having been inside a law school, not only my school but targeting law schools. it's a serious issue to flout the convention and your alumni is students and applicants can be easily drawn into a tailspin if you dropped 10 points in the rankings. i am a believer in there are ways to vent the law schools in gpa in various ways -- i know one school with folks of the employment outcomes admits people with lower lsat is because they know their more employable, but that is very early where we are added and i would love to break out of that. >> almost impossible for an individual school to do that because you get killed in the marketplace changing the discounting, for example it's darn near fatal. john mayer from the ohio state university school country and state law school important to tease out a few of the options that might exist for collaborative work. she's gained some attention rightly because of that. >> we have another question here in the middle. >> nine by noah al-assad is any gpa. are you talking about it breaks my first test and if so, does the law firm or

having been on the inside a law school, not only at my school but talking to a lot of other law schools, it's a very serious issue to flout the conventions of u.s. news and world report. if your alumni and students and applicants can all be easily thrown into a tailspin if you dropped ten points in the rankings. i'm a believer in rankings management. there are ways that the law schools themselves, i know one school that actually focuses on employment outcomes and admits people with lower sat because they know they're more employable on the backend and they run the math. that's very early in where were at. i would love to break out of that prisoner's dilemma. >> almost in impossible for an individual school to do that. you get killed in the marketplace. >> it's got to be collective. >> changing the discounting could be darn near fatal. deborah from ohio state university law school has done some important work trying to tease out a few of the options that might exist for collaborative work. she has gained some attention because of that. >> another question here in the middle. >> it's not

and the eagle -- a legal conference a law school professor discussed the future of law school. this is from the seventh circuit bar associations annual meeting. it is an hour and a half. thank you for making time on the program for this conversation about the future of our profession i am randy shepard i ended up spending most of my adult life in the supreme court. i now sit doing senior service. and i have an appointment over at the mccain school of law. to my right is rebecca corliss. spent more than decade on the colorado supreme court. she left their ten or 11 years ago. she does all sorts of research and programmatic work. on the improvement of courts into the improvement of legal education and the legal profession. and then professor anderson certainly a man of circuit if there ever was one after his legal education at the university of chicago became a clerk despite his recent career i will say there's nobody has done more intriguing work. i will begin with the words was setting the stage. not necessarily know about in detail. they provide considerable foundation for eva

others might take talent or suitability for law school. the change in student legal aid as the competition for a lot applicants increases, schools have used more and more legally chasing the numbers because it helps ratings and of course students in the law school. the result of that is the amount of merit waste aid over the last decade has gone up 10%. the amount of merit aid has stumbled and there is a third category called both merit in need-based. i haven't spoken yet to an actual law school admissions officer who didn't tell me that both men could merit. most of that goes to the people who have the best metrics. so it is the folks at the back end of the line end up with a far greater share of that debt when they lock out the door with their degree. i've been particularly worried about the effects of this, the demonstrable effects of this minority applicants because their profile in gpa and lsat isn't as good as asians and caucasians. the hispanic applicants and african-american applicants have lower metrics and it's harder for law scho

having been on the inside of law schools, not only in my school but talking to a lot of other law schools, it is a very serious issue to flout the conventions of u.s. news & world report. all can beants easily thrown into a tailspin if you drop 10 points in the rankings. i am a believer unfortunately in rankings management, but there are ways i think that the law schools themselves overweight lsat and gpa. i know one school that actually focuses on employment outcomes and actually admits people would lower lsat's and lower undergrad they will have more back and and they have run the math. but i would love to break out of that dilemma. >> almost impossible for an individual school to do that because you killed in the marketplace. changing the discounting for r faple, would be darn nea tal. from the ohio state university school of law, they said important work trying to tease out possible options for collaborative work. she has gained attention rightly because of that. >> another question in the middle. gpa, but isat and don't know that b category. do you know of any entity that used b-base

who couldn't -- first in his class at yale law school. couldn't get a job in a major law firm because he was jewish. he worked on the new deal. he got to know a jung congressman from texas, lyndon johnson. 1948, in the election -- the fight of his lifetime, johnson dpaif up a safe congressional seat to run for the senate from texas. had he lost that race, we never would have heard of lip done johnson. in an amazingly -- >> are we sure he didn't lose that race? >> well, i'll come back to that. in my book i document the fact that, well, there's a good argument that he did lose that race. which -- forth that you'll have to read the book. now, it was such a close race after a million 560 votes cast for thereabouts, it was sent to a blue ribbon committee of washington attorneys to investigate and, you know, the -- can and check about whether there was voter fraud. and well, we know there was a great deal of voter fraud. they personally chaired this committee and argued the case at the supreme court in favor of lyndon johnson was an young up and

brandice, harvard law school, he went to columbia, a fairly good law school, might i say. top of his class at harvard law school. goldberg went to northwestern. not officially ivy league, but tremendously good law school. fordice went to yale, of course. ruth bader ginsburg by the way went to harvard and yale. she followed her husband who was a year ahead of her. when he moved to new york to get a job she went to could lumbia she's the only not only woman, one of the few people who were on two law reviews, harvard and columbia law review. steven breyer went to harvard and stanford. and elena kagan went to princeton and harvard law school. part of the acrulturation was the decline of anti-semetism. he received much more notoriety tried to introduce a quota on jewish admissions at harvard. it was through the jewish students who grew up most -- frankfurter, fordice were the first members of their family to go to college. then they went all to these very prestigious law schools. and so it was part of the greater acceptance in the law school that helped the change -- helped bri

the one million lawyers in the united states the deans of our law schools and judges in our courts refuse to hold corporate power accountable to the law they have failed us they alone have the education and the skill to apply the law on behalf of the citizens they alone know how to use the courts for justice rather than in justice when this period of american history is written the legal profession must bear much of the responsibility for our descent into corporate tyranny lawyers are supposed to be officers of the court they are supposed to be the sentinel and guardians of the law they are supposed to enlarge our access to justice not narrowing they are supposed to serve those who defend the law not subverted this moral failure by the legal profession has a blitter raided our rights and taken from us our ability to protect ourselves from corporate abuse. thank you for watching you can find us on our t. dot com slash on contact see you next week. i'm a trial lawyer i've spent countless hours poring through documents that tell the story about the ugly side of. corporate media everything us

fortis, was a new-deal lawyer and was first in his class of the law school and couldn't get a job in the major law firm and he worked in the new deal and he got to know a young congressman from texas, lyndon johnson. 1948 in the election, the fight of his life time, johnson gave up a safe, congressional seat from texas. had he lost that race, we never would have heard of lyndon johnson. >> are we sure he didn't lose that race? >> well, i'll come back to that. in the book there is an argument that he did lose that race. for that, you'll have to read the book. now it was such a close race after 1,560,000 votes cast or there about, it was sent to a blue ribbon committee washington attorneys to investigate and to check whether there was voter fraud, and we know there was a great deal of voter fraud. the person who had shared this committee and who argued the case at the supreme court in favor of lyndon johnson was a young up and coming attorney. and johnson never forgot this. throughout his years as majority leader of the senate in the 1960s and was vice president, and as vice president f

brian: our guest is a professor of law at georgetown law school.is book is called "chokehold: a renegade prosecutor's radical thoughts on how to disrupt the system." "policing black men," another subtitle. we thank you very much. paul: it is an honor to be interviewed by brian lamb. thank you for having me. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q-and-a.org. "q&a" programs are also available as c-span podcasts. ♪ announcer: if you enjoyed this week's interview with paul butler, here are some other programs you might like. former new york police department deputy inspector talks about his book "once a cop." the baltimore police commissioner on the challenges of policing that city. and author nathan mccall talks about race relations and his involvement with gangs early in his life. you can watch these anytim

you teach at georgetown law school. you are a graduate of harvard law school and yale undergrad. you're a graduate of st. ignatius high school in chicago. how did you do all this? paul: i'm fortunate. i had a wonderful set of parents who raised me in a beautiful, all-black neighborhood in chicago. growing up there, i had a number of experiences with the police, like any black boy does. once i was riding my bike to the library, which was in an all-white neighborhood literally miles from my house, and a cop car rolls up next to me. a white officer says, is that bike yours? i said yes. is that car yours? and i sped off. when i got home, i told my mom what i did, and this was a woman who marched with malcolm x and martin luther king. when she heard what i said to that cop, she spanked me. don't i know what happened to black boys when i talk to the police like that? it's one of those spankings where the parent cries as much as the child. some 30 years later, my mom was absolutely right. what we now know is that during this time, the police in chicago were operating this off-site where

chicago and enjoyed that, too. >>> there's a lot of institutions and the university and chicago law schoolyou see yourself growing up as a minority facing many of the issues that minorities feel in terms of the getting into the best schools and having the best opportunities in america. do you relate to any of those stories. >> guest: yes, and no, yes in the sense that when i was coming through law school, there were very few asian americans at that time who were in my law school class. it wasn't that i heard a lot of my peers doing. now when you go, it's incred populations are for all kinds of minorities, my parents always told me that you are an individual, you have got to succeed on your own merits and never try to ascribe a blame or credit to other people. you rise and fall based on the work you put in. that is something that really pounded into me for quite a while. so i always tried to think, was i doing the best i could with the opportunity i have been given. that's because now that i'm in this position, i feel so incredibly blessed to have the their guidance and my grandparents guid

stories of the difference she made when she spoke with them at their elementary or high atool, at the law school, the law firm, at bar meetings, and events she organized at the united states supreme court. she also used her position and her influence to further other objectives important to her view of the essential nature of a judicial system that ensures continued to the rule of law. expending that judicial independence is the essential underpinning of our democratic government. she cautioned such independence is tremendously hard to create. and it's easier than most people imagine to damage and destroy. working with organizations, local, national, and international, she spoke with leaders and judges and lawyers in numerous countries to help them reach their goal of forming and independent judiciary. judicialto further independence and reliance lead her to the realization that in this country, too few of our students and too few of our adult understand our government, our history, and our laws. alarmed and frustrated by the lack of civic education available to middle and high school students,

justice kagan: i hope the people coming out of law schools -- >> they don't. we had another panel here and making edwards, the former congressman said law schools to not teach a thing about civics and democracy and he was emphasizing our colleges and universities. i'm talking about the basic structures. they might know about the great court final deciders, but it seems to me we have an awful lot to do. justice kagan: i think if you haven't done this by the time you go to college it is very possible that it will never happen. so i am a big proponent of doing it early. by first grade. >> we are not doing it enough at public schools. it's wonderful that you have i-civis but we just do not teach it anymore. your brother's teach civics? justice kagan: my brothers are both social studies teachers. >> do they teach civics? justice kagan: they probably do. [laughter] >> we will have them here next year and examine them. [laughter] justice kagan: i think you have a new job, justice marshall. marshal: i do, and it is having you back on the panel, it will make my life so

, the university of virginia law school, the georgetown university law center. he served as a law clerk to justices reed and burton from 1961 to 1962. he's co-author of the chapter on patents, that's a task, an important chapter and very good in the third edition of the treatise "business and commercial litigation in federal courts." judge james boasberg joins him on the panel. judge boasberg was appointed to the u.s. district court for the district of columbia in march 2011. he served as law clerk to judge dorothy nelson on the ninth circuit. following his clerkship he was a litigation associate at checker and van ness in san francisco from 1991 to 1994, at kellogg huber in washington from 1995 to '96 and in '96 he went to the u.s. attorney's office for the district of columbia as an assist ant united states attorney. he was there for five and a half years. he specialized in homicide prosecutions, the most difficult part. in september 2002 he became an associate judge of the district of columbia superior court where he served in the civil and criminal divisions

next, new york university law school professor, john sexton talks about chief justice burger's life and legacy. mr. sexton was a law clerk to the chief justice and later served as nyu's president and law school dean. this is a 50-minute event in the supreme court chamber. >>> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the trustees of the supreme court historical society, welcome to our 42nd annual lecture. before we do anything else, i'll ask everyone to take out their phones and turn them off, even on silent mode, they will interfere with the sound system here in the court. i'm greg joseph. i'm president of the society. welcome. we're delighted to have you here today. we're honored to have as our lecturer, john sexton of nyu, whose topic tonight is warren burger, and warren burger, of course, is the founder of our society and is of immense importance to us. there's no one more qualified than president sexton to deliver this lecture. he's, was a warren burger clerk, but he a long history before that. president sexton earned his ba in history and ma in ph.d. in religion from ford

she stepped down the year i graduated from law school in 1959, and then there were none. and then johnson appointed shirley huff stetler, she became the first ever secretary of education, and then there were none again. so i didn't think about being a judge until jimmy carter became president of the united states, and he looked around at the federal bench and he said, you know, they all look like me. ( laughter ) but that's not how the great united states looks. he was determined to appoint members of minority groups and women in numbers not as one at a time curiosities. he appointed over 25 women to the federal district court, the trial bench, and 11 to courts of appeals, and i was one of those lucky eleven. no president, by the way, went back to the way it was. president reagan didn't want to be outdone so he made a nation-wide search for the first woman. >> rose: sandra day o'connor. and it was a brilliant choice. >> rose: in fact, you have said when she left the court, retired, and alito came on, it marked a change in the court. >> yes. >> rose: because she was gone.

you teach at georgetown law school and you are a graduate of harvard law school, graduate of yale undergradome a graduate of saint ignatius high school in chicago. how did you do all of this? paul: i'm fortunate and i had a wonderful scent of -- a wonderful set of parents who raised me in a beautiful, all black neighborhood in chicago. i had a number of experiences with the police like any black boy does. once, i was riding my bike to the library which was an all white neighborhood literally miles from my house. a cop car rolls up next to me, rolls down the window and a white officer says is that bike yours? i said yes. is that car yours? and i sped off. when i got home, i told my mom what i did and this is a woman who marched with both malcolm x. and martin luther king. when she heard what i said to that cop, she spanked me. don't i know what happened to black boys who talk to the police like that? those spankings when the parent cries as much as a child. and it turns out some 30 years later my mom was absolutely right. what we now know is during this time i'm of the police in chicago were

. ♪ q&a, first onn university law school professor paul butler.rofessor butler discusses his book, chokehold: policing the black man. brian: in your new book chokehold, you write this new the end of the book, the united states is a company -- a country of gross racial inequality. mr. butler: yes, and the chokehold is what the african-american men feel from the criminal justice system. when please put you in a chokehold, they are trying to get you to comply, but you can't comply because you can't read. blacks emblematic of the male experience in the united states. the social and legal response to the issues that black men have is to lock us up, to put us in cages, to stop and frisk us, to treat us as citizens whose rights other people do not respect. we are not full citizens of the united states. in thisou write more particular chapter, chapter eight, you save their lives are not afforded the same dignity and respect as white lies. my question is, why not? mr. butler: people are afraid of african-american men. there are studies that show people hav

[laughing] he's a graduate of harvard law school picky clerk for judge from after graduating from law school and served as the sissy nye states attorney in the southern district as an assistant d.a. in the office of robert morgenthaler, the legendary new york district street and as a judge in the southern district before salvation to the court in 1993. i must confess an exceptional fondness to judge leval because it was his declaration of senior status in the fall of 2002 the ultimate lead to my nomination to the second circuit and the wonders of article iii of the constitution of the united states. for that, i thank you. on behalf of the court i want to thank you for helping us to plan this event and for all your assistance in covering what seemed to be endless challenges we face in making today's program a reality. ladies and gentlemen, i am pleased to give you the honorable pierre leval who will introduce our distinguished panel and will serve as moderator of today's panel. judge leval. [applause] >> thank you, bob and dick, for those lovely words. this evening we celebrate one of

professor lipman joined from harvard law school where she was a fellow in lecture on law. keep the program moving, i have asked the panelists for speak than no more than seven minutes on one of the court cases as term,s a theme from the which will be left half the time for the town to engage with one another and to take questions. we will take questions from the live audience, questions on lawscotus,ing #uci all one word. we have changed our format for audience questions. rather than stepping up to the microphone, there should be cards that you can fill out. i will make an announcement that you should pass your cards to the il. -- aisle. they will be collected. you can direct a question to any of panelists. please keep your questions short. please keep your writing legible, and please keep them questions. [laughter] to keep things moving, i would like you to please save your applause until the end of the program, except for now as we welcome our panelists. [applause] >> i'm going to talk about the travel ban. reg has only given me seven is to talk about it. i would like to

so they set up this vastly inferior law school.he had his building blocks in place and made the big pitch, and so the aclu women's rights project, which i co-founded, that is what we tried to do to get there. not in one giant step, so that by the time the big step came it would be inevitable. because they had all the building blocks that led up to it. justice sotomayor: do you think you have reached that stage? justice ginsburg: no. but considering where we were, considering that in 1961, the liberal warren court told wendell android eight, -- told wendell and hoyt, the woman we would call battered, who had been humiliated to the breaking point by her philandering abusive husband, she couldn't bear it anymore. she spied her sons baseball bat, picked it up with all her might, and she beat her husband over the head. that was the end of the humiliation. and the getting of the murder prosecution. and -- in the beginning of the murder prosecution. and florida didn't put women on juries in those days. 1961. the supreme court said we don'

previously, he taught at duke law school and at the university of southern california law school. he is one of the country's leading experts in constitutional law. he served as chief judge on the court from 2000 722 thousand 14. he graduated from ucla. prior to the appointment to the bench, he served as chief judge to united states claims court. a particular focus on federalism. he was at our panel two years ago. has there from harvard law school with a lecture on my. to keep the program moving, i have asked them to speak for no more than seven minutes on one of the courts cases. the panels will be able to engage with one another and take questions. we will take questions from the live audience, on twitter using tag.#-- hash we have changed our format for audience questions for you rather than stepping up to the microphone, there should be .ards that you can fill out i will make an announcement that he passed the cards to bio. they will be collected and i will be able to ask questions from there. please keep your questions short. please keep your writing legible, and please keep th

he is interviewed by jennifer, law school professor and law school professor and author of other people's houses. >> host: it is my great pleasure to be here today with jesse the pulitzer prize-winning reporter to talk about the book that came out this week, the

at other law schools -- criminal law was taught without reference to criminal procedure. my criminal law course was taught by an australian professor, who knew absolutely nothing about constitutional law. it was all first degree murder, second degree murder, assault, battery, all that. and the warren court changed that. now criminal law to a significant extent has been constitutionalized. that's a very important part of the prosecution. most people would think the criminal justice system is fairer as a result of that. >> you've admitted that you were born after gideon was decided. do you see looking back as someone who has taught law and has also obviously gone to law school and practiced law, do you see the warren court as being a path breaker? >> absolutely. i also know that it was certainly an expansion of rights for defendants during that era. subsequent courts sort of narrowed that expansion and provided balance, because there are certain exceptions that need to apply for officer safety and other reasons. yes, i definitely think that the warren court was a path break

grew up in new jersey and manhattan and you went to the university of rochester, and then harvard law schoolul: it was a wonderful experience, but a daunting experience, especially because i did not exactly like what i was doing. david: but you went to practice law in new york. paul: in the absence of a better idea. david: i practiced law in new york initially as well, and i practiced law in washington -- paul: sad to hear it. [laughter] david: when i gave up the practice of law to go in business, my mother said, you went to law school. what are you going to do? you do not know anything about business. what did your mother say when you said, i am going to give up law? she said what? paul: can you earn a living? [laughter] david: you started, you are working out of your apartment. what was the strategy that you used to get off of the ground? paul: a tiny bit of context. my dad was a retail pharmacist and after i started attending law school he said, you have to learn how to be an investor. he and i traded tiny amounts of tech stocks and mining stocks together. $2000 of this or $5,000 of this,

[laughter] david: when i gave up the practice of law to go in mother said come you went to law schoolat are you going to do? what did your mother say when you said, i am going to give up law? she said no? paul: can you earn a living? [laughter] david: you started, you are working out of your apartment. what was the strategy that you used to get off of the ground? paul: a tiny bit of context. my dad was a retail pharmacist and after i started attending law school, he said, you have to learn how to be an investor. he and i traded tiny amounts of tech stocks and mining stocks together. so i became very interested in markets and in trading. and in the period of time from 1967-1968 through 1974, he and i found just about every possible way to lose money. conceivable to lose money. [laughter] paul: so when i started elliott in 1977, i was determined to engage in a trading strategy that made money all the time. and so for the first 10 years or so of elliott's existence, the primary strategy was convertible bond hedging. buy the bond, short the stock, it had a strong positive carry and tradin