This discussion group explores how mid- and senior-level faculty can effectively support their junior colleagues while respecting their autonomy and academic freedom. Discussants will share strategies for mentorship in teaching, scholarship, and service, as well as for guiding newer faculty through institutional norms and promotion and tenure expectations. The group will also discuss fostering collaboration and camaraderie across faculty cohorts, including tenured, pre-tenure, clinical, academic success, and legal writing faculty. In exchanging practical approaches to mentorship, discussants will consider how experienced faculty can help build a supportive academic culture that benefits everyone as we strive to achieve our common mission of educating our students to the best of our abilities.
For the first time in its history, the Supreme Court decided two Second Amendment cases in a single Term. These cases raise distinct challenges to the test Bruen articulated in 2022. One challenges a new state law that responds to changing social conditions and legal terrain (Wolford). May states change the default rules for gun carrying on private property? The other challenges a federal law that has been on the books for more than half a century (Hemani). May legislatures disarm those who abuse illegal drugs? This panel unpacks the decisions and their implications for Second Amendment doctrine and issues the Court will soon confront like assault weapons, sensitive places, and disarmament for those with felony convictions.
As law professors, we frequently encounter opportunities to spotlight our research and engage in public discourse via op-eds, testimony, amicus briefs, media commentary, podcasts, and more. Should legal academics engage more actively with the public, or does this detract from scholarly and pedagogical commitments? Drawing on their personal experiences, discussants will debate whether public engagement is a civic duty of the academy. The discussion will also consider institutional incentives, public trust in legal expertise, and the responsibilities of scholars in shaping legal narratives beyond the classroom.
How can you find your place in the legal academy? Who can you talk to about your questions? This session provides aspiring law teachers an opportunity to gather information and ask questions of experienced law teachers regarding specific issues in entering the academy. This session explores how to research the legal academic job hiring market and position yourself for the job, including how to build experience and prepare your curriculum vita and academic record to compete in the academic market. This session also provides information regarding the core components of an academic's life: teaching, scholarship, and service.
In recent years, law schools have placed greater emphasis on being student-centered than perhaps they traditionally had. Many view this as a positive development. Yet, professors must now navigate the expectation of caring for students while still upholding standards, maintaining balance between professional obligations and personal life, and establishing their own professional identities. This discussion group focuses on the new professor-student dynamic and its effect on faculty members' ability to accomplish their own personal and professional goals. Topics include: setting appropriate boundaries with students and colleagues; managing time to fulfill teaching, scholarship, and service obligations; remaining professional but approachable when working with different types of students in different capacities; and addressing the "student-as-consumer" culture.
Realization of substantive rights depends on remedies. Increasing use of emergency dockets places equitable remedies as pivotal from the start of the litigation. The nature and scope of remedies demonstrate what the law honors most from private law to public. Varied remedies are key to advance executive prerogatives or forestall overreaches. We discuss a host of areas, including intellectual property, unjust enrichment, contracts, torts, criminal law, constitutional law, and administrative law. Before equitable or legal remedies may flow, plaintiffs must meet demanding requirements. Judges may also need to consider federalism, separation-of-powers issues, sovereignty, choice of law, and reform statues. This discussion group explores strategies, obstacles, and unifying principles. Discussants ultimately suggest how remedies may best serve underlying rights at stake.
In the years since the Supreme Court decisions in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, law schools have experienced increased scrutiny of their admissions processes at both the federal and (particularly in the case of public institutions) state levels. This increased scrutiny seems to be part of a broader trend in which governments and private organizations have challenged previously accepted norms surrounding legal education and reignited debates about what faculty are allowed to do both inside and outside the classroom. This discussion group examines this trend and considers the impact that these decisions continue to have on the future of legal education.
In April 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Louisiana v. Callais. This decision struck down Louisiana's second majority minority congressional district, promulgated in 2024, as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Louisiana successfully argued that, when devising a challenged 2022 map, it had redistricted based on politics._x000D_ _x000D_ Callais promises to be consequential for redistricting at the national, state, and local levels. This discussion group will convene constitutional law scholars to address the case from many angles, including doctrinal, historical, cultural, and theoretical. By engaging with differing perspectives on the case, the discussion group will seek to come to a fuller understanding of what Callais will mean for the future of law and politics in the United States.
This Discussion Group features four professors demonstrating teaching exercises that engage the rule of law in the context of professional identity formation in a variety of contexts with constructive feedback from the other members of the Discussion Group. In the three-hour session, each of the four presenters has roughly 30 minutes to demonstrate their teaching exercise with discussants having 10-15 minutes to offer constructive feedback.
This session exposes aspiring law teachers to ways an applicant can better increase their odds of securing a screening interview, along with the format and content of a typical screening interview for doctrinal, clinical, and legal writing positions. The group will engage in an in-depth discussion with aspiring law teachers about question content, interviewing styles, and common mistakes made by applicants during screening interviews. Experienced faculty will act as mock interviewers, while new members of the academy who have recently been through the rigors of the job hiring market will act as mock interviewees. This session will be helpful to those who are about to enter the job market and those still thinking about it.
Panelists offer advice on best practices for job talks. Job talks not only forecast the scholar you are and will become but also model the type of teacher you will be. The panelists will share the characteristics of an effective job talk, focusing on topic selection, authenticity, expertise, clarity, and delivery. They will also examine how to harness key points from your work into digestible, yet provocative, content that best showcases your ideas and what you bring to the intellectual discourse.  Panelists will provide tips on how to prepare and how to handle tough questions from the faculty during your talk.  
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea.
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea.
This discussion group addresses the value of scholarship. Topics include how to develop best writing practices and balance commitments. Speakers explore various types of writing (from opinion-editorials and blogs to journal articles and manuscripts) and examine benchmarks for quality and quantity (including length, type of research, and placements). Speakers also offer advice on how to create a thoughtful, clear research agenda; consider how to evaluate different publication opportunities; and offer advice on how to maintain your voice as you seek to meet institutional and editorial norms.
Online education, particularly asynchronous education, creates opportunities and challenges for students. This session explores the best practices to promote student engagement, learning, wellness, and connectedness. Well-designed courses and programs meet this need by providing the students structured and serendipitous opportunities to engage with each other, promote learning, and build community. This discussion group focuses on the methods to promote a robust, student-centered learning community.
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea.
This discussion group focuses on different ways to integrate faith into the classroom. It addresses ways to analyze subjects through the lens of faith and difficulties in doing so when students or professors might be hesitant. The discussion group addresses courses where this may be more natural, such as Constitutional Law, and more challenging, such as statutory-based courses like Evidence and Commercial Law. It explores how professors can develop curriculum and teaching in ways that are consistent with a school's mission or consistent with faith-based ideas that students want to explore. Finally, the group addresses ways that professors can choose texts and reading material that would assist in bringing this type of discussion into the classroom. _x000D_ _x000D_
This Discussion Group features four professors demonstrating teaching exercises that engage the rule of law in the context of professional identity formation in a variety of contexts with constructive feedback from the other members of the Discussion Group. In the three-hour session, each of the four presenters has roughly 30 minutes to demonstrate their teaching exercise with discussants having 10-15 minutes to offer constructive feedback.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to engage in mock interviews and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to engage in mock interviews and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to engage in mock interviews and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to engage in mock interviews and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to engage in mock interviews and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
Sometimes a call to service is hard to ignore. The group discusses the catalysts that led to their decision to accept interim dean posts. Interim dean terms of service are indefinite and may lead to a future deanship or a return to the faculty. Discussants explore the motivations for service and the skills developed in serving through crises. Such positions are filled with such challenges as budgetary issues, student concerns, and human resources matters. Through the experience, there are still rewards. This discussion engages in a candid conversation about leadership and pitfalls in responding to a call to serve. This program is open to all who are interested.
This workshop gives faculty the opportunity to present a work-in-progress and to receive substantive feedback on their work from scholars with varying degrees of experience in the academy who write in similar or related fields. Each participant both submits their own work and reviews that of their fellow participants in advance of the meeting, leading to a more interactive exchange of ideas. Unlike other works-in-progress programs, the participants in this session are chosen from a request for submissions.
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea._x000D_ _x000D_
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea.
Is my next idea one that will become a good article? I've done some initial research where do I go now? Should I take a different approach? These are common questions that new (and even experienced) scholars ask themselves as they progress with developing an idea into an article. The primary purpose of this panel is to provide participants in our New Scholars Workshop with input on direction and development of their scholarship. It offers New Scholars an opportunity to present a developing piece or a few ideas about potential projects in an informal setting and receive feedback on the idea. Additionally, this discussion group explores motivation, creativity, and the process for finding your next great idea._x000D_ _x000D_
This panel offers advice on determining your areas of teaching and research interests. The panel will explore the importance of connection to your research, passion, and expertise. Topics include how to articulate these connections and show flexibility. Discussants also weigh how aspirants might consider market demands and advise on how to research, compare, and adjust to varied institutional needs. Finally, the group suggests ways to communicate and develop individualized teaching approaches, including styles, methods, and tools.
This discussion group explores innovative approaches to teaching and researching civil and comparative law. Discussants examine curricular integration, pedagogical strategies, and scholarly trends, with attention to the unique insights that civilian and comparative forms of legal analysis may provide to teachers and scholars at institutions where civil law is part of the curriculum and at institutions where it is not. The session aims to foster collaboration, share best practices, and highlight the value of comparative perspectives in legal education and scholarship.
There has not been enough discussion about how law school deans can leverage artificial intelligence to streamline administrative tasks, such as drafting thank-you notes, supporting business planning, and assisting with staff and faculty evaluations. Panelists will discuss practical applications that save time and enhance efficiency, while also addressing critical considerations like confidentiality, data security, and the risk of bias in AI-generated outputs. The discussion will emphasize the importance of transparency and disclosure when AI tools are used in decision-making or communications, ensuring stakeholders understand when technology is involved. Attendees will gain insights into balancing innovation with ethical and legal responsibilities, avoiding pitfalls that could compromise trust or institutional integrity.
This discussion group is a forum for new and established scholars to discuss their forthcoming articles, works in progress, and ideas for articles on constitutional criminal procedure.
This discussion group builds on years of tips, tricks, and best practices designed to address the opportunities and challenges of online pedagogy with additional considerations of how pedagogies must evolve in response to student use of AI. The discussion will feature how to design a course, uses of synchronous and asynchronous instruction, learning management systems, videoconference tricks, how to use online techniques in in-person classes, and much more.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to present a mock job talk and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
As part of this workshop, participants have the opportunity to present a mock job talk and receive feedback. Note: Participants for this session were previously selected.
This session examines the relationship between corporate purpose and corporate misconduct amid shifting regulatory, political, and institutional conditions. The 2019 Business Roundtable statement reignited debate over corporate ends and spurred corporate commitments to ESG and DEI--many since narrowed, rebranded, or abandoned. Corporate misconduct remains a feature of the modern economy, even as enforcement regimes appear unsettled, with changes in regulatory priorities and political leadership reshaping identification and punishment of misconduct. We explore how corporate purpose concepts intersect with patterns of misconduct. How do claims about purpose shape corporate behavior? Do broader conceptions of purpose meaningfully constrain misconduct or risk functioning as symbolic compliance lacking robust enforcement? How should corporate law and governance respond when normative expectations and enforcement regimes fluctuate?
As technologies like artificial intelligence, data privacy, cybersecurity, and blockchain evolve, the legal landscape must adapt. The group examines how various jurisdictions are responding to these issues, drawing on international frameworks and comparing legal approaches in different countries. Emphasis will be placed on how these regulatory paradigms reflect local values, policy priorities, and their potential convergence on the global stage. This discussion group also explores the implications of emerging technologies for business, intellectual property, and corporate governance, considering how legal frameworks can evolve to balance innovation with safeguarding individual rights and public interests.
This discussion group focuses on attacks on the federal judiciary in our current political climate. District judges enjoining the administration's constitutionally suspect policies have witnessed the Supreme Court staying the injunctions on the emergency or shadow docket. This has raised a new phenomenon--open conflicts between the Supreme Court and lower courts, as the former complain about "defiance" of their interim orders and the latter complain about lack of guidance and clarity in those orders. That phenomenon enables and worsens long-standing divisions and conflicts with the other branches of the federal government. 
There has been a rapid transformation in the legal profession's approach to artificial intelligence, LMS platforms, and more. Initially seen as a threat, AI has unleashed potential for new self-directed learning as well as for easy student shortcuts. The discussion group focuses on the use of these tools in law school pedagogy, the importance of technological competence as a lawyer's ethical obligation, and how best to explore these tools in legal education.
Introducing faculty to an institution is often treated as a single event with a single audience. In reality, faculty arrive through many pathways and experience institutions differently. Adjuncts, visitors, pre-tenure faculty, clinical instructors, online teachers, and lateral hires all face distinct challenges and expectations. Faculty come with differing identities, abilities, familiarity with academia, and networks. Relying on uniform models of orientation and support can lead to confusion, isolation, and uneven success. This discussion session invites all attendees to rethink faculty acculturation as an ongoing, differentiated process rather than a one size fits all experience. This session explores how institutions can create support structures with intentional inclusion for role-specific and diverse realities while still fostering shared culture and connection. _x000D_
Being a law school dean requires managing the expectations of many different groups, including those beyond the core constituencies of students, faculty, and staff. Success often depends on how well you work with other key partners like the provost, other college deans, advisory boards, and alumni. This panel will discuss practical ways to strengthen those relationships, align priorities, and create successful collaborations. We'll discuss how to navigate university politics, make the most of advisory boards, and turn alumni into champions for you and your school. Expect real-world examples of successes and failures, candid advice, and (hopefully) ideas you can put to work right away.
This discussion group addresses the interesting and timely questions related to integrating AI into your pedagogy and classroom. Among the questions considered are: (1) Should students be permitted to "opt out" of using AI; (2) Is unauthorized use of AI a syllabus infraction, policy infraction, or unauthorized use of assistance; (3) Are all or any of these cheating or violations of academic integrity; (4) Do I need to protect my intellectual property and, if so, how; (5) Is AI citable; (6) How do my rubrics need to evolve to meet AI; (7) How do I assess when using AI tools?
10 percent of law schools have received an acquiescence from the ABA to permit delivery of a significant portion of their JD program online. The updated definition of a "distance education course" - under which a course qualifies only if all instruction is delivered exclusively online, rather than exceeding a one-third threshold - marks a significant shift, allowing law schools to offer more online credit hours without acquiescence. The Council is considering more fundamental questions, including whether a physical building remains necessary and whether other Standards should be revised to reflect a modern, online law school. This discussion examines the present an futurof online legal education from regulatory, business, and impact perspectives
This discussion group will explore the critical role law school leaders play in preserving the integrity of a self-regulated legal profession. We will examine three interconnected responsibilities: ensuring lawyers are held accountable for unethical conduct under professional reporting rules; addressing concerning student behavior that may impact Character and Fitness (even when it falls short of academic discipline); and maintaining meaningful engagement from tenured faculty to ensure that a few bad actors do not threaten an important system of protection. We will discuss how to balance candor, compassion, and accountability while upholding the values that will help maintain (and rebuild) public trust in legal education and the profession.
The discussion group analyzes how international, transnational, and domestic legal systems address challenges posed by multinational corporations and global value chains. Key topics include the EU's Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, the U.S. legacy of the Alien Tort Claims Act, ESG due diligence, materiality assessment, duty to report, rating agencies, the experience from other countries, U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and assessing their impact on the evolving regulatory landscape. Through case studies and practical insights, the group emphasizes reconciling corporate interests with human rights and sustainable development globally.
Throughout our Nation's history, the rich and powerful have exploited land opportunities for their benefit and at the expense of small land and property owners. These legal takings include eminent domain, the partition of heirs property, and tax and blight lien foreclosures. The result has been dispossession of the average American._x000D_ _x000D_ This discussion group will explore ways by which the consolidation of real property in the super rich can be redressed, mainly via litigation; will discuss the case of Youngblood v. ConocoPhillips; and will focus on successful lawsuits where the dispossessed have become the repossessed. Ultimately, the discussion group will share their knowledge of and thoughts on how litigation is a viable vehicle to achieve long due justice.
This Group explores the ways in which the current moment has laid bare the deeply rooted problems in the criminal legal system. These problems are not new. But our political climate has intensified them, so that promising paths for reform face strong rhetorical and institutional pushback. In order to address these problems, community driven efforts may offer meaningful hope. Criminal law and procedure scholars are taking note of innovative proposals by advocates who support reforms that are rooted in care, accountability, and safety. Group members plan to share their work in progress on a wide variety of subjects -- and to share ideas about how to support strategies that can build a sustainable and fair justice system.
This panel discusses the numerous changes and challenges facing federal labor and employment agencies. Potential issues include executive orders' impact on the EEOC's priorities; the Supreme Court's pending ruling on the firing of political appointees with just-cause protection; constitutional challenges to the NLRB; and disruptions in the ability of the MSPB, FLRA, and Office of Special Counsel to enforce federal employee protections. The panel also explores how these changes and challenges may impact employers and employees.
This workshop gives faculty the opportunity to present a work-in-progress and to receive substantive feedback on their work from scholars with varying degrees of experience in the academy who write in similar or related fields. Each participant both submits their own work and reviews that of their fellow participants in advance of the meeting, leading to a more interactive exchange of ideas. Unlike other works-in-progress programs, the participants in this session are chosen from a request for submissions.
This workshop gives faculty the opportunity to present a work-in-progress and to receive substantive feedback on their work from scholars with varying degrees of experience in the academy who write in similar or related fields. Each participant both submits their own work and reviews that of their fellow participants in advance of the meeting, leading to a more interactive exchange of ideas. Unlike other works-in-progress programs, the participants in this session are chosen from a request for submissions.
This discussion group explores emerging trends and challenges in teaching legal research to first-year and upper-level law students. Participants examine strategies for integrating AI-powered research tools, developing new or revised courses aligned with evolving professional competencies, and preparing students for the research components of the NextGen Bar Exam. The session provides opportunities to share innovative teaching approaches, discuss assessment methods, and consider how legal research instruction can best support future-ready law graduates.
This is an ongoing working group, open to all interested parties, developing an update to the 2015 best practices and model recommendations. Online delivery is significantly different because online can be part of an existing course, a course that is part of a traditional curriculum, or an program operated under a variance. The participants will work on a forthcoming book project related to updating guidelines, recommendations, and good practices to help schools with their continuous improvement of online learning and pedagogy. This discussion is intended for anyone already working on the project or interested in joining this ongoing effort.
This discussion will focus on the Trump Administration's efforts to strip universities (and law schools, to the extent some have been swept up in those efforts) of federal funds for reasons ranging from failure to control antisemitic harassment on campus to efforts to seize control of university hiring, admissions, and education. It will focus on the (likely ongoing) litigation involving Harvard, as well as the many universities that have settled in ways that surrender control over how the university functions. This panel will explore issues of academic freedom for students, faculty, and the university as a whole.
This panel addresses issues related to legal mentoring. While many surveys of new lawyers show that they want mentors, little research has been conducted about best practices in legal mentoring. This panel joins legal scholars and actively practicing lawyers to discuss what good legal mentoring might entail, potential characteristics of good legal mentors, and what mentees gain from mentoring opportunities. The hope is that this discussion will lead to additional research and thinking on legal mentoring.
Employers have long used emerging technology to improve their businesses. Currently, these technologies, especially AI, are being used in numerous ways including screening and evaluating job applicants, monitoring work, tracking productivity, interacting with and managing workers, scheduling, and replacing human workers. This discussion group considers the impact of these technologies on the workplace and their interaction with current and possibly new labor and employment laws. We will also discuss how workers can shape the use of AI and other technologies, such as through unions.
This discussion group offers a forum for consumer law, commercial law, and bankruptcy scholars to workshop a work-in-progress or emerging idea for a future project. The scope of this discussion group encompasses any contract, consumer, commercial and/or bankruptcy law-related theme and is intentionally broad. Discussants briefly present an idea for an early-stage project (5-10 minutes) and receive feedback from other discussants._x000D_ _x000D_
Associate deans for faculty research discuss how they use innovative methods to promote faculty scholarship and raise the profiles of individual faculty members and their institutions. Discussants share ideas about ways they have introduced new programming, changed existing processes, implemented new incentive programs, maximized efficiency, encouraged and incorporated the use of AI into the development and promotion of faculty scholarship, and creatively problem-solved in their roles._x000D_
As artificial intelligence, generative search tools, and advanced legal databases reshape how lawyers find and analyze legal authority, law professors face a critical pedagogical challenge: how do we teach students the enduring fundamentals of legal research and citation while preparing them for a technology-driven profession? This group will explore topics such as integrating technology without eroding critical thinking, maintaining academic integrity in the AI era, designing assessments that measure both process and accuracy, and updating citation pedagogy for digital workflows._x000D_ _x000D_ Attendees will gain practical ideas for classroom exercises and ethical discussions that help students master both the "how" and the "why" of research and citation in a changing profession._x000D_
Even before the reversal of Roe v. Wade, the law governing reproductive rights and justice was in a period of flux and change. The Dobbs opinion poured gasoline on a fire - and the legal regimes that govern human reproduction are changing quickly and in real time. Legal issues that arise out of the reproductive process can include elements of constitutional law, family law, civil rights law, and health law, among others. Participants in this discussion group will discuss the myriad ways that the law in this area has - and continues - to change._x000D_
This discussion group aims to bring together professors who teach in the fields of consumer law, commercial law, and/or bankruptcy to share best practices for teaching and assessing our students. Topics include: final exams, midterms, and other assessments; written projects; simulations; drafting exercises; and other modes of teaching and assessing students. Professors of all levels of experience are encouraged to share their experiences and expertise. The scope of this discussion group is intentionally broad and participants may touch upon any matter related to teaching and assessing consumer law, commercial law, and bankruptcy.
This discussion focuses on two pieces of the Administration's efforts against the legal profession. First is the executive orders targeting various law firms, the effects on those firms that settled, and the status of litigation involving those firms that challenged the orders. We sought to include an attorney from one of the firms that has challenged the orders. Second is efforts to target attorneys who litigate against the government, from a DOJ policy to pursue Rule 11 sanctions against plaintiffs' lawyers to a federal perjury indictment against a plaintiffs' lawyer for allegedly lying during a sanctions investigation. This group explores how these efforts affect the legal profession, particularly those who pursue constitutional and civil rights litigation.
This discussion group unites diverse perspectives to explore challenges and opportunities in agriculture. By integrating disciplines like law, trade, ethics, and innovation, the panel addresses critical issues such as protecting farmers' rights, evolving animal law, the effects of international trade, and food sovereignty's role in sustainable development. Topics include ethical considerations, technological advancements, and policy frameworks essential for navigating transformation. Panelists will offer insights into fostering global and domestic collaboration to build equitable, sustainable agricultural systems while tackling climate change, biodiversity loss, and food security challenges, driving meaningful progress for a sustainable future.
This panel will discuss new, emerging, expanding, or changing topics for employment law and employment discrimination courses. Potential topics include dealing with challenges to employee free speech; attacks against diversity initiatives; changes in federal labor and employment agencies; potential changes to the McDonnell Douglas framework and disparate impact claims; developments in pregnancy and disability accommodation law; the impact on employment of the current immigration crackdown; and restrictions against non-compete and retraining agreements.
Ordinarily, criminal conduct that causes more harm should be punished more harshly, whether for reasons of retribution or deterrence. According to some recent estimates, the annual economic loss attributable to white collar crime is at least 20 times greater than the economic loss attributable to every other sort of crime. Yet despite the outsized economic effects of white collar misconduct, many commentators question whether it has victims, or whether it should count as a crime at all. This discussion group will weigh the relative moral, economic, and social impact of "White Collar" versus "Street" or violent crime, while addressing questions like: Are there victimless crimes? Is violent crime worse than financial crime? How should scarce law-enforcement resources be allocated?
This workshop gives faculty the opportunity to present a work-in-progress and to receive substantive feedback on their work from scholars with varying degrees of experience in the academy who write in similar or related fields. Each participant both submits their own work and reviews that of their fellow participants in advance of the meeting, leading to a more interactive exchange of ideas. Unlike other works-in-progress programs, the participants in this session are chosen from a request for submissions.
This workshop gives faculty the opportunity to present a work-in-progress and to receive substantive feedback on their work from scholars with varying degrees of experience in the academy who write in similar or related fields. Each participant both submits their own work and reviews that of their fellow participants in advance of the meeting, leading to a more interactive exchange of ideas. Unlike other works-in-progress programs, the participants in this session are chosen from a request for submissions.
This fourth annual SEALS cannabis law discussion shifts focus from speculating on uncertainty to identifying signs of maturation. After more than a decade of state-level adult-use legalization, some doctrines and administrative practices have achieved relative stability, even as the future of federal prohibition remains ambiguous. The session considers which aspects of cannabis law might be called "settled"; identifies accepted practices in licensing, compliance, and enforcement; and explores whether these lines reflect true success or uncomfortable compromise. Invited discussants include cannabis industry and drug policy scholars as well as those working in overlapping areas of administrative, constitutional, criminal, and agricultural law. All participants and perspectives are welcome as we collectively synthesize insights on the transition from responsive to established law.
This past year has seen a significant increase in threats to workers' ability to speak, both while at work and off-the-clock. Workers, including university professors, have been disciplined or fired for engaging in speech--particularly related to current events--that their employers don't like. This discussion group explores the legality of some of these cases, the legal protections that exist for private and public-sector workers, and what the future may hold for workers' right to speak without losing their job.
In broad terms, U.S. domestic tax policy since 1981 has reflected an effort to reduce the federal tax burden, especially on capital. Taking a long view, resulting reductions in funding for many public and quasi-public goods have reduced total social wealth, which in turn has contributed to a smaller tax base and larger federal deficits. In response, Congress has continued to cut spending in an effort to manage the deficits, apparently unconcerned about the relationship between funding these goods and maintaining the tax base over the long term. The discussion focuses both on specific areas in which the trend is significant and on whether and how the trend can be reversed in the foreseeable future.
This discussion group explores a variety of legal topics addressing current hot topics in health law, bioethics, disability, and public health law, including tort reform at the state level, funding of biomedical research, scope of practice issues, health technology, health insurance coverage and benefits, GMOs and bioengineered foods, Medicare Advantage and the state of managed care models, social drivers of health disparities, vaccine policy, Medicaid buy-ins, and regulation of drugs such as cannabis and psychedelics as therapeutics.
This group facilitates discussion among doctrinal and clinical professors about the tools and strategies they use in their family law (and related) classrooms. Special focus is afforded to building students' practical lawyering skills, drawing connections from family law to the broader law school curriculum, new approaches to teaching traditional family law topics, methods for incorporating non-traditional topics in family law courses, strategies for incorporating scholarly literature and other critical perspectives on family law, and approaches that bring into the classroom discussion issues faced by families from diverse backgrounds.
Name, image, and likeness (NIL) law has transformed college sports from an amateur activity to a professional moneymaking activity for college (and high school) athletes. Consequently, along with tremendous financial opportunities comes important legal challenges that students, their families, their colleges, and society must understand and grapple with. The recent ABA publication, Game Changer, provides case studies of many of these legal challenges. This discussion group will explore the legal challenges that college athletes face during the lifecycle of an NIL deal. It will suggest the role legal counsel can and should play in NIL dealmaking. Ultimately, it will recommend changes to NIL laws to protect college athletes from exploitation in executing NIL contracts.
As artificial intelligence tools become increasingly sophisticated, legal education faces fundamental questions about the nature and purpose of scholarly writing. This discussion group will explore how law schools can preserve the pedagogical value of student and faculty scholarship in an algorithmic age, addressing concerns about authorship attribution, academic integrity, and the ethical use of AI in legal research and writing. Participants will examine how faculty can meaningfully evaluate student work when AI assistance is prevalent, consider whether traditional scholarship requirements still serve their intended learning outcomes, and discuss how both students and faculty can generate and recognize authentic intellectual contribution.
This discussion group examines the evolution of the SEC as a market regulator and how these changes fit within the agency's tripartite mission: ensuring investor protection, creating fair and orderly markets, and enhancing market efficiency. In the name of making the markets more attractive to public companies, the SEC has altered key long-standing rules or policies, such as its approach to shareholder proposals, mandatory shareholder arbitration, and corporate disclosures. This discussion group explores questions, such as: Are the agency's new regulatory priorities a reflection of its need to evolve alongside market changes? Do these changes conflict with or support the agency's mission? Who do these changes benefit: the markets, investors, public companies, or the agency?
This discussion group will continue the conversation from previous years on how AI is impacting the legal profession. More specifically, this year, we will focus on how AI is impacting the law school classroom. Are students using AI to draft submissions for law school classes? If so, how, and are we able to accurately detect it? How are professors using AI? Is it a reliable tool we can use to create assessments? Is it a reliable tool we can use to review student submissions and generate feedback? This group will survey how far AI has come on these topics and will aim to offer guidance to professors on how they can use AI in their courses.
The academy typically focuses on federal civil procedure and the federal court system. But state courts and state court procedure are also crucial to access to justice in the American dual court system, a significance that has been increasingly recognized in the scholarly literature. This discussion group addresses noteworthy aspects of the dual American judicial system, first considering federal-court procedural developments, then addressing state courts and state civil procedure (what issues have come up, why they are important, what it means going forward), and finally contemplating the intersection of the two systems: what does federal procedure tell us about state procedure, and vice versa? 
The discussion group explores innovative ways to integrate real-world experiences into legal education. Bringing together educators, practitioners, and policymakers, it highlights approaches to teaching environmental, energy, and climate law, focusing on legal clinics, simulations, fieldwork, and community projects addressing sustainability challenges. The group also discusses the impact of the NextGen Bar Exam on doctrinal courses and the importance of collaboration among doctrinal, clinical, and legal writing faculty. Participants share best practices, trends, and case studies demonstrating experiential learning's effectiveness in preparing future lawyers to address complex global and domestic challenges, fostering a transformative shift in legal education for the 21st century.
This discussion group brings together business and criminal law scholars to discuss developments, noteworthy cases, and new ideas in corporate and white collar crime. Topics of discussion may relate to bribery and extortion, corporate compliance, corporate deferred prosecution agreements and non-prosecution agreements, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, healthcare fraud, mail fraud and wire fraud, money laundering, obstruction of justice, organizational sentencing, and securities fraud and insider trading. Discussants will leave the session with an understanding of recent developments in white-collar crime and approaches for addressing these topics in their teaching and scholarship.
