone in the world and say. I need to help the president understand about your area of expertise. Can you spend some time with me? The person will always say yes. And then you have. You have a tremendous Roster of experts working in the government and then also outside of government Who can help feed you information? So the information tends to find you and if it doesn't you've you've got a team of talented people who can go find out The best available answer to any question. That's out there but there definitely is sort of a fog of war we're You think you know what's going on and you probably have a better picture than almost anyone else But there are a lot of unknowns. There are a lot of things that You know that you're just making educated guesses at so that's tough in hindsight This is one of the big mistakes. In terms of historic analysis is in hindsight. It is very easy to forget the things that now seem obvious. But we're not obvious time You know the biggest mistake about hindsight announces at the time. You didn't know what was going to happen next. And while you thought you knew what your actions and decisions might Might produce you're not always certain And then the other thing is is stressful And so you learn how individuals react to stressful environments and then you learn how teams React to stressful environments and you know I think it also depends on how long the crisis Lassen how long the pressure is applied. It's one thing to be in a stressful situation for days and weeks. It's a whole another thing to be in it for weeks and months and wears on people and In overtime that takes a toll because the people who are making these decisions are after all humans right. That's actually kind of interesting. And and so how? How do you keep team functioning under these kind of in under this kind of situation? And where might we might be doing this for a long time? Yeah I'm not sure I have many tricks. We were in in one respect. We were fortunate in that the the financial crisis in two thousand eight hit in year eight. So of the Bush team We knew how to operate as a team. We knew how the mechanisms of governments worked on a lot of US had four or five or six or seven years under our belts working for this president working with each other So we had those advantages of experience and know each other and frankly had a really good team In that last year With with Hank Paulson sort of as the the field. General for the president with Ben Bernanke over at the Fed and Kevin Warsh And with a lot of amazing people internally and so that teen Kinda you know it means that you don't have to worry about those aspects of it. You can just focus on the crisis of hand. So we had a bunch of pros. We had a bunch of pros. Who knew how to work together. And then you know you just you kind of say look. There will be time to sleep and time to rest on the back end of this. We're just going to keep pushing basically because we have to. I think the other thing is the morale is really important and and Bush thing. We were really fortunate because the morale comes in large part from the president You know the morale and the tone I always say that the tone in the White House is eighty percent set by the president and twenty percent by the White House Chief of staff and we had a president and a chief of staff who were creating a tone and environment where the rest of us didn't have to worry about the politics We could basically just focus on. What was the? What was the best policy? And how do we try to make it happen? So then you mentioned the that you knew how the government works and the government with all of its departments and with experts who sometimes have competing priorities. So in general strokes. Can you talk about how to how these departments all work together and coordinate during a crisis like this? Well that's what the White House policy councils are for. At the time we had four of them there are now three In the White House of the National Security Council is the granddaddy of them all And the National Economic Council in the Domestic Policy Councils And I worked in a on the National Economic Council staff so these are people who work in the White House for the president and Their job is to coordinate policy making in their in their area for the All the information that comes in for the president goes through the Policy Council to sort of structure. It make sure the presence president knows what's going on and what that best information is and in particular because the president has got a lot of advisers each of whom is responsible for looking at a part of the problem and the Policy Council Stash. Job is to make sure that the president has the information that they need to look at the whole problem. And so when you run one of these Policy cancels you get very good at running meetings and conference calls to pull all the advisers together To to compare information to figure out what decisions the president to make and then to make sure that the president hears from all of you know his advisors that he needs to we. We would joke that. Our job was to set up clean fights cleaner where you'd have conflicting advice. The you know one team advisors would set a precedent you do X. And other advisers would say the president should do why you. WanNa make sure the president gets the information. He needs so that he can make that decision and then when he makes the decision that everybody throughout the executive branch actually executes. Does what the president wants to do right so you would actually present. Exxon wide both team ex ante y presented the president. Let him make that decision. Yeah and I shouldn't describe as really two teams that a mismatch speak mistaken. Are My these are. These are different advisors who were all part of the president skiing. But right right right just disagree on a particular question and You know these. These decisions are hard. None of the options are particularly good. Because you're always over constrained But there are just different. Trade offs different choices that the advisers would make. And what you WANNA do. Is You want to hear the president. Have the president here. Those arguments be able to push the advisers. And then say okay. Here's what we're going to do You know the privilege of working for the president. Is You get to be in the room to make the argument or the option that you think you should make. And then when he hasn't sides it you've got to go out there and execute even if he went with The other option one that you didn't recommend be interesting thing about the financial crisis is that there were a lot fewer disagreements about what to do among
A Check-Up On California's Efforts To Combat Climate Change
"You A checkup now. On attempts to address Climate Change California is the fifth largest economy in the world. And it has some of the most aggressive climate policies in the country. It passed landmark law. Fourteen years ago to slash greenhouse gas emissions is also one of the first states to set a goal of going completely carbon neutral for many. California has been held up as a model but is it. Npr's Hannah Haeggman joins us now to take a closer look. Hi Hannah Halo all right. Let's tick through a couple of things look at energy. How is California doing so? The big emission cuts. We've seen there so far. Those have mostly come from getting off coal from two thousand four to two thousand. Six Cole was about twenty percent of the total electricity mix and in two thousand eighteen. It was only a little more than three percent. That's good yup. And that happened for a couple of reasons. California committed to this huge goal of getting greenhouse gas emissions below nineteen ninety levels. There was support from the Obama administration and wind and solar prices came way down. So because of all that Danny Colon word a researcher at Stanford Law School told me that. There's a clearer path to decarbonising electricity versus other industries. The technologies that cut the emissions are things we have and we know how to work with. That's installing solar plants. That's installing wind plants. That's putting battery energy storage systems and we have the right policies in tools to get it done and that's less true in some of the other sectors so energy good but he's mentioning these other sectors and I'm assuming one of those is transportation I'm thinking of electric cars. I Know California's done a lot. What's going on there? Actually over the last years vehicle emissions have inched up up. Yeah and that's because the number of people super commuting up to ninety minutes each way that's increase that's one part of the equation and another thing to a record number of Californians have cars about eighty out of every hundred all right. You mentioned commuting this week. It's all about telecommuting. People try to slow the spread of the corona virus. Yeah that's true and we don't know how long this will last but there's other issues at hand. I talked with Daniel sperling. He's a member of the California Air Resources Board about this thing. He called the Amazon prime effect What is that wanting more things delivered fast that means lots of trips from warehouses to neighborhoods and at the end of the day? That's meant an uptick in truck emissions. Which are the worst for the environment? So what about just putting people closer to work so that they don't have to supercomuter. Yeah that's easier said than done. And lawmakers have tried to address that by putting through various policies to build housing closer to city centers. They haven't been successful so far. Though there's also the question of people even really want to live in high rises and cities even if it does mean shorter commutes so kind of back to where we started Lou. The state is really pushing for people to buy more electric vehicles. Here's sperling we're kind of on the path. We just need to add a lot more urgency and move faster so California. Has this goal of getting five million zero emission vehicles on the road and ten years and in October of last year? There are about six hundred fifty five thousand of these cars on the road. Sperling has there are some state level incentives but there needs to be more to get more people to buy vs. Last thing is thirty to be a lot more charging infrastructure But if you put all these incentives in is that really enough to widely motivate Californians to buy vs yet Gets at the heart of the challenge. I talked to Havi Air Casinos. He's a native Californian and he commutes from Whittier California to Santa Ana about an hour and a half each way he drives a Honda. Civic that runs on natural gas he bought it a couple years ago to try and reduces impact but now the card doesn't meet the State's Clean Car Standards. He wants to buy a newer EV. But it's still too much for him at this point and he feels like people like him are being left behind Latinos and people of Color. We're the guys that drive all the way from east. La Too West La and we're not getting any love in terms of getting support to get in these cars so this is really about the environment which it's supposed to be about. Then why are you ostracizing your big majority of people that are on the road more than anyone else? So what's your big takeaway here when you look at? How a state like California? Which really has made this front and center is struggling so much. I mean with a state like California. They put up a lot of money to try and make these things happen at the same time. There's been a real slowdown a federal effort so now California's making progress to meet goals. But it might be going too slow that's NPR's Hannah Haeggman. Thank you so
"stanford law school" Discussed on Recode Decode
"Is there another way to do this without you? Know this idea of focusing on the exit. Yeah so I mean in the paper. We talk about a variety of carrots and sticks. I think you could make IPO and make being public easier than you currently do Relieving Regulation relieving some of the regulation. I think you could find other non-public ways to get the venture capital and the and the employees paid so if we find a way to people invest in private that more people invest in private companies. Create an open up secondary markets. We've seen some moves in that direction. But I think we could do more to try to say hey cashing out as a venture capital doesn't have to mean we're ending the company if we don't hit the billion dollar IPO. It could mean now. A new group of investors comes in. Maybe now it's a bank who is willing to loan money. Maybe it's a private equity group. That does later. Stage infusions of capital the early investors get paid and the company continues to operate as a As a going entity. What is the best reason for going online? I mean I think the best reason for going public is you want to keep operating and you need the money right and and you WanNa make create a liquid opportunity for your employees right. Yeah I think with employed exactly and I think in with employees. It's always a tough choice because you want those employees to get paid Right they've often been taking sub market wages and taking stock options the more successful your IPO is the tougher retention issue. You have right. Yeah and so I mean. I'm not sure I think if you didn't if you didn't need the money and you were just making a profit. I'm not sure company would go public except that there are a bunch of people who are rolling stock options. That aren't currently worth anything until they got them. All right we're here. With Mark Linley from Stanford Law School. He wrote a CO authored. A paper called exit strategy about By focusing on the exit and the acquisition startups and venture capital or suffocating innovation the issue. We'll get to that. We're going to talk a little bit more about the acquisition of small companies by larger companies. When.
Legal scholar says Trump's actions are "abuse of his office"
"In Washington legal scholars made their case for impeachment of president trump Linda can Yanis covering the next phase of the house investigation the house Judiciary Committee has taken over armed with the house intelligence committees three hundred page report from its hearings and ready to determine if president trump's pattern of behavior warrants impeachment president trump welcomes foreign interference in the two thousand sixteen election he demanded and for the two thousand twenty election ranking Republican Doug Collins calls the impeachment process a sham it just don't like the guy the hearing called for constitutional scholars to the witness table one of them was professor Pamela Carlin was Stanford Law School who reflected on the founders of the constitution the very idea that a president might seek the aid of a foreign government in his reelection campaign would have horrified them professor Michael Gerhard with the university of North Carolina school of law told the committee that is exactly why impeachment was invented if what we're talking about is not impeachable than nothing is a peach Republican dog collar aides insisted the president broke no law in some way in saying you wait a lot lot with a lot of people listening did the founding fathers would have found president trump guilty is just simply malpractice Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman strongly disagreed if we cannot impeach a president who abuses his office for personal advantage we no longer live in a democracy and he said the president's abuse of power cannot be allowed to go unchecked then you're sending a message to this president and to future presidents that it's no longer a problem if they abuse their power it's no longer a problem if they invite other countries to interfere in our elections professor Jonathan Turley with George Washington University law school urge the committee to slow down I'm concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence an abundance of anger Turley added he believes Congress also is being too hasty when it comes to the issue of obstruction that's the problem when you move towards impeachment on this abbreviated schedule that has not been explained to me why you want to set the record for the fastest impeachment Republican Jim Jordan a staunch trump supporter took that statement even further such a fast impeachment it's a predetermined impeachment but professor Carlin said arguing against the process doesn't negate the severity of the president's actions a president should resist far an inter interference in our elections not demand it and not welcome it it is up to the house Judiciary Committee to decide whether to draft articles of impeachment and if it does so to send those articles to the full house for a vote well the committee malls that over professor Turley reiterated caution is in order it's not that you can't do this just can't do it this way Linda Kenya
Trump impeachment probe enters new phase
"Sure you are aware we are now in a new phase of the house impeachment process with the scene setting hearing held by the house Judiciary Committee when the Kenyan wraps it up for us Michael a tester hearing marks the start of the next phase in the impeachment process the house Judiciary Committee has taken over armed with the house intelligence committee three hundred page report from its hearings and ready to determine if president trump's pattern of behavior warrants impeachment president trump welcome foreign interference in the two thousand sixteen election he demanded in for the two thousand twenty action ranking Republican Doug Collins calls the impeachment process a sham just the hearing called for constitutional scholars to the witness table one of them was professor Pamela Carlin with Stanford Law School who reflected on the founders of the constitution idea that a president might seek the aid of a foreign government in his reelection campaign would have horrified them professor Michael Gerhard with the university of North Carolina school of law told the committee that is exactly why impeachment was invented if what we're talking about is not impeachable then nothing is professor Jonathan Turley was George Washington University law school urge the committee to slow down I'm concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence an abundance of anger truly added he believes Congress also is being too hasty when it comes to the issue of obstruction that's the problem when you move towards impeachment on this abbreviated schedule that has not been explained to me why you want to set the record for the fastest impeachment Republican Jim Jordan a staunch trump supporter took that statement even further fast impeachment it's a predetermined impeachment but professor Carlin said arguing against the process doesn't negate the severity of the president's actions a president should resist far an inter interference in our elections not demand it and not welcome it it is up to the house Judiciary Committee to decide whether to draft articles of impeachment and if it does so to send those articles to the full house for a
"stanford law school" Discussed on WRVA
"Dropped on the day's impeachment hearing to feature testimony from constitutional law scholars has judiciary chair Jerry Nadler gave his opening statement of facts before us are undisputed on July twenty fifth president trump called the president's Lynskey of Ukraine and then president trump's words ask him for a favor that call was part of a concerted effort by the president and his men to solicit a personal advantage in the next election Doug Collins in Georgia gave the Republican statement and said this impeachment enquiries about Democrats on going political vendetta tell me this is about new evidence in new things and new stuff we may have a new hearing room we may have new mines we may have chairs are comfortable but this is nothing new folks a motion was attempted to postpone the testimony from Republican Kelley Armstrong from South Dakota however the decision to do that was denied overwhelmingly Armstrong tried unsuccessfully to get that motion passes the first person was testifying during the hearing the vote didn't happen until after the first witness gave his opening statement the committee hearing from Harvard law professor Noah Feldman and Pamela Carlin a law professor from Stanford Law School president trump point in on a video where Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau appear to be mocking him to other world leaders A. B. C.'s Karen traverses in London with the latest president trump criticized and complimented Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau in the same breath after he was asked to respond to the video where Trudeau appears to criticize how long Mr trump spoke to reporters yesterday during his meetings with world leaders well it's too fast and honestly with the nice guy I find to be a very nice guy the president went on to say Trudeau is not happy that he's pushed him to increase his defense spending an issue Mr trump has been pushing for three years at these NATO meetings Karen Travers ABC news traveling with the president in London Chillin supervisors have voted unanimously to pass a resolution protecting the second amendment it joins a growing list of counties across the state to declare itself a second amendment sanctuary that includes all we said Dinwiddie and King William there's been a lot of background checks on gun purchases this year A. B. C.'s dairy all bigger has details number of background checks on gun purchases in the US this year is climbing toward a record high by the end of November there were more than twenty five point four million checks conducted by the FBI the firearms industry sees that as a strong indicator of gun sales thing it means people rush Xing to buy weapons in reaction to calls by democratic presidential candidates for tighter restrictions on gun purchases Terry Alden or ABC news the bishop of the Roman Catholic diocese a buffalo is resigned following widespread criticism over how he handled allegations of clergy sexual misconduct pope Francis says accepted bishop Richard Malone sit resignation and name the bishop of Albany New York to run the buffalo diocese temporarily until a permanent replacement is found U. S. companies added just sixty seven thousand jobs in November a private survey found barely half the gain of the previous month payroll processor eighty P. says that manufactures construction firms and mining companies cut eighteen thousand dollars come our eighteen thousand jobs rather combined checking your money the Dow is up to hundred three the S. and P..
"stanford law school" Discussed on KCBS All News
"Embarrassment of riches with candidates, which I love. So I want to hear a little bit from all of them in San Francisco. Doug, sovereign KCBS. San Francisco's health commission has unanimously passed a resolution declaring incarceration is a public health issue. KCBS Margie Schaefer reports underserved populations are disproportionately represented in a downward spiral, the recognition of incarceration as a public health issue is being acknowledged by the director of the three strikes and Justice advocacy projects at Stanford law school, Michael Romano, very relieved that city is recognizing that and moving towards model of rehabilitation and not just incarceration in punitive measures many get caught in a downward spiral, especially those who are homeless. And have substance abuse disorders or mental illness. Then people are released from prison and jail. They become homeless to commit more crimes to go back to jail and a cycle. Keep yourself and people get more and more sick and ultimately harm our community. Those between the ages of eighteen and twenty five and African Americans are disproportionately represented in San Francisco's county jail. Declaration will commit the department of public health to develop a plan to prevent incarceration Margie Schaefer KCBS coming up on KCBS some second graders in the north bay were able to access porn on their school. Ipads, the mom who caught it wants to make sure it doesn't happen. Again. KCBS news time is two fifteen..
"stanford law school" Discussed on WINT 1330 AM
"Okay. Did you know that that rain Quist actually asked Sandra Day O'Connor to marry him? No. This story is wonderful. And it's come out of the book. I the biography of Sandra Day O'Connor by author. Evan Thomas and a letter from Rehnquist to then Sandra Day asking him to marry her. It read quote to be specific sandy will you marry me this summer he wrote that nine hundred and fifty two and then Sandra Day who was dating a man named John O'Connor that you would go on to marry declined. The proposal though, wasn't just out of the blue. They had dated for a time when they were both at Stanford law school, so how cool would that have been if Sandra Day O'Connor and William Rehnquist had actually gotten. Married, and we would have had married supreme court justices. I would love to know what you know, made her refused his offer while she was dating somebody else more seriously. And apparently she was a hot tomato because she had a couple of guys chasing after her. Wow. Who knew she was a hot tomato. Well, he he apparently. She was not just the good editor at the law review. But she was also hot tomato. Hey, no. I mentioned the aftermath the in, you know, candy just a moment ago. I just want to let you know, because I know you, well, I mean, my money means I know you are fat kid. I call you what they call you again. I had shop in the husky section. They don't have it sectioned anymore. But it makes me giggle to year it, and they.
O'Connor, Rehnquist And A Supreme Marriage Proposal
"Showed a future chief Justice of the supreme court once proposed marriage to the first woman who would sit on the high court correspondent, John stolas has more biographer Evan Thomas told NPR's morning edition that he found a letter that was written by future supreme court chief Justice William Rehnquist to Sandra Day O'Connor who would later become the first woman on the court Thomas said he found the letter while doing research for his upcoming book on O'Connor called first rank west and O'Connor dated while both were students at Stanford law school in the early nineteen fifties they broke up but remained friends. But during their courtship Thomas said the letter from rank west read to be specific sandy will you marry me this summer, she said, no as she was also dating another student. John O'Connor who she would later Mary in nineteen fifty two.
"stanford law school" Discussed on Forever35
"Wellesley college and Stanford law school, no big deal and a former writer for the beloved website, the toast. She's the author of the wedding date, which nylon called effervescent witty and sexy, which is and her new book. The proposal comes out Tober thirtieth. Now Roxane gay said about the proposal. There's so much to relate to and throughout the novel. There is a sharp feminist edge loved this one and you will too and BuzzFeed BuzzFeed, BuzzFeed said with sharp banter, a well rounded cast of characters and plenty of SUNY scenes jasmine gillary defends her position as one of the most exciting rom com writers out there. Woo. Yeah. I mean, those are two very exciting reviews. So I will say that when I saw rushing gay say that about the book, I was in the backseat of a friend's car. A friend of mine texted that to me, and like I screamed so loudly, my friend almost got in a car. So next I'm going to try to do that. If I. Those are a amazing reviews, but I can say as someone who's currently reading the proposal that it lives up to the hype. Oh, yeah. Oh, well, thank you so much, and we're thrilled to have you back. And we wanted to just kind of check in with you. But then also just bring you on board to answer. Some of our listener questions. I'm delighted to do though. So jasmine you're on day three hundred and what of your yoga challenge. I believe I night was three hundred forty nine. Okay. Almost a year almost. And when we first talked you think you were in like the the fifties. Yeah. Somewhere in the fifty s what is made you keep going with this practice of doing yoga in your home every day. You know, a few things that kept me going like I started doing it just sort of on a win like I had just gotten back from chip to New York. And in New York, I find that. I like exercise a lot more than I do at home. A lot less sedentary. And I was thinking, you know, I need to try to keep this up. Maybe I'll try to do yoga today. And then it was like, maybe I'll try geogra- for the next thirty days. And then I did, and I just kept going so few think like it has been really good for daily habit. I mean, a usually sometimes they do it in the morning and at night, but I almost always do that night before bed, and it really just sort of like gets me ready to go to bed. But also, the the thing that I noticed about it was, and I, you know, in that way that we beat ourselves up for like even good things. I've been thinking like, you know, I really only do like twenty to thirty minutes a day. This is not such a big deal. Other people do so much more. But I have really noticed like my whole body feels better which I mean because last year I was I went to in June of last year before I started doing yoga every day. I went to my college, reunion and just walking around campus. Like, you know, I have like as we all are getting old, right? Certain parts of your body hurt. So like, my back was hurting walking up. The stairs. My hip was hurting. Like there was a time. When my friends were all hanging out, and I had to go back and sit down in my room because my back her so much, and then I was back there this June. And I felt fine. Like, I was not taking ibuprofen constantly, my back did not her a, you know, the the beds were not comfortable to sleep on. But like my whole body just feels better which I didn't even realize until I went back in June. And was like, oh, wow. This really has made a difference to me, and I didn't expect that at all. Like that's not why started. But that's definitely why I've kept going. That's amazing. I'm jealous. I'm kind of jealous. Hurts amazing that you had that comparison because I do think it is so hard to see the progress in the changes day by day or even week by week. But for you to be able to say, oh, I felt so much different at this time previously, you know, in this place than I do now is like is very very inspiring..
Who owns genetic testing results?
"This marketplace podcast is brought to you by wasabi hot cloud storage. If your company is thinking about moving data storage to the cloud, then you have to think about with Sabi. It's less expensive than just the maintenance on your current on premises storage. See yourself with unlimited storage for a month. Go to a dot com. Click free trial and use the offer code was ambi-. Genetic testing is popular and potentially has lots of benefits, but who owns the results from American public media? This is marketplace tech demystifying. The digital economy I'm Ali, would. DNA and genetic testing are big business, but there are real questions about privacy and about what happens to your genetic information after you get tested recently, the DNA testing company. Twenty-three in me, partnered with pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to develop personalized drugs and research treatment for diseases like lupus and Parkinson's. Jen king is director of consumer privacy at the center for internet and society at Stanford law school. Her research finds that surprisingly, most people who take DNA tests, don't think the data is all that personal. Most of them felt that their genetic data while it was personal at the same time, it didn't reveal who they really were versus one of the things in my study I looked at was search queries. So when people type a search term into Google, for example, did they consider that more personal than genetic data? In some cases they did because it really revealed something more about what. Made them tick what they were concerned about, what they thought about what they care about. Whereas genetic did. It doesn't tell you anything about that, but then you get to, you know, the news that twenty three and me is partnering with a pharmaceutical company to develop drugs based on DNA data that they got from twenty three and me. Do you think that changes the calculation for people? I think it can because one of the things I discovered is while people were motivated by the idea that their data could be doing good. That often wasn't very critical. People hadn't spent time to really dig into what that meant. And so while there's probably an assumption that, well, you know, great. I'm going to help make a drug that could help a disease. I know nothing about and maybe I'll benefit because I have that disease. No one, at least of the people I talked to really sat down thought about, well, wait a second. The company isn't obligated to give that drug away for free. They can charge as much as they want for it. So there was the sense of helping the public, but it wasn't very critical. Really wasn't carefully thought through just exactly how that might happen. It was more of a check the box going, hey, I can do something good. This is a little Sifi I know as we are also exploring gene editing. Is there an argument that we should start to consider patenting gene profiles? You know, should we started having like an ownership conversation about our most basic identity? That's really interesting question. If you look at the customer agreements of these different online genetic testing companies, it's kind of a big open question as to who owns your data and the agreements today, I think are pretty clear that at least with twenty three and me that once they do something with that data, in this case partner with a pharmaceutical company and develop a drug on its basis, you sign an agreement saying you have no rights to it, or you have no property interest in the outcome of its. You can't go to them later and say, hey, you need to compensate me for this blockbuster drug that you developed using my data. That's Jen king of Stanford center for internet and society. Another fun tidbit. New research in the journal science says, you could be identified even if you haven't taken a genetic test. Just by tracing the DNA of distant relatives back to you using social media and other online data about sixty percent of Americans of European descent could be tracked down that way. And now for some related links, even though the future of the international space station is currently sort of in doubt after a Soyuz rocket malfunctioned last week in two astronauts barely survived. NASA is trying to figure out when it can send astronauts to the ISS again and whether the ones who are already there, we'll have to abandon the space station completely for awhile because the Russian rockets are currently the only way to get humans to and from the ISS and they are grounded because of the accident, Jeff Bezos, aerospace company, blue origin, put up a video today, promising to send millions of people to space eventually. Now is the time to open the promise of space all in lay the way for generations to come. When our descendants look to the stars, perhaps more rocky moon or calling his floating and open space. They'll remember this time. And love me. I'm not trying to be down on big ambitions, but we do seem to be doing a lot of fast forwarding to the future. And I'm kind of wondering what is the plan for the now. Tell you one other thing I'm intrigued by today? A new little phone called the palm? Yes. Nostalgia, they bought the rights to the old name. It's meant to be an accessory phone, so you're big everyday, Android smartphone. So you have like a little add on gadget? The does simple stuff like texting and calls and music and doesn't distract you with the whole smartphones situation. Plus it fits in your pocket. Kind of like apple watch, accept a phone that goes with your other phone, and I know you wanna laugh. But like the bird said, when they wrote about it, the idea kind of worms its way into your head. Mainly the idea that maybe what we all really want is just less computer more phone, less future more now, see what I did there. I'm Molly would, and that's marketplace tech. This is APN this marketplace podcast is brought to you by Amazon web services. Do you ever wonder how we're streaming millions of movies on demand, turning homes into hotels, are watching live missions from Mars, smart business minds dreamed, these ideas and Amazon web services is how they built them with the broadest functionality. And the most experience leading enterprises trust the AWS cloud to build the next big idea. Are you ready to build it? Learn more at AWS is how dot com slash podcast.
"stanford law school" Discussed on Masters in Business
"Do. I'm gonna scan in this two page cease and desist. I'm gonna put it on the internet, and I'm going to write on there about like this conversation I'm having and I'm gonna tell everybody how cert- it is that this is happening that an and I'm going to ask for help for like I feminine defense because I'm not going to defend myself and I'm gonna get it and, and I'm gonna make your client, take a fool, and the lawyer was like, are you threatening me? Mr.? Surrogates and I was like, no, I'm not threatening. I'm telling you my cards on the table. Yeah, sharing really strategy. Don't pursue this. No one's gonna. No, I don't have any t-shirts shirts left. I don't know why are doing this. I'm not selling tee-shirt anymore. I don't. I don't wanna make a big deal out of it and he's like, well, talk to my client and ten days ten days later he called back and he said, my client wish to pursue this lawsuit. And I was like, oh, man, you're asking for it. And so I did exactly that. I basically put the conversation that I had with them on on a scam, the ages it, it was the biggest thing on the internet that day. That's awesome. It went viral like crazy because both people from the left and the right liked it, it was the top Lincoln drudge. Andrew, Sullivan order column about it. All the bloggers of that day were like it was a big deal for them like people like Matthew yglesias like the first generation of of internet people were all about it and up in an uproar, and it got six hundred comments and the ACLU called the Stanford law school called said, they wished defend me in this. Exactly what you. And when are they call back and say, are willing to let this go?.
"stanford law school" Discussed on AM 570 The Mission
"Just want. To help people think indicated radio host No Syndicated radio host and author? Up, no he. Can't Radio we discussed is also zero collusion and it has had a negative impact upon the relationship of the two largest nuclear powers. In the world because they should be guided by could you name a single? Threat, of that Improve collusion It is nonsense It's really weird This Putin thing. It's really weird here's. George W Bush you went and, met with Putin, and he said I looked into his eyes and I, saw his, soul and, somehow you know had had a man crush Trump's talking big and he goes in and he just totally like. Softens up today I don't know how to describe Putin's effect, on Republican presidents but I don't. Like it equally I don't like President Obama saying he's going to do stuff and then never. Doing that either so what does? It all mean what was? This historic summit there was a lot of interesting. Angles of this they met for far longer, than they, were you know. Had planned to I. Even think that. Putin was pulling. A little bit. Of a man stunt. On Trump when he showed up, a half hour, late I'm really interested in kind of breaking this down, psychologically but let's let's, I turn to Alani chan- PHD Hoover Institution he's also a law lecturer Stanford law school and public policy program. At Stanford University lectures there he's also council at aren't FOX, LLP and he's also a member. Of the Salem media editorial board he it's good to have you at Kevin McCullough radio have. Known appreciate your work for a? Long time first time I've? Been able to get you on the air thanks. For being here Kevin thanks for having me, on definite, describe what happened From your perspective with the president and Mr. Putin today his critics are obviously blasting him even on, FOX every fifteen minutes how good how bad was this was. This appearance well I don't I don't think it was good you know I think very cynical. View of the Russians I take a, very cynical view Vladimir Putin I agree with you that President. Bush was badly mistaken when he thought he. Could. Trust Vladimir Putin I think Barack Obama was was incredibly. Naive when he tried to reap that relations with Russia you. Know you'll recall famous, we. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton then. Factory Clinton presenting I mean if. You talk about naive I think my four year old would no not do that and now unfortunately it seemed like we. Had another meeting here between our President Putin that that didn't go particularly, well from the perspective of those of us who believe Russia continues to be a serious threat to American interests and and I. You know I think the president wasn't wrong in saying you know we want to have better relations with, the Russians I, think he's right about that but I, don't think the way you get there is by, not calling them, out for some of the things? They've done collusion? The, collusion issue. Aside because I tend to agree. That there's, been no evidence to date that demonstrate collusion. Of any sort there is evidence that suggests. The Russians tried to interfere in our election and I think we have to put them on notice. That that kind of behavior is unacceptable and will be responded to right let me let me. Ask for, some clarity on. That because when that came up, in the presser today Putin immediately went to this idea that this was this private company compared it to kind of George Soros and said you know Soros doesn't speak for the Americans when he undermines foreign elections do we do we have direct, evidence or, does Muller have direct evidence that the twelve, that he, indicted were agents of the government or were they. Simply Russian citizens well Muller's investigation, so far has been very comprehensive and and the the indictment that was just filed last week provide what I believe is pretty..
"stanford law school" Discussed on The Art of Manliness
"Whatever it is at your engaged in business if you put small talk around that you will develop business friendships in all things being equal people do business with their friends and all things not being so equal people still do business with their friends yeah i mean despite your competence i mean you might be the best whatever but if people don't like you or feel comfortable around you they're not going to do business with you're not gonna like working with you or not only that an i couldn't i couldn't have said it better brat but there's another benefit to small talk net is to gain visibility so what i mean by that is if you're not a confident networker and you went to let's say stanford law school into great on your lsat's in you are currently in attorney for a firm and they're looking at cutting back who do you think they're going to cut that the person bringing in the billable hours what they call a rainmaker or they're gonna look at your gpa from law school into see went to stanford and keep you on board if you're not there's so much power to meeting new people that is how we bring in clients and referrals in and i'm not too speaking out to attorneys speaking to with the entrepreneur need angel investors or whether you are cpa in need to build your practice you can be the best cpa and if you're not willing to go to after hours events and or civic opportunities or charities in meet new people so they get to find out about what you do how you can build your practice us an anecdote in my personal life might my husband happens to be a period honest so we don't want to go into any details except that that's a gum surgeon but he'll tell you that when a patient comes into his office he will he seen a lot of bad dental work so whether that be ortho whether that be cavities with whatever's he doesn't do that but he'll see bad work in people's mouths and more often than not the bad work that he sees in people's mouths come from dental practices that are big that are successful why is it dental practice success when yet.
"stanford law school" Discussed on KBNP AM 1410
"Mccoy what i do i had no idea he said well thanks to i in in berkshire beyond buffet i answer a question a lot of people ask which is does anyone follow the berkshire model is is really unique and an answer is it's it's rare but there are companies that have emulated the model very successfully and i mentioned marquel and explain a little bit about their style and on the basis of that a seller of a business of the largest manufacturer of ornamental plants house plants called them and said we'd be interested in discussing a transaction tom proceeded they close the transaction at turned down because of that patient by book so tom was called to thank me for that you know i also tom russo i've had a chance to interview i really liked his chapter because you know he talks about he's known for enduring moats and things like that but he was really not as well known as his management development talent and the ability to do nothing the willingness to do anything the capacity to suffer shortterm earnings and then even unconditional love and friendship the things that he got out of that chapter just blew me away blew me away to a tom obviously very smart and savvy guy learned about berkshire from his class at stanford law school and stanford business school he's been stockholder ever since and he he gets those lessons about about patients about opportunistic about friendship and relationship gets them from the berkshire meeting he he probably developed an on his own born born and raised in the mid west you guys good solid values but they're definitely been nurtured incubating reinforced berkshire meeting and he gets them from the fellow shareholders as he explains and he also gets managers one of the things about tom's piece is explains how here at this meeting all the berkshire ceo's are walking around just like everybody else and the share owner can talk to him and he's interviewed lots of them over the years and learn those points that you just made and other useful skills in in running his own business it's we're going to hear from one of the members of this ecosystem we're talking about the coetzer nelson in the next segment and then larry joins us for the final national segment.
"stanford law school" Discussed on BizTalk Radio
"What i do i had no idea he said well thanks to i in berkshire beyond buffet i answer a question a lot of people ask which is does anyone follow the berkshire model is really unique and and the answer is it's it's rare but there are companies that have emulated the model very successfully and i mentioned marquel and explain a little bit about their style and on the basis of that a seller of a business of the largest manufacturer of ornamental plants house plants called them and said we'd be interested in discussing a transaction time proceeded they close the transaction turned out because of that page of my book so tom was called the thank you for that you know i also tom russo i've had a chance to interview i really liked his chapter because you know he talks well he's known for enduring moats and things like that but it's really not as well known as his management development talent and the ability to do nothing the willingness to do anything the capacity to suffer shortterm earnings and then even unconditional love and friendship the things that he got out of that chapter just blew me away blew me away to tom obviously very smart and savvy guy learned about berkshire from his class at stanford law school and stanford business school he's been stockholder ever since and he he gets those lessons about about patience about opportunistic about friendship and she gets them from the berkshire meeting he probably developed an on his own born born and raised in the mid west you guys good solid values but they're definitely been nurtured incubating reinforced berkshire meeting he gets them from the fellow shareholders as the planes and he also gets managers one of the things about tom piece is he's played how well here at this meeting all the berkshire ceo's are walking around just like everybody else and the shareholders can talk to him and he's interviewed lots of them over the years and learn those points that you just made and other useful skills in in running his own business we're going to hear from one of the members of this ecosystem we're talking about for tally cats and elson in the next segment and.
"stanford law school" Discussed on KQED Radio
"Of the federal court order a few years ago to ease crowding in the state prisons a lot of those folks ended up in the county jails and then a few years after that a state proposition reclassified some felonies misdemeanors so we're just have many more people with mental illness inside the county jails but it's also may just be better identification and diagnosis of folks with mental health issues you quote someone in your story that says jails and prisons have become a quote repository for people in the throes of mental health crises can you explain that so across california and the country far more people with mental illness are housed in county jails and state prisons than psychiatric hospitals in fact la county jails are considered the largest mental health institution in the country and it poses problems there's hiding suicide rates there's lots of violence their self mutilation and the part of the reason this is happening is because there is not enough community based mental health treatment throughout the state and nation so people aren't getting the care they need in the community and so they have problems they commit crimes this director of the justice advocacy project at stanford law school said in many ways the whole justice system is overwhelmed with mental illness what what are jail officials saying about this increase in the use of these drugs and the increase in in folks that have mental illness so what i spoke to the chief psychiatrist at la county jails and i also spoke to a director of a correctional mental health for san diego county jails and they said it's really difficult to handle they're trying to do everything they can to improve training and treatment but it's hard because of crowding and because jails really weren't meant to be mental health facilities.
"stanford law school" Discussed on KCBS All News
"Seven forty kcbs kcbs news time twelve twenty one major sporting goods retailers including l l bean dick's sporting goods kroeger and the nation's biggest retailer walmart all announce changes to their gun sale policies while the announcements are significant from a cultural and political an angle rather it's difficult to know if they'll have any meaningful impact on sales themselves as a gun industry keeps that data close to the best and lobbyists often stymie efforts from third parties to track sales for more on that part of the story were joined now in the kcbs newsline by john donahue law professor and researcher at stanford law school thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us why is it do you think that the uh gun sales data it tends to be kept so close to the best well in general the ameri does in life to have uh information about guns and uh and their impacts uh of available so they go round the country getting jaguar gr gag laws put into effect so you cannot tell for example who possesses a concealed carry permits so when somebody's arrested we don't know whether they were a permit holder and the same thing goes for for gun sales as well they don't want researchers to be able to uh you know link gun sales to crime and and so in general they want to keep that information as close to the best as possible are there are there ways or significant reasons even to change that or is the nra just too powerful um well certainly uh did there are things that could be done uh and i do think these these uh these laws that prevent researchers for from finding out you know details about people who have been arrested in committed crimes are really ridiculous um but as you say the nra is very powerful and the republican party tends to uh just follow whatever the direction of the nra is so it's a it's a tough flood all right well it is our our the moves made by walmart and dick's sporting goods and l bean are they still significance even if we can't know what their actual impact on sales.
"stanford law school" Discussed on KCBS All News
"Are well we don't know it depends a little bit on what the overall responses in other words if other companies are gonna come in and and try to uh uh advertise and make up all the flak that the peace of big retailers or creating in in the sales for guns uh but as a general matter one thing that you you'd prefer to do is to make guns a little bit less uh on the minds of people who are uh you know on the edges of sanity or wellbeing and uh one thing about the american gun culture is that the people who are on the edge or saturated uh in in the gun culture too we can do anything to sort of reduce that such a in it's the reason why are mentally ill uh commit these major mass shootings while the mentally ill all around the industrialized world uh ten not to do that um so that's one step to that uh that we hope is in the right direction we've only got thirty seconds last night are we aware of what the actual gun manufacturers think and the fact that these sales can't be traced are they in favour of this uh yeah i assume that they're in favour because they could make this information all available and if uh the the particular gun manufacturer is a publicly traded companies there can be uh some information uh required under federal law but most of these major gun manufacturers are privately held and they do not want that information to be revealed all right well we thank you so much for taking 15 minutes to talk to you let's status john donahue a law professor and researcher at stanford law school sponsored by the.
"stanford law school" Discussed on Off The Hook
"Do you remember there was a preliminary injunction there was issued against you that prevented you from disseminating the dcfs source code over there and i i think it's probably in the magazine as well but how you maneuvered around that preliminary injunction and allowed the information to get out at any cost than a great potential liability to the magazine and yourself i've look back at it now and think that was actually really kind of cool very smart and and very neat so you'll see all of this you'll see all of it in in the record the the whole story is there the fight between the mpla and 2600 the case itself i think of went to the second circuit in fact we had kathleen sullivan come out the dean of stanford law school flew out an argued the case in front of the second circuit pro bono four 2600 and i believe the name of the cases universal studios v ramirez it doesn't actually have 2600 in the caption he added first defendant who are the head sas since dropped out of the case that's how her us yup that's exactly right but it's a really fascinating reed it's an incredible case and it was a was real battle louis has a more words about the year two thousand for whatever reason two thousand was the year of the lawsuit particularly the year of the lawsuit against us we received illegal threat from staples over an article that appeared in a previous issue which sought to advise us on finding the line where freedom of speech ends and corporate infringement begins while we advised them that while we appreciate these suggestions on how to run our business we feel your knees we best suited if you simply minded yours or when they demanded that we reveal the name of the author of the story we made our position quite clear we will never reveal a source without that sources explicit permission and we won't cave in to threats of any sort reprinted the whole thing in our letter section the writer of the story even wrote in to reemphasize our position and it continued a new company called va rizon threatened does for registering for rise and really sucks dot com.
"stanford law school" Discussed on KQED Radio
"To berkeley peter you're on the are good morning good morning thank you attorney general what can we do to provide all california eight guarantee of legal representation under civil law as well as the guarantee that we do have nationally under criminal law mm great question uh to do that nationally uh because again the reason that there is a protection for a you have legal rights in any criminal proceeding is because under the constitution it is precise it is considered necessary in order to have your rights protected in any type of criminal action to do i mean out speaking technically in order to do something on the civil side you'd have to have a national statute that allows that to happen we could do that on the state level as well arc stay could go ahead and provide the types of protections under civil actions that we provide in criminal actions then you're talking about the resources and peter an you know you and i know that what we need to do then is we would have to lobby to get a legislature and governor that be willing to commit the funding to help make that happen legal services for many decades has been sort of the answer that america's put forward but as you probably have seen uh the funding for legal services at the national level has been cut decade after decade my first job out of stanford law school was working as illegal aid attorney representing folks who are mentally ill i made eighteen thousand dollars a year uh but you know what i was enriched in so many different ways so we can do it peter it just we have to have the will and the resources uh to do it and let me thank peter for the call you know you're talking about california's history with immigration i can't help thinking about something i read that you were saying recently about how you should keep in perspective one seven proposition one eighty seven that pete wilson former governor put forward was really very much an anti immigration a proposition and it got louder national play in seemed to have a good deal support here in california that state has turn in a very blue and you know now we have people like you an office uh pushing on behalf.
"stanford law school" Discussed on Boston Herald Radio
"Think donald trump wants to be president it absolutely listen i i think you can disagree but i will tell you i've got i got i got to know him fairly well he's a good man that really cares about this country and so you may not always agree with his policies but i know his arts and the right price he truly cares about this country he wants to give back new are doing public speaking now an area enjoying doing that it's it's yes is there a qna portion or you do that there's there's been acuna there has been a nicer it's a nicer i will you write a tellall book with every detail you will not now why because i don't think that's the right thing to do i think if you owning trust you to bring you into the inner circle of something that it is it would be an act of betrayal now i think i've learned a lot from my experience there it was an amazing honor to serve in this position and i would like to maybe share some of the experiences with folks share some of the lessons learned some of the in sailing right to tell some book i will tell i wouldn't i i don't think it would be that the right thing to do but i i think there's something there they've got a really interesting pieces of history that i had the unbelievable honour and privilege to be part of an i'd love to maybe share that with the american people who have trump by the balls right now i mean if you write that hook look if you hold on friday this country shadow organization at your house i priest i i appreciate that i thank you for being here i really do appreciate it is great i am truly kimmel if you enjoyed the video hit subscribe to this thank you very much jim jimmy this all right we are not about joy i thought it was a pretty good sean spicer a enjoyed and i thought he had the right temperament and into in kindle was fine he was just fine i think we'll both of whom are to bring on now illinois were warm who is a fellow at stanford law school but for our purposes here he's.
"stanford law school" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York
"S dot com or call 1866sector e t f us stocks mixed s p down two points little change pulling back from a record dumb one tenth of one percent nasdaq down 24 down four tenths of one percent dow industrials advancing forty six points up twotenths of 1 percent i'm charlie pellett that's a bloomberg business flash thanks charlie you're listening to bloomberg long with tune grasso in greg store we're talking about the supreme court action this week reinstating two republican drawing congressional districts that had been ordered redrawn by a lower court our guests are nate personally a stanford law school id richard default of columbia law school or rich win this when this order came out from the supreme court are these orders two of them in two separate cases i sensed a lot of worrying on the left about the implications of this it's sorta went along the lines that he thought we had anthony kennedy who's kind of the swing vote on the court in these issues that we thought we had him on voting rights issues this is evidence that were mistaken it do you think that concern is warranted in light of what the court did this week well that hard to answer or a lower court it's not happy new i mean he did go along with that but i think a ruling com like they're not quite enough uh trying your hat on a tricky to be obeyed on the other hand is maury negative a positive climate upon a very quick nate and i want to go back to a for a moment to what the state was arguing it was such a short time for them to go redraw the maps you've drawn legislative maps in been involved in that would it have been two different goals for them to redraw these maps before the midterm elections they can draw the right now take really a day to.