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. 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/
]]>Der Irankrieg ist ein "virtueller Krieg" (Michael Ignatieff hat diesen Begriff für die Kosovo-Intervention gewählt), wir sehen ihn auf Bildschirmen und in Posts von Donald Trump oder KI-Videos vom Iran, wir diskutieren ihn in TV-Formaten, Kommentarspalten und ja, auch in Podcasts. Und dabei ignorieren oder vergessen wir bisweilen, viel zu oft, die Zerstörung und das menschliche Leid, das mit jedem Krieg eingehrgeht. Ich habe mit Solmaz Khorsand über Humanismus, Empathie, Sprache, Expertentum und Journalismus in Zeiten des Krieges gesprochen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
The annual Exploring Law Conference (ELC) was held again this year at the Faculty between 30 April and 2 May. The four-day residential experience provides 250 Year 12 (Y13 NI/S5 Scotland) students the opportunity to gain a balanced view of Law as an academic subject as well as a profession and offer a deep insight into life as a Cambridge undergraduate student. The Conference was a huge success and the delegates had a fantastic opportunity to attend taster lectures and engage in workshops with current legal professionals from the Faculty’s partner firms and chambers, all while staying at 6 Cambridge Colleges. The event was organised by the Faculty's Outreach, Widening Participation and Communications Coordinator Rosalind Boswell alongside the student-led Exploring Law Conference Committee constituted from current undergraduate Law students and a team of vounteer Conference Mentors also drawn from the Faculty's undergraduate students. Of the delegates, 150 are students who meet additional widening participation criteria and thus qualify for fully-funded places, which are generously funded by our Access and Widening Participation Partner firms – Clifford Chance , Hogan Lovells , Slaughter and May , and Maitland Chambers . This year, all students (fee-paying and fully-funded) were chosen through a rigorous process and among a pool of 1250 applicants who had to present their interest for the course and future plans in a comprehensive application. Prioritising students who met several widening participation criteria resulted in an extremely diverse Conference delegation, which reaches a number of the Faculty's targets. Over 60% of participants were eligible for Free School Meals, and 95% of the delegation came from maintained-sector schools. The Faculty is proud to have worked with the Conference Committee for over half a century in reaching out to prospective students and opening the gates of access to the study of Law and the Cambridge educational experience. There is a long history of Conference attendees subsequently successfully applying to study at the Faculty. For anyone considering applying for next year applications will open around October 2026.
The University of Cambridge Faculty of Law is delighted to celebrate the outstanding success of the Cambridge University Arbitration Society's (CUArb) 2026 Vis Moot team comprising Tripos students Dawn Chow (Newnham), Sam Moore (Trinity Hall), Ewan Crease (Fitzwilliam) and Thomas Loke (Trinity), who recently reached the final of the prestigious international competition . The Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot, held annually in Vienna, is one of the world's largest and most rigorous advocacy competitions. This year's event saw 384 universities from across the globe competing in a series of grueling rounds. The Cambridge team demonstrated exceptional legal reasoning and oral advocacy, navigating complex issues of international commercial law against a diverse field of international opponents to reach the final. In addition to the success in the oral arguments, the team's legal writing and argumentation was also recognized. The Cambridge team earned 2nd place for the Claimant Memorandum and an Honourable Mention for the Respondent Memorandum exemplifying the high standard of advocacy across the disciplines. The team's success was made possible through the generous support of Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer . The firm is a long-standing supporter of the Faculty and CUArb, and their continued commitment to fostering interest in international arbitration was vital to the team's preparation and participation. The students were coached by doctoral candidate Leo F. Souza-McMurtrie and LLM student Margaret Driscoll, whose expert guidance proved instrumental in the team's progression. The squad also benefited from the expertise of Professor Campbell McLachlan and Dr Faidon Varesis , who provided invaluable mentorship throughout the competition.
The conversation then traces her journey through the legal profession, from clerking in federal court to building a career in complex litigation and eventually becoming a justice on the Court of Appeals. She shares what it was like stepping into the role, including the transition from advocate to decision-maker and the responsibility that comes with shaping the law through written opinions.
Throughout the episode, Justice Rivas-Molloy offers a behind-the-scenes look at life on the bench, from her weekly routine to how she approaches analyzing cases and writing opinions. She reflects on the types of cases she finds most challenging and meaningful, as well as how her perspective has evolved during her time as a judge.
She also discusses the importance of pro bono work, mentorship, and her early experiences on law review, highlighting the skills that have carried through her career. As the conversation comes to a close, she shares her thoughts on public service, the impact she hopes to have through her work, and what she hopes voters understand about her as she seeks reelection.
Tune in for a thoughtful and personal conversation on public service, perseverance, and the path to the bench.
To get a mailing or electronic subscription to the Houston Law Review click here.
For more Emphasis Added content, follow us on Instagram and check out our video content on YouTube!
The discussion then turns to her transition into academia and the development of her scholarly interests. Professor Portuondo offers insight into her work on reproductive rights and justice, breaking down the constitutional foundations of these issues and the ways they intersect with broader questions of privacy, equality, and individual liberties.
Throughout the episode, she explores the evolving legal landscape following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, unpacking its constitutional implications and the unresolved questions it leaves behind. She also examines the tension between state authority and personal freedoms, as well as the increasing overlap between First Amendment protections and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees, particularly in areas like free speech, equal protection, and regulation in the digital age.
Finally, Professor Portuondo shares her perspective on what constitutional issues may be on the horizon and reflects on the direction of the Court and the future of these critical legal questions.
Tune in for a thoughtful conversation on constitutional law, reproductive justice, and the shifting boundaries of rights in today’s legal landscape.
To get a mailing or electronic subscription to the Houston Law Review click here.
For more Emphasis Added content, follow us on Instagram and check out our video content on YouTube!
Justin and Annefaye share how they each found their way to HULR, what drew them to legal writing, and how their academic experiences shaped their paths. Justin reflects on helping found the organization, while both share how they prepared for the responsibilities of serving as Editors-in-Chief and what it takes to guide a student-run publication.
Throughout the discussion, they offer insight into the day-to-day realities of leading HULR, from managing deadlines and coordinating teams to ensuring a smooth transition between editorial boards. They discuss the challenges they’ve faced, the strategies they’ve developed to stay organized, and their broader vision for HULR’s role in legal scholarship and student development.
Finally, Justin and Annefaye reflect on the personal and professional skills they’ve gained through their leadership, offering advice to students interested in joining HULR or pursuing similar opportunities. They close with thoughtful reflections on their experiences and how their time as Editors-in-Chief has shaped their future goals.
Tune in for an engaging conversation on student leadership, legal scholarship, and the impact of leading the Houston Undergraduate Law Review!
To get a mailing or electronic subscription to the Houston Law Review click here.
For more Emphasis Added content, follow us on Instagram and check out our video content on YouTube!
His commenters were Andrew Hammond, Professor of Law at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law and Abigail R. Moncrieff, Associate Professor of Law and Political Science and Co-Director of the Center for Health Law and Policy at Cleveland State University.
Tune in for a fascinating and informative discussion about how federal programs expanded during the pandemic and the legal, policy, and social consequences of their subsequent rollback.
On behalf of the Houston Law Review, Emphasis Added would like to thank Professor Bagenstos, Professor Hammond, and Professor Moncrieff for sharing their work with us. Furthermore, we are grateful to the Frankel family for their continued support in fueling the Law Center's ability to host timely and intellectual conversations on important legal issues.
To get a mailing or electronic subscription to the Houston Law Review click here.
For more Emphasis Added content, follow us on Instagram and check out our video content on YouTube!
Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Expungement, Non-Adjudication, Collateral Consequences.
The MS Center for Justice has a great webpage with information about expungements. There’s a link to their detailed Expungement Eligibility intake Form. There’s also information if you want to volunteer your time at an Expungement Clinic or if you want to host a clinic in your community.
MPB has a special gift for you! Beginning Monday, January 5th, 2026 at 5pm, @Issue will offer 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. We’re excited that @Issue will be back on MPB Think Radio.
MPB has a gift suggestion for you. If you or someone you love LOVES Mississippi Public Broadcasting, consider getting them an MPB Foundation Membership. $60 for the year or $5 per month, and you get access to Passport to watch MPB and PBS programs on demand and you get our Fine Tuning Program Guide in the mail each month so you can read about what’s coming up at MPB. You can donate from MPBonline.org or from the MPB Public Media app. You can also see MPB scarfs, hoodies, tote bags and socks that are thank you gifts for your donations.
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
MPB has local call in shows where you can ask an expert about money, health, gardening, and more. We’re the legal show!
You can listen LIVE to us from the MPB Public Media app or from MPBonline.org/radio
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Die USA sind eine andere Welt. Ich habe mit dem ORF-Auslandskorrenspondenten Markus Müller-Schinwald über Trump, Hegseth und die Rolle der Religion gesprochen, über Parallelen zwischen Trump und Kaiser Wilhelm, Immobilien-Fantasien von Gaza bis Grönland, die Selbstausschaltung des Kongresses, Trumps plötzliche Kriegslust und die über alledem stehende Frage, wie das alles eigentlich möglich ist.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/Links:
Scholarship discussed in the episode includes Lauri Mälksoo’s recent book, Russia, the Soviet Union, and Imperial Continuity in International Law (2025); and Gulnaz Sharafutdinova’s The Red Mirror: Putin's Leadership and Russia's Insecure Identity (2020) and The Afterlife of the ‘Soviet Man’: Rethinking Homo Sovieticus (2023). Erika de Wet expands on themes in ‘Is the future for collective security regional? Assessing current challenges to regional and sub-regional security frameworks in Africa’, forthcoming Japanese Yearbook of International Law (2026).
]]>Die Türkei war außenpolitisch durch den Sturz von Assad zuletzt auf der Siegesstraße, aber der Irankrieg sorgt auch hier für Unsicherheit. Ich habe das zum Anlass genommen, mit Cengiz Günay vom Österreichischen Institut für Internationale Politik (OIIP) – wo ich als Affiliated Researcher tätig bin – über die aktuelle Lage im Nahen Osten, das Erbe des Osmanischen Reichs, den Vertrag von Sevres, Atatürk, den Neo-Ottomanismus, islamistische Außenpolitik, Identität zwischen Religion und Nationalismus, Erdogan, die türkischen Beziehungen zu Israel oder zur EU und vieles mehr zu sprechen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/Links:
Didn’t we just have Eric on our show? Yes! Eric was on March 5th but we had so much we wanted to cover we brough him back today.
You think you know the rules of the road? But do you have the rule book? Sometimes nonfiction reading is fun – check out the Dept of Pubic Safety’s Driver’s License Manual from their website
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
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.
]]>
Links:
Connect:
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>In March a Cambridge University team comprising Amia Guha (lead counsel) (Trinity), Sherelle Lim (Magdalene), and Leonard Krych (Corpus Christi), travelled to Madrid to compete in the Mitchell L. McLean Trial Competition . The competition is the only American law moot held in Spain, hosted by the European Law Students' Association at IE University in partnership with Pérez-Llorca. Joel Ireland (Trinity) was also an invaluable research member of the team, back in Cambridge. The competition placed teams inside a fictional US federal criminal case, United States v. Joshua Francis-Dragoș , involving a fatal shooting near the Utah-Arizona state line on land overlapping with the Navajo Nation. The case raised some of the most technically demanding areas of American law: Indian Country jurisdiction, the Major Crimes Act, Public Law 280's displacement of federal criminal jurisdiction, and federal self-defence doctrine. Cambridge won the trial court round 37 to 36.5 on the strength of a forensic-led defence challenging the government's GPS evidence and corroborating a close-quarters struggle rather than a deliberate killing. In the appellate round, the team argued novel grounds including a Public Law 280 displacement argument and a statutory interpretation point drawn from the MCA's own text - and won the overall competition (by a 0.7 mark margin). The Cambridge Team also won the Best Brief award.
Zur den aktuellen Entwicklungen der Generalsekretärsauswahl: Chile hat mittlerweile die Nominierung von Michelle Bachelet zurückgezogen, Brasilien und Mexiko halten sie jedoch aufrecht. Virginia Gamba musste ihre Kandidatur zurückziehen, da die Malediven ihr die Unterstützung entzogen.
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
]]>
Dr Gurgen Petrossian is a Senior Officer for International Criminal Law at the International Nuremberg Principles Academy. He also holds teaching positions at the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), the Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, and the Yerevan State University. His work focuses on international criminal law, international criminal proceedings, and human rights law.
Sources:
]]>
Professor Catherine Barnard, Professor of European Union Law and Employment Law ( Trinity College ) and Senior Fellor of UK in a Changing Europe , appeared before the House of Lords European Affairs Committee earlier this week to provide expert testimony on the legal implications of dynamic alignment between UK and EU law. The evidence session on Tuesday was part of the Committee's inquiry into the future of the UK-EU relationship. Professor Barnard provided the Committee with a comprehensive overview of how dynamic alignment - the process by which the UK might voluntarily or through treaty obligation adopt new EU rules - operates in practice across different international models. During the session, Professor Barnard outlined a "spectrum of approaches" to alignment, ranging from the "hardcore" automatic alignment seen in the Northern Ireland Protocol and the proposed Gibraltar agreement, to more flexible arrangements such as the Swiss and EEA models. She also clarified the distinction between true dynamic alignment and the "non-regression" or "rebalancing" provisions found in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). "Traditionally, dynamic alignment means you are required to follow what the other party tells you to do in perpetuity" Professor Barnard told the Committee. She highlighted the complexities of maintaining a "duty of homogeneity" in judicial interpretation, noting the challenges faced by courts in Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein in following the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Faculty continues to lead the way in providing rigorous academic analysis of the post-Brexit legal landscape. Professor Barnard's contribution to this inquiry ensures that parliamentary scrutiny of the UK's evolving legal framework is informed by world-class expertise. A full transcript and video recording of the evidence session can be found on the UK Parliament website .
Die Folgen des Irankriegs sind in der gesamten Region spürbar. Trump hat keine Strategie und Netanjahu hat eine fragwürdige Strategie. Ich habe mit Bente Scheller von der Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung über den Konflikt zwischen Israel und den Palästinensern, die iranischen Beziehungen zu Terrorgruppen und die Auswirkungen auf Länder wie den Libanon oder Syrien gesprochen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Im Mittelpunkt des Gesprächs steht die Perspektive von Betroffenen digitaler Gewalt: Was bedeutet bildbasierte sexualisierte Gewalt konkret? Und welche rechtlichen Möglichkeiten gibt es, sich dagegen zu wehren? Was bräuchte es, um wirksamen (strafrechtlichen) Schutz von Betroffenen zu erreichen?
**Shownotes: **
Justitias Töchter Folge 39 (November 2023): Bildbasierte sexualisierte Gewalt – mit PD Dr. Anja Schmidt [https://www.djb.de/podcast/detail/folge-39-bildbasierte-sexualisierte-gewalt](https://www.djb.de/podcast/detail/folge-39-bildbasierte-sexualisierte-gewalt)
djb Policy Paper 23-17: Bekämpfung bildbasierter sexualisierter Gewalt [https://www.djb.de/presse/stellungnahmen/detail/st23-17](https://www.djb.de/presse/stellungnahmen/detail/st23-17)
Artikel: Bildbasiert aber unsichtbar von Theresia Crone | Verfassungsblog [https://verfassungsblog.de/pornografische-deepfakes/](https://verfassungsblog.de/pornografische-deepfakes/)
**Feministische Fundstücke: **
Artikel: Avantgarde der Geschlechtervielfalt von Elisabeth Holzleithner | Verfassungsblog [https://verfassungsblog.de/osterreich-geschlecht/](https://verfassungsblog.de/osterreich-geschlecht/)
Rechtsentscheidung: Recht auf Menstruationsgesundheit als Ausdruck des Rechts auf Leben und des Chancengleichenzugangs zu Ausbildung anerkannt vom Supreme Court Indien [https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/mandating-menstrual-leave-may-harm-womens-careers-says-supreme-court-asks-union-to-consider-framing-policy-526281](https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/mandating-menstrual-leave-may-harm-womens-careers-says-supreme-court-asks-union-to-consider-framing-policy-526281)
[https://fosfeminista.org/news-and-stories/from-menstrual-hygiene-to-menstrual-justice-the-promise-and-limits-of-indias-landmark-ruling/](https://fosfeminista.org/news-and-stories/from-menstrual-hygiene-to-menstrual-justice-the-promise-and-limits-of-indias-landmark-ruling/)
Buch: Americanah von Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie [https://www.fischerverlage.de/buch/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-americanah-9783596185986](https://www.fischerverlage.de/buch/chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-americanah-9783596185986)
Past podcasts with Kyle-Wynn attorneys:
Where can you get news about our Mississippi Laws? our MPB News program @Issue, Mondays at 5pm. There is extra information on the where you can find their audio podcasts and their YouTube interviews.
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: testate, intestate, testamentary
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.
]]>In dieser Folge schauen wir uns an, was hinter den SDGs steckt, wie sie entstanden sind und welche Rolle sie heute für eine nachhaltige Zukunft spielen.
Weiterführende Informationen
Moderation: Mariam Souseh
Redaktion: Mariam Souseh, Sophie Fasshauer, Laura Stettner
Postproduktion: Erwin Eisenhardt, DGVN-Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
]]>In this episode of the pod, we get into the nitty gritty on energy, utilities, and governance strategies. The episode begins with a discussion of whether, and under what circumstances, centralized government regulation is (and is not) better than competition among private energy providers. We then tackle several big theoretical questions, such as the best methodology for analyzing regulatory policy, whether a carbon tax could be effective, and whether there should be an Abundance agenda for energy. And we also talk practical solutions: Why don’t we create a vast inter-state energy network? Should every state adopt the Texas approach of “surge pricing” during times of increased electricity demand? And more.
The episode concludes with another excellent nomination for the Canon of American Legal Thought (1975-2025).
Referenced Readings
“Behavior of the Firm under Regulatory Constraint”, by Harvey Averch and Leland Johnson
The Economic Structure of Corporate Law, by Frank Easterbrook and Daniel Fischel
“The Corporate Governance of Public Utilities”, by Aneil Kovvali and Joshua Macey
“In Defense of Chapter 11 for Mass Torts”, by Anthony Casey and Joshua Macey
“Inside or Outside the System?”, by Eric Posner and Adrian Vermeule
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]
This episode features a discussion of whether a carbon tax could effectively curb climate change. And David has recently called attention to the new property tax revolt. In this spirit, what’s something you think should be taxed, but currently is not?
Sam: In my new book, I argue for a new suite of tax laws that attack the nexus of age and wealth - for example, by incentivizing departure from homes for those who have means to leave and, because they are older, often occupy more square footage than they need.
David: Lots of possibilities – low taxes on different tax bases can be very attractive, as the deadweight loss of taxation gets increasingly worse as a single tax gets higher. A serious answer is congestion. Driving downtown during busy periods creates huge externalities, and once passed, as NYC’s experience shows, congestion charges become popular because they reduce traffic.
A less serious but equally strongly-felt answer: a progressive tax on the length of meetings, particularly Zooms. How happy would the world be if the person who said “one more thing” at the end of meeting faced a stiff penalty! Also, of course, seconds of speeches during faculty meetings!!!
Finally, my wife would also say there should be a tax on exclamation points in emails, as it would encourage people to sound less deranged!!! And by people, she definitely means me :)
]]>Imagine you’re on a yacht in the South China Sea. Suddenly, a US destroyer and a Chinese patrol vessel approach. Both claim rights to the same stretch of water; both believe they are following international law. How can two superpowers look at the same body of water and see two different sets of rules?
Join host Christopher Murphy and guest Malcolm Jorgensen as they explore the retreat of the 'rules-based order'. They discuss a world fracturing into spheres of influence, where international law is increasingly defined by the local superpower. It’s a fascinating look at how China, Russia, and the US are competing to rewrite the very definition of global power.
Find out more:
]]>When do art and the law meet? Why during Turkey Hunting Season! If you’re confused, stay with us to learn from our guests from the Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks MDWFP Wild Turkey Program Coordinator, Caleb Hinton, and South Region Administrator, Major Kallum Herrington
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: Administrative Regulation, Bag Limit, Harvest Reporting, Wildlife Stamp
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.
]]>Die gute alte Weltordnung ist nicht mehr, Europa muss sicherheitspolitisch erwachsen werden. Sprich: Sich von den USA emanzipieren, neue Partnerschaften eingehen, bestehende Partnerschaften stärken und sich ganz allgemein fragen, wie man in dieser Welt bestehen kann. Ich habe mit Jana Puglierin über ihr neues Buch "Wer verteidigt Europa" gesprochen.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen:
Ambassador Tomohiro Mikanagi is the Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations and was the Japanese Legal Advisor from 2022 to 2024. He also holds the title of Ambassador-at-Large for Cooperation on International Law.
He was a visiting fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre of International Law and is currently an LCIL Partner Fellow. He participated in the proceedings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the Advisory Opinion issued on July 19, 2024. Japan's oral statement in February 2024 was unique as it focused exclusively on the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force.
Chair: Prof Sandesh Sivakumaran
]]>Links:
Connect:
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>Michael Byers (PhD Cantab) is Professor of Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia. He also co-directs the Outer Space Institute, a global network of space experts united by their commitment to highly innovative, transdisciplinary research that addresses grand challenges facing the continued use and exploration of space. Dr. Byers has been a Junior Research Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford University; Professor of Law at Duke University; and a Visiting Professor at the universities of Cape Town, Tel Aviv, Nord (Norway), Novosibirsk (Russia), St Andrews, and the Geneva Graduate Institute. His two most recent books, both published by Cambridge University Press, are International Law and the Arctic and Who Owns Outer Space?
Chair: Prof Lorand Bartels, Centre Fellow
The Friday Lunchtime Lecture series is kindly supported by Cambridge University Press & Assessment.
]]>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: Equal Protection Clause, Civil Rights, Rule of Law
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.
Do you need a lawyer? Or do you need scholarship money to go to college or while attending law school? The website for The Magnolia Bar Association has a “find a lawyer” tab and information about scholarships for highschoolers and current law students.
Do you love MPB? Would you like some “MPB” stuff? A Felder Rushing – The Gestalt Gardner t-shirt? Tomorrow – Friday, March 13th starts our MPB Radio Pledge Drive. With your contribution to Mississippi Public Broadcasting you could choose as a Thank You gift a variety of items such as an umbrella or a weather radio, or a whole passel of items bundled together. Tomorrow there’ll be more information on MPB Radio and our webpage.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>Die UNO steckt einmal mehr, eigentlich wie immer, in der Krise. Trump und Netanjahu kümmert das Völkerrecht wenig. Gleichzeitig sollte das Völkerrecht Diktaturen kein Schutzschild bieten. Was also tun? Ich habe mit der Rechtsanwältin Arlette Zakarian über ihr Heimtland Iran und ihr Fachgebiet – das Völkerrecht – gesprochen: über das Konzept der „humanitären Intervention“, Frauenrechte, Trump, Israel, wie man die UNO reformieren könnte und vieles mehr.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/Links:
Inhalt
Weiterführende Informationen
Moderation & Redaktion: Sophie Fasshauer
Postproduktion: Erwin Eisenhardt, DGVN-Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
]]>An expert in international law and its subfields, including legal history and international criminal law, Diane Marie Amann has served as Regents’ Professor, Emily & Ernest Woodruff Chair in International Law, and Faculty Co-Director of the Dean Rusk International Law Center at the University of Georgia School of Law, and is an Academic Affiliate at University College London Faculty of Laws. She was Special Adviser to International Criminal Court Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on Children in & affected by Armed Conflict, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and has held leadership posts in the American and European societies of international law. Amann is writing an Oxford University Press book about lawyers and other women professionals at the first Nuremberg trial.
]]>The episode explores how lived experience, frontline services, and strategic lobbying intersect to shape laws that protect victims and survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. Sonya charts the evolution of Women’s Aid’s work: from the development of the first 24/7 domestic abuse helpline in the mid‑1990s, to the introduction of landmark legislation such as the Domestic Abuse and Civil Proceedings Act (NI), the Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking) Act, and the non-fatal strangulation offence.
She also sheds light on persistent challenges: under-resourcing, gaps in police training, complex legislative delays, barriers to legal aid, and the urgent need for better protection orders. But the conversation also showcases promising developments including the Domestic Abuse Court pilot, new prevention programmes in schools, and initiatives supporting medical, nursing, social work, and law students to recognise and respond to domestic abuse.
Motherhood sits uneasily within the institutional imagination of international legal academia. Academic career paths are still commonly structured around expectations of uninterrupted productivity, geographic mobility, and “always-on” availability – assumptions that collide with pregnancy, postpartum recovery, and the ongoing realities of care. This episode takes that tension seriously, treating motherhood not as a private contingency to be managed individually, but as a question of academic culture and institutional design.
In this episode, Sissy Katsoni and Polina Kulish sit down with Michelle Staggs Kelsall, Joyce De Coninck and Tania Ixchel Atilano to discuss the realities of motherhood in modern legal academia, the anxieties many women academics experience when considering whether and when to have children, as well as practical steps needed to make academic legal spaces more inclusive.
Before the interview, Céline Chausse introduces the discussion by reflecting on the ‘Women in International Law’ symposium and the importance of bringing mothers’ experiences into conversations about legal academia as a workplace. Rishiti Choudaha then sets the stage with key facts and frameworks on the struggles facing mother and non-mother academics in contemporary legal academia and on how institutional practices continues to fall short.
At a moment when many early-career scholars weigh parenthood against professional survival, this episode speaks directly to the anxieties that shape those choices and to the structural changes needed to make legal academia workable for caregivers.
This special episode is part of the ‘Women in International Law’ symposium and was therefore produced in English.
Have thoughts to share? We’re all ears! Whether it’s applause, reflections, or a dash of helpful critique, reach us anytime at podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Be sure to subscribe via RSS, Spotify, or wherever your favorite podcasts live. And hey, if you love what you hear, a five-star rating goes a long way!
Background information (all Open Access):
Lutiana Valadares Fernandes Barbosa, Pandemic, Maternity, and International Lawyers from the Global South: a Call for an Intersectional Approach (2024)
Olof Ejermo, Research or Family: How Does Becoming a Parent Affect Academic Productivity? (2024)
Christy Ebert Vrtis, If you’re a mother doing a PhD, expect to be ignored and undermined (2022)
Karen Ramsay and Gayle Letherby, The Experience of Academic Non-Mothers in the Gendered University (2006)
Xiang Zheng, Haimiao Yuan and Chaoqun Ni, How Parenthood Contributes to Gender Gaps in Academia (2022)
Moderation: Céline Chausse
Interview: Dr. Tania Ixchel Atilano, Dr. Joyce De Coninck, Dr Michelle Staggs Kelsall, Dr. Sissy Katsoni, Polina Kulish
Background information: Rishiti Choudaha
Cut: Daniela Rau
Credits: Opening with Michelle Staggs Kelsall’s quote during the post-episode recording discussion.
Background music: ‘Gravity of Tenderness’ created by The Fabler.
]]>Today’s Legal Terms on In Legal Terms are: Hardship License, Right‑of‑Way, Traffic Control Device
What does the Department of Public Safety do? What don’t they do!? Their website: https://www.dps.ms.gov/ has information about Mississippi’s Most Wanted, a commercial vehicle towing manual, firearms permits, homeland security, in addition to drivers’ license and highway patrol.
This show, today, has changed my life – just about saved my life. I am not being dramatic. Preparing for this broadcast, I like to put little info tid-bits into the show. What could I talk about today? Oh, how about the Mobile ID app! I love mine. Went out one time and forgot my purse but, of course, I didn’t forget my phone. I was so glad – so if I got stopped, I’d have my ID.
Well, I went to open the app to remind myself how it works, and I noticed my license expires on my birthday this year – VERY SOON - and while I’ll be traveling! So I’ve got to get my license renewed – quickly!!
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
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.
]]>The episode begins with a general discussion about the Supreme Court’s power to impose an interpretive methodology on lower courts, what is often called “methodological stare decisis.” Grove advocates for something resembling a middle ground—the Supreme Court has a limited, bounded power to impose method on lower courts. We then get into the nitty gritty of the distinction between holding and dictum and of Article III’s case and controversy requirement. David asks why the Supreme Court can’t just do what it wants regarding method, and he queries whether the Supreme Court also has power to narrow the precedential force of its interpretive holdings. Sam asks why we should care whether the Supreme Court could impose method in one fell swoop if it’s clear that it can impose method in a piecemeal, case-by-case fashion. We conclude our discussion of Grove’s article by debating the normative credentials of interpretive pluralism.
Before wrapping up the pod, we launch a brand new featured segment on The Canon of American Legal Thought, where we ask guests for (at least) one nomination for a list of the most important legal scholarship of the last fifty years. Grove offers not one, but three, excellent nominations, and Sam and David resist the urge to nominate their own work. We hope you enjoy!
This podcast is generously supported by Themis Bar Review.
Referenced Readings
“The Power to Impose Method”, by Tara Grove
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]
H.L.A. Hart’s “no vehicles in the park” hypothetical has been described as “the most famous hypothetical in the common law world.” In the spirit of this episode, give us your hottest take on this chestnut of statutory interpretation. Are airplanes vehicles? Tricycles?
Sam: Anything is a vehicle that an adequately powerful consensus decides is one. Do the math.
David: As is often the case, the fight over legal interpretation missed the big policy change – many parks closing their internal roads to cars, leaving more space for bikes and runners alike. The closing of Central Park to cars (other than the separated cross-town thoroughfares) is a huge policy success, and far more important than edge cases about motorized scooters.
Die USA und Israel bombardieren den Iran und wünschen sich einen Regime Change herbei. Wie der aussehen könnte, bleibt offen: Vom Sohn des letzten Schahs bis hin zur Frage, ob ein "genauso schlimmer" Machthaber wie der eben erst getötete Ayatollah Chamenei, stehen einige "Optionen" im Raum. Ich habe mit Hessam Habibi über die aktuelle Lage gesprochen, von der Unterstützung für die Kurden über die Gefahr eines Bürgerkriegs bis hin zu den Auswirkungen in der Region.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/Links
Weiterführende Informationen
Moderation: Laura Stettner
Redaktion: Laura Stettner, Sophie Fasshauer, Mariam Souseh
Postproduktion: Erwin Eisenhardt, DGVN-Arbeitskreis Nachhaltigkeit und Klimagerechtigkeit
]]>On this episode of Stanford Legal, co-host Professor Pamela Karlan sits down with international trade expert Alan Sykes, professor of law and Warren Christopher Professor in the Practice of International Law and Diplomacy, to unpack the Court’s 6–3 decision. Sykes is a leading expert on the application of economics to legal problems and the author of the book The Law and Economics of International Trade Agreements.
At the heart of the case, Sykes explains, was the question of whether a statute that allows the president to “regulate importation” can be stretched to authorize taxes on imports. The majority said no, emphasizing that the Constitution assigns the taxing power to Congress, and that if Congress intended to hand that power over, it would have said so clearly. The conversation explores the statutory arguments, the role of the Major Questions Doctrine, and the unusual alignments among the justices.
But the ruling raises as many questions as it answers, Sykes notes. What happens to billions in tariffs already collected? Do international trade deals struck in the shadow of these tariffs still stand? And with other statutory tools available is this really the end of the tariff saga, or just the next chapter?
Links:
Connect:
(00:00:00) Tariffs and IEEPA
(00:10:53) Statutory text and the history of tariffs
(00:13:54) “Regulate importation” and the Major Questions Doctrine
(00:17:56) Liquidation Timing, finality, and the 314‑day rule
(00:19:11) The Court of International Trade
(00:29:53) From IEEPA to Section 122 and what’s next under Section 301
Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
]]>Dr Natalie Klein is Associate Dean (Academic) and a Professor at UNSW Sydney’s Faculty of Law & Justice, Australia. Professor Klein teaches and researches in different areas of international law, focusing on law of the sea. She was a Visiting Fellow at the Lauterpacht Centre in 2008 when she was working on Maritime Security and the Law of the Sea (OUP). She is co-author, with Kate Purcell and Jack McNally, of a forthcoming monograph, Submarines in International Law (CUP).
There is a sandwich lunch at 12.30 pm in the Old Library at the Centre. All lecture attendees welcome.
Chair: Prof Markus Gehring
The Friday Lunchtime Lecture series is kindly supported by Cambridge University Press & Assessment.
]]>Das Völkerrecht stößt bei nuklearen Ambitionen an seine Grenzen, für die Angriffe auf den Iran gibt es dennoch keine völkerrechtliche Grundlage. Was die USA und Israel freilich wenig interessiert. Wohl aber könnte es im MAGA-Lager (man denke vor allem an Tulsi Gabbard, von der ich auch Zitate einspiele) zu Zerwürfnissen führen. Viele – auch ich – hatten gedacht, dass Trump wenigstens keine neuen Kriege vom Zaun brechen würde. War wohl nichts.
Podcast unterstützen: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/ralphjanik
Quellen/Links:
Inhalte
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
]]>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: Heirs’ Property, Tenants in Common, Partition Action
Past podcasts with Mississippi Center for Justice:
February 25, 2025 MCJ - Kimberly Jones Merchant
May 7, 2024 - Robert McDuff MCJ
October 17, 2023 Champions of Justice - MSCJ
May 24, 2022 - MCJ Heirs' Property
January 25, 2022 - Educational Rights
November 9, 2021 - Heirs' Property Help
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.
It’s two weeks until our Mississippi Primaries. Are you ready? I’ve seen on social media from Texas, folks who thought they were newly registered to vote, had trouble voting in their primaries. You can check to see if your Mississippi information is in order – verify, update, or cancel your voter registration at yallvote.ms . We’re in our absentee voting period – you can do this by mail or in person and this week and next live absentee voting on Saturdays is available.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
]]>