Law Review Squared
The Law Review Review! Law students discuss legal topics, using law review articles as a lens in a panel format. Each episode a law review article is selected by a panel member and distributed to the group. Episodes are released every other Monday. Follow us on twitter at: @SquaredLaw Mailbag at: lexclava@gmail.com
Episodes
Discrimination against protected classes in employment is clearly illegal, but what protections exist for volunteers? What constitutes a benefit that should trigger employment law protections? Can intangible benefits be enough to trigger Title VII protections? Can an organization refuse to accept donations in a discriminatory manner? Do some volunteer organizations, such as volunteer fire departments, perform such important tasks t...
In this episode, Tony discusses Eliminativism with Professor Evan Bernick from NIU. Does constitutional law actually exist? Do constitutional decisionmakers need to have a theory of law in order to choose a constitutional theory? Does whether something is law carry moral weight? How does a judge or other decision maker make decisions when presented with an unjust law? Also, is twitter going to be the new way to submit law review a...
Dean Danielle Conway, head of Penn State Dickinson Law, joins the panel to discuss law school admissions. How can the law school admission process lead to systematic inequities? How has Penn State Dickinson Law adjusted its admissions process to address some of these sources of inequity? Can everybody benefit when procedures are changed to address diversity, equity, and inclusion?
This is the second of a 2-part mini-series focused...
Professor Kathryne Young from UMass-Amherst is conducting a longitudinal study of law students and mental health. The first paper from that effort was published earlier this year. In this episode, our panel visits with Professor Young to discuss her research. How does a lawyer's professional identity develop? We revisit the question of curved grades and the incentives they create. Who speaks up in class, and can the answer to t...
In this episode, the panel discusses decisions made during the 2020 Covid shutdowns. How were the shutdowns handled in different states? Were civil rights adequately protected? Do civil rights deserve protection, even at the cost of public health? If so, which ones and when?
The article discussed was: John Curran, Jake Gardener, and Jeffery Ding, Covid-19 and the Constitution: How the Bill of Rights is Being Tested by the Coronavir...
Should the amount of wealth a person can acquire be limited? Does wealth translate into political power? If so, does wealth inequality affect whether a society should be considered a democracy? Does inequality in access to justice affect the character of a society? What is justice anyway? And is the political philosophy of limitarianism the way to find justice?
The paper discussed was: Ingrid Robeyns, Having Too Much, 58 NOMOS: AM...
In the 18th century, some folk-medicine treatments were the byproduct of the legal system. Our panel of 21st century law students consider an article which describes them. Why do people believe in superstitions? How has that influenced how we've responded to Covid? Can belief induce a placebo effect in medicine? What is the role of government in supporting public health?
The article discussed was: Roberta M. Harding, Rubbing th...
The panel has a conversation with Professor Ryan Calo from the University of Washington, discussing: How do regulatory agencies use automated decision making software or algorithms? Who is responsible when the algorithms deliver absurd results? Can decisions to procure artificial intelligence enhanced software be reviewed? Also, a short consideration of constitutional rights for robots!
Service Animals are generally considered reasonable accommodations under the Fair Housing Act. Should Emotional Support Animals be treated similarly? What about in non-housing situations? What documentation should be required for an animal to be accommodated?
The article discussed was: Katie Basalla, Shortening the Leash: Emotional Support Animals under the Fair Housing Act, 89 U. CIN. L. REV. 140 (2020).
Host: Jo Ann Fernando
Pane...
BONUS EPISODE! California attorney Michael Smith visits with the panel to discus state regulations regarding shooting fish (with firearms), the topic of a law review article he authored. We also discuss: What constitutes good legal writing? What is the value of 'leisure' writing? What happens when you shock a fish with electricity? As well as different approaches to regulation, federalism, and environmental protection.
How does social media influence jurors? What concerns are raised when jurors use social media during a trial? What are reasonable restrictions during a trial? How has our understanding of reasonable social media use changed over the past few years? The panel discusses these timely topics as well as baked goods.
The article discussed was: Amy J. St. Eve & Michael A. Zuckerman, Ensuring an Impartial Jury in the Age of Social Medi...
The panel discusses video games in the context of e-sports, streaming, and how these activities are and/or should be regulated. Covering subjects from performance enhancing drug testing of e-thletes to visas to monetary and 'attention' in-game currencies, there's something in this episode for everyone from the newest n00b to the l33t gamer.
The article discussed was: Elizabeth Chung, Gotta Catch 'Em All! The Rise o...
Professor Michael Mogill joins the panel to discuss how he used Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, the famous 'hot coffee' case, at a Law Day presentation to explain how the jury system works. Other topics discussed include how to teach legal concepts to various non-lawyer/non-law student audiences ranging from children to senior citizens and challenges of teaching law in the time of COVID.
Article: Michael A. Mogill, ...
The panel discusses an article that raises a hypothetical, what claim for an NFL player whose endzone dance is copied by a videogame. Join us for a wide ranging discussion that encompasses the constitution, TikTok, motivations for creative people, and more!
The article that was discussed was: Alex Avakiantz, Stealing Swagger: NFL End Zone Celebrations and Fortnite's Fortune, 94 Wash. L. REV. 453 (2019).
Host: Tony Fernando
Pane...
Law school grades are curved. Why? What are they trying to measure? Do curved grades serve students? Employers? Are curved grades moral? The panel discusses these topics and more, after reading an article which presented a case study of a law school which changed its curve.
The article discussed was: Deborah Waire Post, "Power and Morality of Grading - A Case Study and a Few Critical Thoughts on Grade Normalization", 65 UMK...
What is the object of having an honor code or conduct code? Should law school honor codes have a "toleration clause", which requires a student who becomes aware of an honor code violation to report it? Should school codes be different than professional codes? Do the honor codes at the top law schools differ from the rest? The panel discusses this after having read:
Meredith C. Manuel, Snitches Get Stiches: Ditching the Tole...
The panel is joined by our first guest-author, Associate Dean Bekah Saidman-Krauss! We discuss an article she wrote which analyzed a proposal by Senator Leahy (D-VT) to allow the Supreme Court to fill recusal based vacancies with retired Justices. The lower courts have mechanisms to replace a judge who recuses themselves, why doesn't the Supreme Court? What effect does not having a replacement mechanism have on their decision m...
The panel considers exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act which protects financial and business information. Does this create a right to privacy for corporations? Should business information be protected from disclosure, when the business is doing work for the government?
The article discussed is: Jane E. Kirtley, Scott Memmel, and Jonathan Anderson, More Substantial Harm than Good: Recrafting FOIA's Exemption 4 after ...
The panel discusses court responses to states imposing restrictions on abortion during the present COVID pandemic. Is medicine an area where public necessity can outweigh private rights? Does restricting abortion actually reduce the use of PPE? What are the ethics around using a public health emergency to advance an agenda?
The article discussed is: B. Jessie Hill, ESSENTIALLY ELECTIVE: THE LAW AND IDEOLOGY OF RESTRICTING ABORTION...
Just in time for the election, Schenley leads the panel in a discussion of Shelby v. Holder and the status of the Voting Rights Act. How pervasive should federal oversight of voting be? Also, instructions on how our listeners can get a free Law Review Squared sticker!
The article discussed was: Ellen D. Katz, Section 2 after Section 5: Voting Rights and the Race to the Bottom, 59 WM. & MARY L. REV. 1961 (2018).
Host: Schenley K...
Popular Podcasts
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people.
The most notorious mass murder in Ohio’s history happened on the night of April 21, 2016 in rural Pike County. Four crime scenes, thirty-two gunshot wounds, eight members of the Rhoden family left dead in their homes. Two years later a local family of four, the Wagners, are arrested and charged with the crimes. As the Wagners await four back-to-back capital murder trials, the KT Studios team revisits Pike County to examine: crime-scene forensics, upcoming legal proceedings, and the ties that bind the victims and the accused. As events unfold and new crimes are uncovered, what will it mean for all involved? What will it mean for Pike County?
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
It’s a lighthearted nightmare in here, weirdos! Morbid is a true crime, creepy history and all things spooky podcast hosted by an autopsy technician and a hairstylist. Join us for a heavy dose of research with a dash of comedy thrown in for flavor.