In this week’s episode, we take a step back and do some introspection. Here to discuss whether you should trust Yale, and other elite universities, more than Jalen Brunson in the fourth quarter is friend and colleague Sarath Sanga, Professor of Law at Yale Law School and Co-Director of the Yale Law School Center for the Study of Corporate Law. Sanga joins us to discuss both his new article, A Theory of Trust in Institutions, co-authored by Yehonatan Givati, and the recent Report by the Yale Committee on Trust in Higher Education, of which Sanga was a member.
Sanga kicks off the episode by explaining his view of why higher education is hemorrhaging public trust. Sanga argues that universities, and other institutions, pre-commit to doing specific things, and they lose trust whenever they stray from this initial commitment. Sam questions whether universities are now, and always have been, finishing schools for elites and, if so, whether it makes sense to talk about institutions like Yale having a mandate. And David brings up a variety of counterexamples that call into question whether an institution going against its mandate, such as when a university fields varsity sports teams, actually decreases trust in the real world. We hope you enjoy!
Referenced Readings
A Theory of Trust in Institutions, by Sarath Sanga and Yehonatan Givati
Report of the Yale Committee on Trust in Higher Education, by Yale University
"Shut Up and Dribble", by Ian Ayres
A Running List of Nominations for the Canon of American Legal Thought (1975-2025)
A Matter of Interpretation, by Antonin Scalia [Grove]
“A Neo-Federalist View of Article III”, by Akhil Reed Amar [Grove]
“The Anticanon”, by Jamal Greene [Grove]
The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, by Frank Easterbrook and Daniel Fischel [Macey]
“The Costs of Employment Segregation: Evidence from the Federal Government Under Woodrow Wilson”, by Abhay Aneja and Guo Xu [Sanga]
This episode is all about how Yale, and other elite institutions, are losing public trust. As Yale Law School insiders, what’s your best solution for making YLS more trustworthy?
Sam: I’m very suspicious of law schools, especially ours-why shouldn’t everyone else be?
David: I’m not sure that there is one quick trick in a polarized country, unless we can ensure that none of our graduates ever have an opinion that anyone of any political party ever disagrees with. That said, the best plan is to focus on what we’re good at, teaching brilliant students (like Daniel Browning, our out-going EP and all-around superstar!) and producing a broad range of excellent and rigorous scholarship.
Dafür haben wir uns mit Björn Schiffbauer unterhalten, der in seiner wissenschaftlichen Karriere die Themenschwerpunkte dieser Folge vereint hat – Völkerrecht, Menschenrechte und Sport. Im Jahr 2025 gab er auch einen Sammelband zu dieser Thematik heraus. Ergänzend beleuchtet Deborah Peters im Grundlagenteil die Rechte von Athlet*innen und stellt Fälle vor dem Internationalen Sportgerichtshof (Court of Arbitration for Sport, CAS) vor.
Eine automatische Transkription der Folge findest du hier auf dem Völkerrechtsblog. Für die Richtigkeit der automatischen Transkription übernehmen wir keine Gewähr.
Wir sind gespannt auf eure Rückmeldungen! Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik sind herzlich willkommen an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Es gibt die Möglichkeit, auf diesen Plattformen den Völkerrechtspodcast zu bewerten, wir freuen uns über 5 Sterne!
Hintergrundinformationen:
Moderation: Marie-Christin Manke & Salman Khan
Grundlagen: Deborah Peters
Interview: Prof. Dr. Björn Schiffbauer & Salman Khan
Schnitt: Daniela Rau
Credits für den O-Ton zu Beginn: https://www.whitehouse.gov/videos/president-donald-j-trump-wins-the-inaugural-2025-fifa-peace-prize/, The White House, abgerufen am 04.06.2026, Minute 00:00-00:21, verwendet unter der CC BY 3.0 US Lizenz, wie in der White House Copyright Policy niedergelegt. Außer des Zuschnitts auf den angegebenen Bereich wurden keine Veränderungen vorgenommen.
]]>The episode begins with an overview of two paradigms in international criminal law. Douglas argues that international law has replaced the “aggression paradigm,” which emerged out of the Nuremberg trials, in favor of an “atrocity paradigm,” which focuses on sanctioning grievous acts of violence, especially towards civilians. However, Douglas suggests that both the atrocity paradigm and the now-defunct aggression paradigm suffer from serious deficiencies. Sam asks whether there really has been an aggression-atrocity shift or, instead, whether the aggression paradigm utterly failed, with a long delay before the separate construction of an atrocity paradigm — which itself proved short-lived. David queries whether Douglas’s story is too formalistic and already out of date. And, fortunately for everyone, we resist the urge to do the entire episode in Seinfeld voices.
Referenced Readings
Humane, by Samuel Moyn
From Aggression to Atrocity: Rethinking the History of International Criminal Law,” by Samuel Moyn
The Internationalists, by Oona Hathaway and Scott Shapiro
A Running List of Nominations for the Canon of American Legal Thought (1975-2025)
A Matter of Interpretation, by Antonin Scalia [Grove]
“A Neo-Federalist View of Article III”, by Akhil Reed Amar [Grove]
“The Anticanon”, by Jamal Greene [Grove]
The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, by Frank Easterbrook and Daniel Fischel [Macey]
In this episode, Douglas proposed co-teaching an international law seminar with Sam. If you could teach a seminar on anything, unencumbered by ABA requirements or Yale Law School bureaucracy, what would you teach?
David: Hmmm… Stoicism: From Marcus Aurelius to O.G. Anunoby. Or perhaps Art History 601: The Art of Walt “Clyde” Frazier’s suits. Or maybe Negotiation 401: How Jalen Brunson Won By Taking Less
Sam: “French Pastry”? I would have listed “Why I Dropped Out of Law School and You Should Too” but then I realized I manage to include the material in most of my classes…
Russlands Krieg gegen die Ukraine hört einfach nicht auf. Jetzt, wo die Ukraine wieder besser dasteht, intensiviert Russland seine Angriffe auf die Zivilbevölkerung. Gleichzeitig hat Zelenskyj einen offenen Brief geschrieben, in dem er Putin zu einem direkten Treffen und Friedensverhandlungen aufruft. Trump findet das Toll, mehr hat er aber auch nicht zu sagen. Und Putin muss so tun, als ob er grundsätzlich an Frieden interessiert wäre. Anlass genug, mal wieder mit Markus Reisner von der Theresianischen Militärakademie in Wiener Neustadt zu sprechen: Über die Ukraine und die europäische Verteidigung, von Drohnen über Panzer bis hin zur Frage, ob wir nicht einfach Rotober für uns kämpfen lassen können (Spoiler: nein).
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen:
Does all this lawyer talk make you want to attend law school? One of our past shows was with MC Law’s Dean John Anderson from Mississippi College. If you’d like to learn a bit about the two law schools in Mississippi, give that podcast a listen.
This attorney also knows a bit about the military. We learned about Military and the law when Professor Frank Rosenblatt was on our show last September. Very interesting and informative.
In Legal Terms, the show where we break down the law, explain how it works, and help make it a little less intimidating for everyday Mississippians hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: HEARSAY, DECLARANT, CROSS-EXAMINATION, DISCUSSION
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Österreichs jahrelange Kampagne für einen (gewählten) Sitz im UNO-Sicherheitsrat hat gefruchtet, wir sind wieder wer: Nämlich bald ein Mitglied im immer noch wichtigsten Gremium der Weltpolitik. Anlass genug für eine spontane Sonderfolge zur UNO, dem Sicherheitsrat, Deutschland, Israel, Gaza und ja, auch zur Neutralität!
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/weiterführende Literatur
In Deutschland gibt es bislang keinen eigenständigen Straftatbestand für Femizide. Tötungen von Frauen werden überwiegend unter allgemeinen Delikten wie Mord oder Totschlag erfasst. Warum viele eine rechtliche Anerkennung von Femiziden fordern und welche gesellschaftlichen Folgen damit verbunden sind, diskutieren sie in dieser Folge.
Hinweis: Das Gespräch wurde Anfang März geführt, also vor Hubigs Vorschlägen zum Kindschaftsrecht und zu häuslicher Gewalt.
Shownotes:
Justitias Töchter Folge 11 (März 2021): Femizide – mit Dr. Leonie Steinl, LL.M https://www.djb.de/podcast/detail/folge-11-maerz-2021-femizide
Bündnis Istanbul-Konvention https://www.djb.de/ueber-uns/kooperation/buendnis-istanbul-konvention
Artikel: Femizide vor Gericht: Du gehörst mir, also töte ich dich von Julia Bellan und Franziska Pröll | Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung https://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/kriminalitaet/femizide-vor-gericht-so-werden-toetungen-an-frauen-in-deutschland-verurteilt-110118402.html
Feministische Fundstücke:
Let’s Talk About Recht – Der Live-on-Tape-Podcast zur Gesprächsreihe der Stiftung Forum Recht https://stiftung-forum-recht.de/themen/podcasts/live-on-tape-podcast/
]]>Im Gespräch geht es um strukturelle Ursachen von Kinderarmut, ungleiche Bildungschancen und die Rolle von Politik und Kommunen. Außerdem sprechen wir darüber, warum Deutschland im internationalen Vergleich oft schlechter abschneidet als erwartet, welche Bedeutung digitale Teilhabe heute hat und wie kinderfreundliche Kommunen dabei helfen können, soziale Ungleichheit abzufedern.
Inhalt
Weiterführende Informationen
Moderation: Natalia Rudenko
Redaktion: Leonardo Pereira & DGVN Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
Postproduktion: Erwin Eisenhardt, DGVN Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
]]>1971 haben die USA unter Präsident Nixon einen "War on Drugs" ausgerufen, 2026 hat Donald Trump unter diesem Banner den Präsidenten eines anderen Landes entführt. Grund genug, über Drogen zu reden: Wie sind sie geregelt, wieso kann man sie trotz Verbots weiterhin kaufen, was hat das mit Falco zu tun, welche Alternativen gibt es und warum werden in ihrem Namen sogar viele Kriege geführt? Darüber und vieles mehr habe ich mit Meropi Tzanetakis, FWF Elise Richter Fellow an der Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, gesprochen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Video/Audio-Mitschnitte:
Quellen:
Inhalt
Weiterführende Informationen
Redaktion & Moderation: Steve Biedermann, Vorstandsmitglied des DGVN-Landesverbands Sachsen, Sachsen Anhalt und Thüringen & Dr. Patrick Rosenow, Leitender Redakteur der Zeitschrift VEREINTE NATIONEN
Postproduktion: mucks audio: Die Audio und Podcast Agentur
]]>We've got a discussion about conspiracies, evidence, and public trust with attorney Francis Springer.
Past podcasts with Francis:
In Legal Terms: Ethics in the Afternoon
In Legal Terms: Ask Us Anything
In Legal Terms: Client Lawyer Relationship and other topics
MPB's @Issue podcast
The Department of War just released the second tranche of records under PURSUE. The first tranche was released on May 8, 2026.
Neil deGrasse Tyson: Give Us the Aliens
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Conspiracy, Defamation, Burden of Proof
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Dr Hend Hanafy , Assistant Professor of Criminal Law at the Faculty, led the coordination of the first official visit by a delegation from the Egyptian Court of Cassation - the highest court in Egypt - to the judiciary of England and Wales. The delegation, headed by Chief Justice Assem El-Gayish, President of the Court of...
Links:
Connect:
(00:00) America at 250—A Nation Under Assault from Within
(14:00) The Legal Profession as Guardian of the Constitution
(20:30) Unconstitutional by Design—The Trump Administration's Legal Record
(28:00) The Corruption of the DOJ
(36:00) Congress, the War Power, and the Collapse of Separation of Powers
(42:30) The Supreme Court, the Shadow Docket, and Presidential Immunity
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>Speaker: Balakrishnan Rajagopal is Associate Professor of Law and Development at the Department of Urban Studies and Planning and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing. He founded the Program on Human Rights and Justice at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and the Displacement Research and Action Network. He is recognized as a leading participant in the Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) Network of scholars and is one of its founders, and is recognized as a leading global commentator on issues concerning the global South.Prof Rajagopal is visiting the University of Cambridge this term as the Leverhulme Professor.
Chair: Dr Joanna Gomula
This lecture was delivered on 22 May 2026 as part of the Centre's Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.
]]>Herfried Münkler ist einer der profiliertesten Analysten der Geschichte und Gegenwart der internationalen Beziehungen und der dazugehörigen politischen Theorie. Da hat man schon viel Gesprächsstoff: Gibt es die "neuen Kriege" noch? Sind die USA unter Trump oder Russland unter Putin rationale Akteure? Wieso beginnen Kriege, wie beendet man sie? Kann Europa im Konzert der Großmächte eine Rolle spielen? War das Denken in Einflussphören jemals weg? Befinden wir uns in einem neuen Kalten Krieg? War im Kalten Krieg alles berechenbarer? Das und vieles mehr in meiner aktuellen Folge.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Bücher von Herfried Münkler (unvollständig, nur die genannten Werke):
Weiterführende Links:
A radical blueprint to reform the UK's creaking employment tribunal system has been proposed by Faculty of Law researchers in collaboration with the Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) , following evidence that some claimants face waits of up to five years for full hearings. The proposals are detailed in a major new report backed by the ELA titled 'Reimagining Employment Dispute Resolution and Enforcement'. The research, co-authored by Professor Catherine Barnard , Professor of European, and Sarah Fraser Butlin KC, Affiliated Lecturer, warns that escalating pressure has seen the number of outstanding claims nearly double over the past five years. Outstanding cases have climbed from 32,000 in autumn 2022 to almost 60,000 at present. The research shows that a significant driver of the backlog is the rising volume of legally complex and document-heavy discrimination and whistleblowing claims, which now constitute up to 70% of all cases received by tribunals. This has been further exacerbated by the increasing use of AI tools by litigants-in-person, which often floods the system with vast volumes of irrelevant documentation. With the phased introduction of the Employment Rights Act expected to increase tribunal caseloads by up to a third over the coming year, Professor Barnard warned that legislative progress risks being undermined by systemic delays. The empirical and theoretical findings under-pinning these proposals will be explored further in the authors' forthcoming book, Reimagining Employment Dispute Resolution and Enforcement , which is due to be published by Hart Publishing, an imprint of Bloomsbury, in June. The book will draw on a large-scale empirical study to reframe workplace conflict resolution, borrowing insights from the management of family law disputes to design a sustainable system for policy makers, practitioners, and academics alike.
You may be entitled to compensation from our government. The U.S. Department of Justice . . . announced that as a part of the settlement agreement in President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, the Attorney General established “The Anti-Weaponization Fund” to provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare.
The headline for a PBS News article reads Justice Department announces a $1.7 billion 'Anti-Weaponization' fund to compensate Trump allies.
The application link has not bee publicized as of today’s show but anyone can put in an application. Anyone. Any person can submit a claim for them to process.
Let’s play a game – think in your head “what’s Liz’s favorite website to give out (outside of MPB?) Can you guess? If you said “yallvote.ms” you’d be right. The secretary of state’s website with voting information has so much that is relevant to so many folks. AND If you want to know more about Southern Poverty Law Center – check out their own website: https://www.splcenter.org/ to learn about their mission and objectives.
In Legal Terms, the show where we break down the law, explain how it works, and help make it a little less intimidating for everyday Mississippians hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Voting Rights Act, Right to Assemble, Civic Engagement
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>LLM (Large Language Model): Note: Mentioned contextually as "LMS" during the interview recording. These are AI programs trained on vast amounts of text data to understand, summarize, generate, and predict new content. Substantial Similarity: A fundamental legal doctrine used by courts to determine if an unauthorized reproduction has taken too much protectable expression from an original copyrighted work. AGI vs. Superintelligence: Narrow AI handles specific single tasks. Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) can holistically apply knowledge to any task like a human. Superintelligence refers to a theoretical future entity whose collective intellect far surpasses the capacity of the human brain.
Inhalt
Weiterführende Informationen
Moderation: Natalia Rudenko
Redaktion: Leonardo Pereira & DGVN Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
Postproduktion: Erwin Eisenhardt, DGVN Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
]]>If the state encourages people to protect others, what duty does the state owe to the people who do the protecting?
For up-to-date information about the Disability Inclusive Climate Action Research Program, please visit https://www.disabilityinclusiveclimate.org/
For more information about the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Alliance, please visit www.aodaalliance.org
David Lepofsky's Open Source Memoir, "Swimming Up Niagara Falls": https://wyaj.uwindsor.ca/index.php/wyaj/article/view/8579
"People With Disabilities Need Lawyers Too! A Ready-To-Use Plan for Law Schools to Educate Law Students to Effectively Serve the Legal Needs of Clients With Disabilities as Well as Clients Without Disabilities": https://wyaj.uwindsor.ca/index.php/wyaj/article/view/7780
]]>Dr Narine Lalafaryan (Assistant Professor of Corporate Law; CERF Fellow; Fellow, Pembroke College) has been cited and quoted by the Financial Times [paywall link] in its piece "US bankruptcy fights are heading to London" for her paper 'The Global Law of Debt' , co-authored with Professor Jared Ellias (Harvard Law School). The research project, 'The Global Law of Debt' , examines the historical evolution and contemporary influence of global debt finance and restructuring laws. It highlights the deeply entangled nature of legal systems across jurisdictions and considers the consequences of this entanglement for investors, clients, courts, regulators, and governments. The global law of debt has emerged from the close interconnection between London's and New York's debt ecosystems, creating unprecedented opportunities for companies, investors, and professionals to raise capital and restructure debt across borders. At the same time, this system poses significant challenges for regulators, courts, and policymakers, and facilitates the spread of practices that remain controversial. The project highlights the increased entanglement of corporate debt and restructuring systems around the world, and the increased significance of London (and the UK’s Part 26A, Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006) as a bona fide restructuring rival to the US' Chapter 11. The Financial Times article is centred around the notion of cross-border restructuring. It cites the concept of 'the global law of debt' and quotes in particular the definition provided by the co-authors, who describe it as a "transnational system shaped more by law firms, investment banks, and investors in New York and London than by national laws or court decisions." This research project was generously funded by the Cambridge Law Faculty's HSF Kramer Global Visitors’ Exchange Fund, enabling Dr Lalafaryan to visit Harvard Law School on several occasions.
In Legal Terms, the show where we break down the law, explain how it works, and help make it a little less intimidating for everyday Mississippians hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Gun Trust, National Fire Arms Act, Prohibited Person
Hey, we know it’s hard to know where to look for “real” and truthful information. Our guest’s website: mid south gun lawyer.com has state laws, information on Restoration of Rights and NFA Gun Trusts plus a FAQ section.
Folks are passionate about gun rights. They are also passionate about HOAs. What do those two passions have in common - Reed Martz has talked with us about them on past In Legal Terms!
In Legal Terms: Gun Rights 2023
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>That moment sets the tone for a candid conversation about what it means to serve inside the Department of Justice, and what happens when career lawyers believe the institution they devoted themselves to has changed. Moderated by Stanford Law professor Pam Karlan, this episode brings together Oyer, former Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Rosen, and former DOJ civil rights lawyer Stacey Young for a discussion of public service, prosecutorial independence, clemency, civil rights, professional ethics, and the difficult questions of when to stay, when to leave, and when to speak out.
The panel, recorded at a live law school event and presented by the Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession and the Neukom Center for the Rule of Law, offers a close look at the professional obligations of government lawyers from people who spent years doing the work: Rosen supervising more than 1,000 prosecutions stemming from January 6; Oyer overseeing the federal pardon process and thousands of clemency petitions; and Young working in the Civil Rights Division while also founding the DOJ Gender Equality Network. Karlan, herself a former DOJ official, draws out the deeper questions behind their stories.
Links:
Connect:
(00:00:00) Introductions and what drew each panelist to DOJ
(00:08:24) Loyalty inside the institution
(00:11:19) January 6th pardons: impact on prosecutors and lack of vetting
(00:32:04) Liz Oyer's firing over the Mel Gibson gun-rights recommendation
(00:43:23) The "stay or go" dilemma and the bifurcated job market
(00:47:15) Rebuilding DOJ: norms vs. enforceable laws and the communications problem
[00:57:00) Student Q&A: red lines, accountability, and the Epstein files
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>The discussion is structured around Page’s three major books: The Toughest Beat, which examines the political power of prison officer unions in California; Breaking the Pendulum, which challenges simple narratives of cyclical change in criminal justice policy; and his most recent work, Legal Plunder, co‑authored with Joe Soss, which explores the predatory extraction of resources through the modern criminal justice system.
Across the episode, they explore how penal policy develops over time, the role of organised interests and policy feedback, the limits of reform, and the ongoing struggles that shape punishment at federal, state, and local levels. The conversation also turns to contemporary debates over bail reform, fiscal pressures on local government, and the broader political economy of criminal justice.
In the final part of the episode, Professor Page reflects on living in Minneapolis since the murder of George Floyd, discussing how community mobilisation, public trust, and resistance to state power continue to shape the city’s political and social landscape.
]]>On 6 May, students taking the Advanced Property and Trusts paper on the LLM spent the afternoon presenting their work to Lord Robert Carnwath, former justice of the UK Supreme Court and Yorke Distinguished Visiting Fellow. The programme for the afternoon involved each student presenting on a key case in property or trusts law, and discussing its significance with the judge. The Advanced Property and Trusts paper was a new addition on the LLM for the 2025-6 teaching year, convened by Dr Lorren Eldridge, who also organised the event. The paper benefits from teaching by a range of experts including Professor Louise Gullifer, Professor Sinéad Agnew, Dr Ernesto Vargas-Weil, Dr Fleur Stolker and Ms Amy Goymour, and the workshop was an excellent way to round off a year of in depth study of English property and trusts law by students from a wide range of common and civil law jurisdictions.
Now that classes are over and the end of the semester is near, we’re back for several weeks of podcastmaxxing. So stay tuned for some great episodes in the coming weeks, dear listeners!
Here to help us understand our current political moment and to diversify David’s reading list is Anton Jäger, a Departmental Lecturer in the History of Political Thought and Political Theory at University College, Oxford. Jäger joins the pod this week to discuss his new book, Hyperpolitics: Extreme Politicization without Political Consequences, where he offers a European’s perspective on the American political moment.
This episode begins with an explanation of what, exactly, hyperpolitics is and how it differs from other, older forms of politics. Jäger suggests that hyperpolitics is characterized by a high degree of political involvement but a corresponding deinstitutionalization of politics. Sam queries whether our current moment might be more continuous with the past, with both characterized by a quiescent politics. And David asks about the degree to which our politics has been causally determined by economic forces. Along the way, we also discuss whether it’s helpful to label the Trump movement as fascist, whether hyperpolitics is the product of liberalism’s failure, and whether the smartphones are really to blame for everything. We hope you enjoy!
Referenced Readings
The Hollow Parties, by Daniel Schlozman and Sam Rosenfeld
Bowling Alone, by Robert Putnam
The Dark Side of Democracy, by Michael Mann
The Project-State and its Rivals, by Charles Maier
A Running List of Nominations for the Canon of American Legal Thought (1975-2025)
A Matter of Interpretation, by Antonin Scalia [Grove]
“A Neo-Federalist View of Article III”, by Akhil Reed Amar [Grove]
“The Anticanon”, by Jamal Greene [Grove]
The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, by Frank Easterbrook and Daniel Fischel [Macey]
On this week’s episode, Jäger offered a European outsider’s take on American politics. Flipping the script, what’s your best outsider’s take on European politics?
Sam: The first wave of right-wing victory is over, and now it is coming for France and Germany. Get ready.
David: I can’t believe that British politics is not full of people with their hair on fire about why the country’s economic growth has been so slow – Poland is likely to catch up in per capita GDP in a few years! And, if anything, de-growther forces, on both the right and left, are rising. It’s like the frogs in slowly boiling water croaking requests to turn up the temperature.
Calculated, unfair, and transactional politics is the name of the game for President Trump’s return to office so far. Whether it is in relation to a developed, developing, or least-developed country, the Trump administration has unapologetically proven that it does not care whose ox is gored. Despite the US Supreme Court ruling, the “Reciprocal Tariff Policy” has disrupted and entrenched the uncertainty in the multilateral trading system that was already confronted with crisis about its own existence, especially the World Trade Organization, and the resulting fragmentation in international trade has further exacerbated the socio-economic and fragile status of developing countries.
Olabisi Delebayo Akinkugbe is the Purdy Crawford Chair in Business Law and Associate Professor at the Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University. Prof Akinkugbe obtained a Ph.D. in law from the University of Ottawa, an LL.M. from the University of Toronto, and an LL.B. from the University of Lagos, Nigeria. He previously served as the Viscount Bennett Professor of Law at the Schulich School of Law and was convenor of the annual Viscount Bennett Roundtable on International Economic Law.
In 2024, he was the recipient of the Hannah and Harold Barnett Excellence in Teaching Award.
In this paper, I analyse the multiple implications for developing countries in the African continent.
Chair: Prof Lorand Bartels
This lecture was delivered on 1 May 2026 and is part of the Friday Lunchtime Lecture series.
]]>
Please note that this episode contains discussion of sexual and gender-based violence. Take care when listening.
]]>
Die Ukraine hat vor Kurzem einen vollautomatisierten Angriff ausgeführt, das Schlachtfeld wird von Drohnen dominiert und irgendwie fühlt sich das alles an wie in Terminator 2 (für meine Generation zumindest, andere mögen an spätere Teile oder andere Filme denken). Anlass genug für einige große Fragen, die ich Ulrike Franke vom European Council on Foreign Relations (und einem größeren Publikum aus dem Sicherheitshalber-Podcast bekannt), gestellt habe: Wie können pazifistische Gesellschaften wehrhaft bleiben/werden? Wie verändert Technologie die Kriegsführung, wie sehr ähnelt Krieg Videospielen? Wieso tut sich Europa immer noch so schwer bei der militärischen Zusammenarbeit? Was tun wir ohne den USA? Alles nicht so einfach. Aber wie ihr beim Hören merken werdet, ist das Glas nicht nur halbleer.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen:
Wir sind gespannt auf eure Rückmeldungen! Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik sind herzlich willkommen an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Es gibt die Möglichkeit, auf diesen Plattformen den Völkerrechtspodcast zu bewerten, wir freuen uns über 5 Sterne!
Hintergrundinformationen:
Die aktuelle Anfrage von Guatemala OC-33/26 auf Englisch.
Die Rechtsgutachten OC-26/20 und OC-28/21 sowie die Fälle Capriles vs. Venezuela und Gadea Mantilla vs. Nicaragua auf Englisch.
Lucas Carlos Lima, Democracy before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: From political rights to democratic backsliding, QIL, Zoom-in 114 (2026) 27-50 (ein zusammenfassender Überblick).
Rodrigo da Costa Sales, The Question of Democracy Before the Inter-American Court : Guatemala's Advisory Opinion Request and the Future of Democracy in the Americas, Verfassungsblog, 20.04.2026.
Verwandte Folgen:
Moderation: Manuel Klein & Daniela Rau
Grundlagen: Marie-Christin Manke
Interview: Vanessa Vanegas & Daniela Rau
Schnitt: Daniela Rau
Credits:
Audiencia Pública de la Opinión Consultiva sobre Democracia y su protección ante el SIDH, Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C1yX8CLqk8 (53:03-53:30).
]]>Wir sind gespannt auf eure Rückmeldungen! Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik sind herzlich willkommen an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Es gibt die Möglichkeit, auf diesen Plattformen den Völkerrechtspodcast zu bewerten, wir freuen uns über 5 Sterne!
Hintergrundinformationen:
die aktuelle Anfrage von Guatemala OC-33/26 auf Englisch.
die Rechtsgutachten OC-26/20 und OC-28/21 sowie die Fälle Capriles vs. Venezuela und Gadea Mantilla vs. Nicaragua auf Englisch.
Lucas Carlos Lima, Democracy before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: From political rights to democratic backsliding, QIL, Zoom-in 114 (2026) 27-50 (ein zusammenfassender Überblick).
Rodrigo da Costa Sales, The Question of Democracy Before the Inter-American Court : Guatemala's Advisory Opinion Request and the Future of Democracy in the Americas, Verfassungsblog, 20.04.2026.
Verwandte Folgen:
Moderation: Manuel Klein & Daniela Rau
Grundlagen: Marie-Christin Manke
Interview: Vanessa Vanegas & Daniela Rau
Schnitt: Daniela Rau
Credits:
Audiencia Pública de la Opinión Consultiva sobre Democracia y su protección ante el SIDH, Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C1yX8CLqk8 (53:03-53:30).
]]>We can’t answer all your questions in our one hour today but I’m going to give you way to answer many of them. Our guest’s website has a FAQ section, has a blog, and helpful links. He’s also literally written the book on Special needs planning, estate planning, asset protection, and elder law and dementia.
In Legal Terms, the show where we break down the law, explain how it works, and help make it a little less intimidating for everyday Mississippians hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: MEDICAID LOOKBACK PERIOD, SPEND-DOWN, LONG-TERM CARE PLANNING
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
What kind of Legacy do you want to leave behind? Our MPB Foundation has suggestions – you can contact them to leave a legacy from your estate, contribute stocks, a vehicle, or land!
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Nathaniel Persily joins Pam Karlan for a discussion about the Callais decision—what it means for racial representation, partisan gerrymandering, and anti-discrimination law. Karlan and Persily are longtime collaborators, including as co-authors of The Law of Democracy: Legal Structure of the Political Process. Their conversation traces the Voting Rights Act’s evolution from the landmark Thornburg v. Gingles decision to the Court’s latest narrowing of Section 2, and examines how the ruling could affect congressional maps in 2026, minority representation at every level of government, and the broader future of disparate impact protections. As Persily explains, the Court has moved from treating partisan gerrymandering as constitutionally suspect to a place where it is now “a legitimate state practice, a legitimate interest that’s almost being celebrated.”
Links:
Connect:
[00:00:30] Introduction: The Voting Rights Act Under Siege
[00:02:18] Section 2's Original Promise: Results Over Intent
[00:11:06] Louisiana v. Cali: Dismantling the Gingles Framework
[00:23:17] From Unconstitutional to Celebrated: The Partisan Gerrymandering Evolution
[00:28:14] Future Implications: Elections and Civil Rights
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>Paul Lendvai ist 96 Jahre alt, hat den Ungarischen Volksaufstand 1956 als Journalist direkt vor Ort erlebt und ist seit Jahrzehnten ein gefragter politischer Beobachter und Kommentator. Mit ihm kann man über alles reden: Trump, Orban, Xi Jinping, den Kalten Krieg, den Nationalsozialismus, Kurt Waldheim und Österreichs Vergangenheitsbewältigung, die Angst vor einem Atomkrieg, das Ende der Sowjetunion als "geopolitische Katastrophe" (Zitat Putin), Nostalgie, den Aufstieg des Rechtsextremismus, Demokratie, Antisemitismus, Israel und Netanjahu, den Hang zum "starken Mann" und vieles mehr. Grund genug, das auch zu tun.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Literatur/Links:
]]>Wussten Sie, dass fast jeder Jugendliche mindestens einmal das Gesetz bricht? Doch was passiert danach? Erzieht eine Strafe sie zum Besseren – oder stempelt sie erst recht als Kriminelle ab?" Darüber spricht Host Anna Schaich mit dem Soziologen und Kriminologen Florian Kaiser.
]]>Co-hosts Amanda Rossini Martins and Büşra Cebeci, speak with Sarah Kasande, who works on the case of Uganda. By shifting the conversation from state-led mechanisms to grassroots documentation practices, this episode explores grassroots actors’ intentions, challenges, and complementarities.
Sarah highlights the responses of civil society actors and victim groups to the stalled state-led transitional justice process:
"After years of engaging with and supporting state-led transitional justice processes with limited substantive progress to show for it, civil society organisations, and victims’ groups have increasingly turned to community driven alternatives. These initiatives offer more realistic pathways for truth-telling, recognition, social repair, and prevention of future violence, filling out the void created by the stalled state-led process."
Documentation efforts from a variety of actors, such as local NGOs, cultural institutions, and community groups, helped to make the scale and patterns of violence visible beyond the affected communities, leading to international advocacy campaigns and criminal accountability. For victims, particularly women and girls who suffered gendered harms that remain unaddressed and unacknowledged, documentation serves as a pathway to draw attention to the violations they suffered and their enduring impacts. At the same time, it resists efforts to minimize, silence, or erase their experiences. As Sarah explains:
“Through documentation, women get to decide what to record, how to narrate the harm they experience beyond the narrow confines of these formal processes, and when to share their stories. This control allows them to reclaim the narratives that were previously shaped by violence, stigma, and exclusion. So documentation, in a sense, becomes a space where women assert voice, reclaim their dignity, and transform private suffering into collective knowledge and collective healing.”
By unpacking the complex transitional justice landscape in Uganda and exploring the diverse documentation actors and practices, Sarah shapes the scope of this episode beyond what is commonly recognized as a transitional justice process, toward a more transformative process spearheaded by grassroots actors.
Sarah Kasande is a PhD researcher at the Human Rights Center, Ghent University. Her research examines how innovations by grassroots actors in Northern Uganda reshape the goals and methods of transitional justice beyond state-centric models, toward an inclusive, victim-centered approach. She has over 14 years of experience as a human rights lawyer and transitional justice practitioner supporting peacebuilding and transitional justice initiatives in Uganda and other African contexts. Before joining the Human Rights Center, she served as Head of the Uganda Office of the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ). She also led the Initiative for Transitional Justice in Africa.
]]>We’re so grateful Mr. Coxwell is able to join us today. His firm, Coxwell and Associates has placed a wealth of information on their website: coxwelllaw.com. There are articles about Criminal defense such as computer crimes and misdemeanor crimes, and posts about personal injury such as construction and product liability.
In Legal Terms, the show about you and your rights hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: White Collar Crime, Embezzlement, Wire Fraud
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
How can you learn more about white collar crime? Well, if it’s news that concerns Mississippi it will be reported on by Mississippi Public Broadcasting. We have news reports most every hour of the day at one minutes past the top of the hour. Our website: mpbonline.org has articles to read. If you want our news to come to you – follow mpbonline on social media.
We’re the “legal” show on MPB. But if you like us, we’ve got some suggestions for other MPB shows you might like. On Wednesdays at 4pm, The Sit Down with Russ Latino is where complex issues meet real conversations. From politics and policy to culture and community, they break down the news that shapes your world, one sit-down at a time. On Mondays at 5pm @Issue offers an inside look at the legislative session, interviews with key players, and perspectives from both sides of the aisle. Republican Rebekah Staples and Democrat Brandon Jones join host Wilson Stribling to discuss happenings at the state Capitol.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Zu Beginn der Folge gibt Patrick zusätzlich einen Überblick über den aktuellen Stand zur Generalsekretärswahl, da am 21. und 22. April in New York die Anhörungen der vier aktuellen Kandidatinnen und Kandidaten Michelle Bachelet, Rafael Grossi, Rebeca Grynspan und Macky Sall stattgefunden haben.
Inhalt
Weiterführende Informationen
Redaktion & Moderation: Steve Biedermann, Vorstandsmitglied des DGVN-Landesverbands Sachsen, Sachsen Anhalt und Thüringen & Dr. Patrick Rosenow, Leitender Redakteur der Zeitschrift VEREINTE NATIONEN
Postproduktion: mucks audio: Die Audio und Podcast Agentur
]]>That concern—how long-standing efforts to restrict voting access can make it harder for eligible voters to participate—runs through the episode, which was recorded shortly before the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Louisiana v. Callais. In a 6–3 ruling, the Court struck down Louisiana’s congressional map, which had created a second majority-Black district, holding that the map was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. The decision could make it harder to use Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to challenge maps that dilute minority voting strength.
Lakin and Karlan discuss what is at stake when access to the ballot becomes harder and the rules for translating votes into political power begin to shift. Their conversation focuses on proof-of-citizenship requirements, mail ballots, voter roll purges, and redistricting battles, offering a timely look at the legal fights shaping who can vote, whose ballots count, and whether communities can elect representatives of their choice.
Links:
Connect:
(00:00:00) The Three Buckets of Voting Rights
(00:02:35) Voter Roll Surveillance
(00:06:17) The Non-Citizen Voting Myth and the Dangers of Faulty Databases
(00:10:23) Citizenship Documentation Requirements
(00:16:19) Mail Voting Rules and the Materiality Provision
(00:21:00) Section Two of the Voting Rights Act and Redistricting Battles
(00:28:51) Race, Politics, and the Future of Fair Maps
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>The publication in paperback of Pursuit of Legal Harmony in a Turbulent Europe: Essays in Honour of Eleanor Sharpston , edited by Catherine Barnard, Adam Lazowski and Daniel Sarmiento, marks a comprehensive celebration of the legacy of one of the most influential Advocates General to serve the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Published by Hart, an imprint of Bloomsbury, the volume brings together a distinguished group of EU law academics and practitioners to assess the impact of Eleanor Sharpston KC. During her tenure at the Court of Justice, her Opinions helped to define modern EU procedural and substantive law, influencing landmark cases such as Ruiz Zambrano , Sturgeon , and Bougnaoui . The collection is structured into six parts, reflecting the breadth of Sharpston’s career and interests. Contributors examine the constitutional law of the European Union, fundamental rights, citizenship, litigation, the internal market, and external relations. By exploring these themes, the book provides a masterful commentary on how the European legal order continues to evolve in response to contemporary political and social turbulence. Catherine Barnard is Professor of European Law at the Faculty and a Senior Tutor of Trinity College. She has co-edited the volume alongside Adam Lazowski , Professor of EU Law at the University of Westminster, and Daniel Sarmiento , Professor of EU and Administrative Law at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid. For more information, please see the Bloomsbury website . For information about publications by Professor Barnard, please refer to her Faculty profile .
This new book edited by Dr Brian Sloan , Assistant Professor in Property Law and Fellow of Robinson College, has been published by Edward Elgar. A Research Agenda for Succession Law brings together an international group of leading scholars to map out the future of legal research in the field of inheritance and estates. The book arises from papers from a conference on the same title held at Robinson College in July 2024, which was supported by Cambridge Family Law (CFL), the Cambridge Private Law Centre (CPLC), the SLS Small Projects and Events Fund, and Robinson College. The volume addresses how succession law must evolve to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century, including ageing populations, the rise of digital assets, and increasingly complex family structures. A Research Agenda for Succession Law explores a wide range of provocative topics, from the legal validity of electronic wills and the ownership of human ashes to the impact of aboriginal inheritance customs and the merits of disinheritance. Using diverse research methods, the contributors examine the extent to which current legal frameworks provide clarity and respect testamentary freedom in a rapidly changing social and economic landscape. The book has received praise from distinguished figures in the field. Professor Reinhard Zimmermann, Emeritus Director at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, described it as a volume that "demonstrates that there are countless challenging questions requiring an answer in this area of the law," noting its relevance to both common law and civilian systems. A Research Agenda for Succession Law is part of the Elgar Research Agendas series and is intended as a vital resource for legal scholars, policymakers, and practitioners.
Orban hat eine Verfassung gebaut, die ihm sehr viel und der Opposition sehr wenig Macht gegeben hat. Aufgrund des fulminanten Wahlerfolgs von Peter Magyar hat sich das nun aber umgedreht. Bleibt offen, ob und wie er den Staat jetzt umbauen kann. Die Mehrheiten dazu hätte er. Aber das allein reicht nicht aus. Ich habe mit meiner Kollegin an der Sigmund Freud PrivatUniversität Eleonóra Wagenknecht über Ungarns Verfassung, Wissenschaftsfreiheit und ja, auch über Trianon gesprochen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Links:
Yallvote.msMS Center for JusticeLeague of Women Voters MississippiMississippi VotesMS Immigrants Rights AllianceDelta Sigma Theta Vote 411
In Legal Terms, the show where we break down the law, explain how it works, and help make it a little less intimidating for everyday Mississippians hosted by attorney Adam Kilgore. legalterms@mbponline.org
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: DOCUMENTARY PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP (DPOC), NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION ACT (NVRA), LIST MAINTENANCE
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
In Legal Terms has got the jump on them! We’re the first! On Monday, April 27th at 5pm MPB News’ @Issue will discuss the MS Shield Law. But that’s after us! So if you want more information about this topic listen live over the air on live online to @Issue or find their podcast or YouTube additional video material on the subject. But just know – In Legal Terms was first.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Viktor Orban ist weg, Peter Magyar ist da: Wir war das möglich? Ist Orban gar kein Autokrat? Wie gewinnt man, obwohl alle Medien gegen einen sind und der Gegner sowohl von Putin als auch von Trump untertützt wird? Und was haben Sex-Tapes und "Brüsseler Eliten" damit zu tun? Ich habe mit der Populismusforscherin Gabriela Greilinger über die Wahl in Ungarn gesprochen. Hören Sie sich das an.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen:
Artikel von Gabriela Greilinger:
Um diese Missstände im Völkerrechtspodcast zu diskutieren, haben wir Valentin Jeutner in den Podcast eingeladen, der in seinem aktuellen Buchprojekt dafür plädiert, den Verhältnismäßigkeitsgrundsatz des humanitären Völkerrechts zu streichen – Kollateralschäden, so das zentrale Argument, können nicht durch Verhältnismäßigkeitserwägungen gerechtfertigt werden.
Wir sind gespannt auf eure Rückmeldungen! Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik sind herzlich willkommen an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Es gibt die Möglichkeit, auf diesen Plattformen den Völkerrechtspodcast zu bewerten, wir freuen uns über 5 Sterne! Hintergrundinformationen
Moderation: Jasmin Wachau & Rouven Diekjobst
Grundlagen: Salman Khan
Interview: Dr. Valentin Jeutner & Rouven Diekjobst
Schnitt: Daniela Rau
Credits: Agnieszka Brugger, Bundestag, 05.03.2020, gefunden mit der Hilfe von Open Parliament TV.
]]>We’re calling today: Helping the Helpers. We’ll learn about the Lawyers and Judges Assistance Program from The Mississippi Bar. Now, if you’re not a lawyer or a judge, I’m sure there will be information that you can use to apply to you and your family’s lives. Our guests are Jessica Cole, with The Mississippi Bar and Sean Guy from McCraney Montagnet Quin Noble.
If you enjoyed listening to this podcast, please consider contributing to MPB: https://donate.mpbfoundation.org/mspb/podcast
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Impairment, Duty of Competence, 12 Step Program
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Thursdays, following our over-the-air broadcast, you can hear Next Stop Mississippi on MPB Think Radio at 4pm Central.
The legislative session may be over or is it? Yesterday, April 15th was the last day of the extended 2026 legislative session. BUT . . . MPB will continue to broadcast our News show: @Issue, Mondays at 5pm. They’ll bring you information all year long about what our lawmakers in Mississippi are up to. You can also find @Issue as a podcast and a YouTube video series.
MPB wants to help you discover treasure! Not as a pirate but maybe as an archeologists? If you go treasure hunting in your own attic, bring that thing to the Mississippi Antique Showcase at Capps Center-Delta Research and Extension Center-Stoneville, Mississippi in the Delta. Tomorrow it’s from 1:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. and Saturday the 18th it’s 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Plenty of time to make a day of it to get there and back. Get your tickets today!
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>A new book by Dr Mohamed Moussa , Assistant Professor in EU Law at the Faculty of Law, has been published by Hart Publishing. Federal Impartiality: Navigating Divisive Rights in the EU and the US explores how federalism emerged as a constitutional remedy to the ‘lethal disease’ of polarisation - a force capable of destabilising constitutional systems from within. The book addresses this theme through both theoretical and comparative perspectives. On the theoretical side, it develops and critiques the influential constitutional theory of James Madison, architect of the US Constitution and modern federalism. The book situates Madison's ideas within a fresh theoretical and doctrinal context and updates them in light of contemporary case law. It also identifies a critical blind spot: in constructing his framework, Madison overlooked the distinction between social conflicts rooted in group difference (such as those involving racial minorities) and those grounded in value conflicts or ideological commitments - a distinction that draws on the work of David Hume and the common law tradition. This omission lies at the heart of the most divisive fundamental rights cases unfolding across Europe and the United States today. The comparative dimension of the book tests these theoretical insights through an examination of a wide range of cases from both the EU and the US, including those on minority rights, equal pay, abortion, religious establishment and religious freedoms. Combining doctrinal legal analysis and constitutional theory with insights from constitutional economics and the history of political thought, the book highlights both the perils and the promise of federalism in securing impartiality and navigating deep social faction. Current University of Cambridge staff and student members can access the ebook via iDiscover . Federal Impartiality is part of the Hart Studies in Comparative Public Law series. It is an essential resource for scholars of constitutional law, European law, and comparative federalism.
In this episode, Greg Ablavsky, a Stanford Law professor and scholar of federal Indian law, joins Pam Karlan to discuss President Trump's challenge to birthright citizenship--a case now at the Supreme Court.
The discussion centers on the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Ablavsky explains why federal Indian law has become part of that debate. He traces the distinctive legal status of Native nations within the United States, the historical exception for members of tribal nations, and the way that history appears in seminal cases such as Elk v. Wilkins. The conversation also looks at the relationship between Elk and U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the 1898 case that recognized birthright citizenship for a child born in the United States to Chinese parents. Along the way, Karlan and Ablavsky break down why history matters to the government’s current effort to argue for new limits on birthright citizenship--and more.
Links:
Connect:
(00:00:00) Who qualifies as a U.S. citizen at birth?
(00:03:54) The Origins of the 14th Amendment
(00:05:58) "Subject to the Jurisdiction Thereof"
(00:11:42) Citizenship at the Supreme Court
(00:17:03) Native Americans, the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act, and the Presidency
(00:18:49) The Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump v. CASA (Barbara) — Analogies, Originalism, and the Native American
(00:28:31) Practical Chaos, Hard Cases and What the Court Should Do
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>Jo is a junior staffer on the Administrative Law Review at American University Washington College of Law, and as part of his graduation requirements, has written an incredible paperdiscussing the Environmental Protection Agency’s wastewater monitoring practices.
Specifically, Jo analyzed whether the EPA needs to be doing more from a data privacy perspective to ensure that American’s privacy rights are not being violated through wastewater monitoring systems.
]]>The Faculty has distributed Volume 17 Number 2 of the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series on SSRN . This issue includes the following articles: Timo Minssen, Mateo Aboy & Effy Vayena: Navigating the EU AI Act: Implications for Regulated Digital Medical Products ( 25/2025 ) The...
We're celebrating 20 years of eucrim— the academic journal that's often been described as the 'instruction manual' of European criminal law.
Putting together a journal for 20 years requires a lot of time, energy, and most importantly talented personnel. Behind the scenes there are a dozen colleagues at the Institute working to ensure that eucrim comes out on time each quarter — from the editors who shape each issue's focus, to the translators who render complex legal concepts across multiple languages, to the proofreaders who ensure every citation is airtight. It is a labor of precision, patience, and genuine passion for the subject matter. Today, three of them sit down to discuss the journal — what it takes to produce it, how it has evolved over the years, and why, after 20 years, the work still feels as important as ever.
Read an article (or three) here: https://eucrim.eu/
]]>