Skip to content
  • News
  • Events
  • Law Library
  • Giving
  • Alumni
  • Quicklinks

    • Academic Calendar
    • bCourses Overview
    • bCourses Link
    • Business Services
    • Schedule of Classes
    • View Evaluations
    • Identity Resources
    • RoloLaw
    • COVID-19 Protocols
    • Event, Catering and Food Policy
    • Emergency Info
    • Resource Hub for Faculty & Staff

    Support

    • Reporting Potential COVID-19 Cases
    • COVID-19 Remote Teaching Resources
    • Computing Support
    • Event Services
    • Faculty Services (Library)
    • Human Resources & Academic Personnel
    • Instructional Technology
    • Phones
    • Room Reservations
    • Resources to Respond to Sexual Harassment
  • Quicklinks

    • Academic Calendar
    • b-Line
    • Berkeley Law Facebook
    • Financial Aid
    • Faculty Profiles
    • Schedule of Classes
    • Teaching Evaluations
    • Final Exam Review Session Schedule
    • Exams
    • Final Exam Schedule
    • CalCentral
    • COVID-19 Protocols
    • Event, Catering and Food Policy
    • Emergency Info
    • Resource Hub for Students

    Student Services

    • Reporting Potential COVID-19 Cases
    • Student Services Office
    • Academic Skills Program
    • Student Organizations
    • Student Journals
    • Commencement
    • Frequently Asked Questions & Rule Clarifications
    • Bookstore
    • Wellness at Berkeley Law
    • Mindfulness at Berkeley Law
    • Registrar
    • University Health Services
    • Resources to Respond to Sexual Harassment
  • Search for People at Berkeley Law

Berkeley Law
    • Academics Home
    • Areas of Study
      • Social Justice and Public Interest
        • Curriculum
          • J.D. Path
          • LL.M. Path
        • Social Justice+Public Interest Community at Berkeley Law
          • Public Interest and Pro Bono Graduation
      • Business and Start-ups
        • Business Law Curriculum
        • Business Law Faculty
      • Law and Technology
        • Student Activities
        • Law and Tech Curriculum
        • Law and Tech Faculty
      • Environmental Law
      • Criminal Justice
      • International and Comparative Law
        • Centers, Clinics, and Programs
        • Faculty
        • Student Activities
      • Constitutional and Regulatory
      • Law and Economics
        • Faculty
        • Prospective Students
        • Visiting Scholars
        • Law and Economics Fellowship
    • J.D. Program
      • First-Year Curriculum
      • Concurrent Degree Programs
      • Combined Degree Programs
      • Berkeley-Harvard Degree Programs
    • LL.M. Programs
      • LL.M. Executive Track
        • LL.M. Executive Track Academic Calendar
        • Engage with Berkeley Law Online Courses
      • LL.M. Traditional Track
        • Current Academic Calendars
      • LL.M. Thesis Track
        • LL.M. Thesis Track Student Profiles
        • Current Academic Calendars
      • Courses
      • Certificates of Specialization
      • Application & Admission
        • Eligibility & Admission Standards
        • Application Instructions
        • Admissions Policies
        • Check Application Status
      • Tuition & Financial Aid
        • Cost of Attendance
        • Scholarships
        • Financial Aid
          • Financial Aid Checklist for LL.M./J.S.D. Students
        • FAQ Financial Aid
      • Professional Development
      • Admitted Students
        • Visas
        • Housing for LL.M. Students
        • Cancellation & Refund Policies
      • Join an Event & Connect with LL.M. Staff
        • Recruiting and Informational Events
        • Visit Us!
        • Contact Us
      • Meet Our Students
      • Meet Our Partners
      • Questions? Start Here
    • Doctoral Programs
      • J.S.D. Program
        • Application & Admissions
          • Eligibility & Admission Standards
          • Application Instructions
          • Check Your Application Status
        • J.S.D. Tuition & Financial Aid
          • Cost of Attendance for JSD
          • Robbins J.S.D. Fellowship
        • J.S.D. Student Profiles
          • Zehra Betul Ayranci
          • Ella Corren
          • Silvia Fregoni
          • George Lambeth Vicent
          • Sylvia Si-Wei Lu
          • Natsuda Rattamanee
          • Youngmin Seo
          • Abdullah Alkayat Alazemi ’21
          • Mehtab Khan ’21
          • Maximilien Zahnd ’21
          • Shao-Man Lee ’20
          • Alvaro Pereira ’20
        • Contact Us
      • Ph.D. Program – Jurisprudence and Social Policy (JSP)
        • Events Calendar »
    • Executive Education
    • Schedule of Classes
      • Two Year Curriculum Plan
    • Current Academic Calendars
      • 2021-2022 Academic Calendar
      • 2022-2023 Academic Calendar
      • Past Academic Calendars
        • 2020-2021 Academic Calendar
        • 2019-2020 Academic Calendar
        • 2018-2019 Academic Calendar
        • 2017-2018 Academic Calendar
        • 2016-2017 Academic Calendar
        • 2015-2016 Academic Calendar
        • 2014-2015 Academic Calendar
        • 2013-2014 Academic Calendar
        • 2012-2013 Academic Calendar
        • 2011-2012 Academic Calendar
        • 2010-2011 Academic Calendar
        • 2009-2010 Academic Calendar
        • 2008-2009 Academic Calendar
    • Registrar
      • Order of the Coif and Dean’s List
      • Academic Rules
        • Supplemental Academic Rules for Traditional and Thesis Track LL.M. Students
        • Academic Honor Code
        • Academic Rules Petition
        • Academic Rule 3.06 – applies to the Class of 2010 and before
        • Credit Hours
      • Registration
      • Transcripts
      • Verification of Attendance
      • Registrar’s Forms
      • Ordering a Diploma »
      • J.D. Academic Guidance
        • 3L Requirements FAQ
        • 3L Degree Worksheet
      • Registrar’s Student FAQ
      • Bar Information
        • State Bar Swearing-In Ceremony Information
    • Admissions Home
    • J.D. Admissions
      • Applying for the J.D. Degree
        • Ready to Apply
        • After You’ve Applied
        • FAQs
      • Entering Class Profile
      • Connect with Admissions
        • Meet Our Team
        • View the Prospectus
        • Webinars
        • Recruiting and Information Events
        • Contact LL.M. Admissions
        • Contact J.S.P. Admissions
      • Meet Our Students
      • Diversity at Berkeley Law
        • Diversity News
      • The Berkeley Experience
        • U.C. Berkeley Campus
        • Berkeley and the Bay Area
      • Concurrent & Combined Degree Programs
      • Faculty Admissions Policy
      • Financial Aid
        • Prospective and Entering Students
          • Entering Student Registration & Financial Aid Information
          • Financial Aid for International J.D. Students
          • Financial Aid for Undocumented J.D. Students
          • Legal Resident Information
        • Types of Aid
          • Scholarships
          • Loans
          • Work-Study
        • How to Apply
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Incoming Transfer Students
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Entering Students
          • Financial Aid Checklist & Timeline For Continuing Students
        • Fees & Cost of Attendance
          • Cost of Attendance Adjustments
        • PDST-Increase Offset Awards (PIOAs)
        • Forms
        • Loan Repayment Assistance Program (LRAP)
          • LRAP Eligibility Guidelines
          • LRAP Eligibility Calculator
          • How to Apply for LRAP
          • LRAP Application Forms
          • Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF)
          • News & Updates
          • COVID-19 & Student Loans
          • LRAP FAQs
          • LRAP Glossary of Terms
        • Info Sessions & Presentations
        • Financial Literacy
        • Financial Aid – J.D. Concurrent Degree Programs
        • FAQ & Glossary
        • Requesting a Financial Aid Award for a Student
        • About Our Team
      • Outreach Partnerships
      • Admitted Students – First-Year »
      • Admitted Students – Transfer & Visitor Status »
      • For Current Berkeley Law Students
      • Admissions Policies
      • ABA Required Disclosures »
      • Our Role in Dismantling Systemic Racism
    • LL.M. Admissions
    • J.S.D. Admissions
    • Ph.D. (JSP) Admissions
    • Visiting Scholar and Visiting Student Researcher Admissions
    • Faculty & Research Home
    • Faculty Experts by Topic
    • Faculty Profiles
    • Deans Emeritus Lecturers
    • Recent Faculty Scholarship
    • Awards and Honors
    • Faculty in the News
    • Featured Research
    • Centers, Institutes & Initiatives
    • Experiential Home
    • Clinical Program
      • Apply to the Clinics
      • Death Penalty Clinic
        • About the Clinic
          • Faculty and Staff
          • Alumni
        • Clinic News
        • Projects and Cases
          • Death Penalty Clinic Amicus Curiae Briefs
          • Whitewashing the Jury Box: How California Perpetuates the Discriminatory Exclusion of Black and Latinx Jurors
        • Information for Students
        • Resources and Publications
          • Capital Defense Internships and Jobs
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • East Bay Community Law Center
      • Environmental Law Clinic
        • About the Clinic
        • Information for Students
        • Newsletters
        • Clinic News
        • Student Voices
        • Faculty and Staff
        • Alumni
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • International Human Rights Law Clinic
        • About the Clinic
          • Alumni
          • Faculty and Staff
        • Clinic News
        • Projects and Cases
          • Accountability and Transitional Justice
          • Promoting Human Rights in the United States
          • A Rights-Based Approach to Combating Poverty: Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
          • Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights
        • Independent Investigation of the Murder of Berta Cáceres
        • Living with Impunity: Unsolved Murders in Oakland and the Human Rights Impact on Victims’ Family Members
        • A New Border Vision
        • Who Will Be Left to Defend Human Rights? Persecution of Online Expression in the Gulf and Neighboring Countries
        • Resources and Publications by Focal Area
        • Information for Students
          • Student Self-Reflection
        • IHRLC 20th Anniversary
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • New Business Community Law Clinic
        • About the Clinic
        • Information for Students
        • Our Work
        • Services to California’s Central Valley
        • New Businesses
        • Events
        • Apply for Services
        • Donate to the Clinic
        • 2014 Fall Startup Workshop Series
      • Policy Advocacy Clinic
        • About Us
        • People
        • Clinic News
        • Juvenile Fee Abolition in California
          • COVID-19 Action on Juvenile Fees
        • Resources and Publications
        • Information for Students
        • Donate to the Clinic
      • Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic
        • About
          • Faculty and Staff
          • Clinic Alumni
          • Partners
        • Clinic News
        • Our Work
        • Information for Students
      • Clinical Program Annual Report
        • Annual Report Archive
      • The Brian M. Sax Prize for Excellence in Clinical Advocacy
        • Brian M. Sax
        • Recipients
    • Pro Bono Program
      • The Pro Bono Pledge
        • Definition of Pro Bono
      • Log Your Pro Bono Hours
        • Definition of Pro Bono
      • Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects (SLPS)
        • How To Apply
        • Current Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects
          • Animal Law and Advocacy
          • Arts and Innovation Representation
          • Berkeley Abolitionist Lawyering Project
          • Berkeley Immigration Group
          • Berkeley Law Anti-Trafficking Project
          • Berkeley Law and Organizing Collective
          • California Asylum Representation Clinic
          • Clean Energy Leaders In Law
          • Consumer Protection Public Policy Order
          • Contra Costa Reentry Project
          • DA Accountability & Participatory Defense Project
          • Digital Rights Project
          • Disability Rights Project
          • East Bay Dreamers Project
          • Environmental Conservation Outreach
          • Food Justice Project
          • Foster Education Project
          • Free The Land Project
          • Gun Violence Prevention Project
          • Homelessness Service Project
          • International Human Rights Workshop
          • International Refugee Assistance Project
          • La Alianza Workers’ and Tenants’ Rights Clinic
          • Legal Automation Workshop
          • Legal Obstacles Veterans Encounter
          • Name and Gender Change Workshop
          • Native American Legal Assistance Project
          • Palestine Advocacy Legal Assistance Project
          • Police Review Project
          • Political and Election Empowerment Project
          • Post-Conviction Advocacy Project
          • Reentry Advocacy Project
          • Reproductive Justice Project
          • Startup Law Initiative
          • Survivor Advocacy Project
          • Tenants’ Rights Workshop
          • Wage Justice Clinic
          • Workers’ Rights Clinic
          • Workers’ Rights Disability Law Clinic
          • Youth Advocacy Project
        • How to Start a New SLP
        • Inactive Student-Initiated Legal Services Projects
          • AI Legal Workshop
          • Berkeley Immigration Law Clinic
          • Berkeley Students in Support of Arts and Innovation
          • Civil Rights Outreach Project (CROP)
          • Community Restorative Justice Project
          • Juvenile Hall Outreach
          • Karuk-Berkeley Collaborative Legal
          • Local Economies and Entrepreneurship Project
          • Prisoner Advocacy Network
        • SLPS Champions
      • Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips (BLAST)
        • Current Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips (BLAST)
          • Atlanta
          • Central Valley
          • Hawaii
          • Mississippi
        • Inactive Berkeley Law Alternative Service Trips
          • Kentucky
          • Los Angeles
          • South Texas
          • Tijuana
      • Call for Necessary Engagement in Community & Timely Response (CNECT)
        • Berkeley Law Afghanistan Project
        • Current & Past CNECT Partners
          • Hub for Equity in Administrative Representation
          • Racial Justice Legal Research Bank Project
        • CNECT News
      • Independent Projects
      • Opportunities for LL.M. Students
      • Supervising Attorneys
      • Pro Bono Spotlights
        • Malak Afaneh ’24
        • KeAndra Hollis ’24
        • Maripau Paz ’24
        • Lucero Cordova ’23
        • Bharti Tyagi ’21
        • Benji Martinez ’23
        • Will Morrow ’23
        • Stephanie Clemente ’23
        • Francesco Arreaga ’21
        • Armbien Sabillo ’21
        • Kelsey Peden ’21
        • Jennifer Sherman ‘22
        • Professor Khiara M. Bridges
        • Professor Kristen Holmquist
      • Awards
      • Law Firm Pro Bono Programs
      • New York Bar Pro Bono Requirement
      • For Public Interest & Pro Bono Providers
    • Professional Skills Program
      • Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing Program
      • Elective Skills Courses
      • Advocacy Competitions Program
        • Tryout Procedures
        • Student Eligibility & How to Contact Us
        • Internal Competitions
          • McBaine Honors Moot Court
          • Halloum Negotiations Competition (Spring)
          • Halloum Business Competition (Fall)
          • Bales Trial Competition
          • Pahlke Internal Trial Competition (PINT)
          • The Pircher, Nichols & Meeks Joint Venture Challenge
        • External Competitions
          • Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Team
          • Moot Court Team
          • Trial Team
        • Writing Competitions
        • 2021 ABA Negotiation Competition
        • Travel Reimbursements
        • Our Supporters
    • Field Placement Program
      • Testimonials
      • Judicial Externships
      • Civil Field Placements
      • Criminal Field Placements
      • Away Field Placements
        • Berkeley Law in The Hague
        • INHR Program
        • UCDC Law Program
      • For Supervisors and Host Organizations
        • BACE: Bay Area Consortium on Externships
      • How to Apply
      • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Startup@BerkeleyLaw
      • Law Students
      • Entrepreneurs
        • Resources
        • How to Start a Startup @ Cal
        • FORM+FUND
          • FORM+FUND Fall 2020 Video Library
          • FORM+FUND Fall 2021 Video Library
          • FORM+FUND Spring 2021 Video Library
        • BerkeleyBase
        • Startup Law Initiative
      • Investors
    • Domestic Violence Law Practicum
      • About the Director
      • How to Apply
      • Companion Seminar
      • Former Students
      • Impact of DVP
      • Domestic Violence Field Placement Internships
      • News
      • Photos
      • Student Writing
    • Veterans Law Practicum
    • Careers Home
    • For J.D. Students
      • Appointments and Drop-in Hours
      • Private Sector Careers
        • Explore Private Sector Careers
        • Find Private Sector Jobs
          • 2022 OCI: EIW & FIP
          • OCI Alternatives
          • SIP – Spring 2022
      • Public Interest Careers
        • Explore Public Interest
        • Find Public Interest Jobs
          • PI/PS Interviewing Resources
          • Using Interview Programs to Land Your 1L Summer Job
          • Post-Graduate Public Interest Fellowships
          • CDO PIPS Videos
        • Finance Your Public Interest Career
          • Summer Funding for PI/PS Internships & Judicial Externships
          • Berkeley Law Bridge and Public Interest Fellowships
      • Public Sector Careers
        • Federal Government Careers
        • State & Local Government Careers (incl. CA)
        • Careers in Policy/Politics
      • Judicial Clerkships
        • Application Instructions and Materials
        • OSCAR Resources
        • Clerkship and Interview Evaluations
        • Other Clerkship Resources
        • Videos of Clerkship Programs
        • State Court Resources
      • Judicial Externships
      • Academic Careers
        • FAQ
        • Further Reading
        • Alumni Contacts
        • Links
        • Webcasts
      • Alternative Careers
    • For LL.M. Students
    • For Employers
      • Berkeley Law Recruiting Policies
      • Employer Resources for Virtual Internship Programs
      • Non Discrimination and Non Harassment Policies
      • Grading Policy
      • Interview Programs
      • Posting Job Listings
      • Reaching Berkeley Law J.D. Students
    • PSJD »
    • For Alumni
      • Enrichment Opportunities for Recent Grads
      • CDO Online Resources
      • Alumni Resource Collection
      • Help the CDO
      • For Recent Graduate Job-Seekers
    • About CDO
      • CDO Staff News
    • Career Resource Library
    • Employment Outcomes
      • Employment Statistics
      • Judicial Clerkship Placement Statistics
      • 2018 Clerkship Yearbook
  • Racial Justice
Home Articles News Op-Eds – ARCHIVAL Scholarship highlight: Can the Court change Americans’ views?

Scholarship highlight: Can the Court change Americans’ views?

  • Share article on Facebook
  • Share article on Twitter
  • Share article on LinkedIn
  • Email article

By Katerina Linos and Kim Twist, SCOTUSblog

Last Term’s decision on the Affordable Care Act, and this Term’s decision on same-sex marriage, place the Supreme Court at the center of American public life. But how exactly do Supreme Court opinions influence the views of ordinary Americans? By constitutional design, the Court’s institutional independence has long guaranteed protection to wronged parties even when their positions are unpopular. Yet the influence of the Court hardly stops there. Many actors who seek social change through the judicial system hope that a favorable ruling will shift the views of most Americans and convince them that a particular law or policy is consistent (or inconsistent) with deeply held constitutional values. For example, when the Court reviewed the Obama administration’s signature health care law just months before national elections, key actors in the ongoing campaigns anticipated that its ruling could influence the electoral outcome. President Obama presented the Court’s opinion as an endorsement of his policies, while Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney took great pains to clarify that, while the law may not violate the Constitution, it was still bad policy.

Given the importance of the Court’s rulings, it is surprising how little we know from prior academic studies, and how inconsistent the results of these studies are. Observational studies track American public opinion on various issues over many decades, and are based on data collected for other purposes, such as the General Social Survey. These studies tend to find no significant net change after a Supreme Court ruling, although they report that the Court can polarize opinion and push some groups in opposite directions. In contrast, experimental studies, in which a researcher informs respondents about a (usually fictitious) Court decision, often find that respondents increase their support for laws and practices after hearing that the Court has found them constitutional.

We present the results of a new study, which offers significant methodological improvements over past studies by combining experimental and observational elements. We examined how information received (or not received) by individuals through their regularly watched television news channels compares to information they receive in the course of an experiment. We built our study around the Court’s recent decisions on the Affordable Care Act (NFIB v. Sebelius) and Arizona’s immigration restrictions (United States v. Arizona). Because the health care decision upheld a law championed by Democrats, while the immigration decision upheld (at least for now) the centerpiece of a law championed by Republicans, we were able to examine how people responded to both a liberal and a conservative decision. In anticipation of the Court’s rulings, we surveyed a representative sample of Americans to measure their support for the key pieces of each law: the health care law’s individual mandate and the immigration law’s “show your papers” provision.

After the Court issued its rulings, we returned to the same participants to investigate changes in their views. In this second wave, we randomly assigned participants to four different groups and varied the information that each group received about the ruling. The first group received no information about the decisions from us; they only received information from the media sources they regularly use. The second group received a reminder from us summarizing the Court’s holding, and specifying that the challenged provisions had been upheld.  The third group was also informed about the main argument in support of the Court’s majority. The fourth group was given one additional piece of information, an argument from the dissent.

We found that even when ruling on highly controversial and politicized issues – such as the health care and immigration rulings we considered – the Supreme Court can change public opinion.  For example, among people who received no reminder from us, aggregate support for the individual mandate increased by 6 percentage points, from 31% before the Court’s decision to 37% after. This shift and all the other shifts we describe below are highly statistically significant. In addition, other polling on the Affordable Care Act suggests that support increased soon after the Court decision, and that this bump persisted in later months.

One goal of our research was to compare experimental and observational stimuli. Experimental studies could yield larger effects than observational studies for a variety of reasons, including experimenters’ ability to expose everyone (not just people who follow the news) to information, and to frame Court decisions in particular ways.  We found that a large majority of Americans had, before we gave them any information, already heard and correctly understood the health care ruling. As a result, responses to experimental reminders were generally very similar to responses to real-life news coverage. The only experimental frame that made a significant difference was the reminder that included information about the dissent. Dissenting Justices argued that government should not force Americans to buy a product they do not want. People whom we randomly selected for exposure to the dissent’s argument maintained their original views on the individual mandate, unlike people in all the other conditions, who increased their support for the mandate after the Court upheld it. Interestingly, people who were extensively exposed to the dissent’s arguments because they chose to watch Fox News responded in a very similar way to people whom we exposed to the dissent and retained their original opinions.

News coverage of the immigration decision was more limited and less straightforward than coverage of the health care case. Even in this case, however, we observed an increase in support for the “show me your papers” provision after the Court upheld it among people who followed the news and received no reminder from us. However, we were able to further increase the size of this effect in the course of the experiment by reminding people of what the Court had decided in this case, and by informing them of the majority’s argument and of the fact that the provision had been unanimously upheld.

The net effects we have described so far obscure significant variation in how different people responded to the Court rulings. After the health care ruling, we found very large increases in support for the individual mandate among Democrats and independents, while Republicans retained their highly negative attitudes on this law. Independents were also very responsive to the immigration ruling, and became much more supportive of the “show your papers” provision. This pattern suggests that Court can move independents’ views in both the conservative and the liberal direction. We also found that people who expressed high levels of trust in the Court prior to the decisions were especially likely to follow the Court’s lead and increase their support for the laws after the Court upheld them. In addition, the immigration ruling generated strong backlash among Hispanics, and in particular, among Hispanics who regularly watch either Univision or Telemundo, two networks that devoted extensive time to critical coverage of the Court’s decision.

These findings suggest that the Supreme Court can lead American opinion and contribute significantly to processes of social change. The Court’s ability to shape the views of independent voters is especially noteworthy, as these are often the swing voters critical to election outcomes. That said, powerful dissents can greatly limit the Court’s influence.

These findings also open up several avenues for further research. One question that intrigued us concerns the role of the media in transmitting information about Court decisions. Our preliminary analysis suggests that some Americans end up following not only the outcome of major cases, but also aspects of the Court’s reasoning. Extensive and critical coverage of the health care decision on Fox News, and of the immigration decision on Spanish-language television, likely made these networks’ audiences very knowledgeable about the Court. A second question that we plan to investigate further involves trust in the Court. So far, our story can be seen as an optimistic one, in which the Court is able to persuade significant numbers of Americans about the wisdom of the policies it upholds. But what happens among the many people who still disagree with the Court’s rulings? Under what circumstances does disappointment with particular rulings translate into a loss of trust in the Court as an institution? We plan to further research these questions, and are hopeful that our unique dataset can shed much-needed light on these points.

03/07/2013

News

  • Coronavirus (COVID-19) Information
    • Berkeley Law COVID-19 Protocols
    • Event, Catering and Food Policy
  • Transcript Magazine
    • Transcript Archive
      • Transcript Spring 2021 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2020 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2020 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2019 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2019 Online Edition
      • Transcript Fall 2018 Online Edition
      • Transcript Spring 2018 Online Edition
      • Transcript 2017 Online Edition
      • Transcript 2016 Online Edition
  • Podcasts
  • On Display
  • Media Highlights
  • News Archive
    • 2022 Archive
    • 2021 Archive
    • 2020 Archive
    • 2019 Archive
    • 2018 Archive
    • 2017 Archive
    • 2016 Archive
    • 2015 Archive
    • 2014 Archive
    • 2013 Archive
    • 2012 Archive
    • 2011 Archive
    • 2010 Archive
    • 2009 Archive
    • 2008 Archive
    • 2007 Archive
    • 2006 Archive
    • 2005 Archive
    • News Briefs
    • Alumni Newsletter
  • Trailblazing Women
  • Social Media
  • Communications Office
    • Identity Resources
      • Ordering Printed Supplies
    • Media Release Form
  • Law School Images »
Berkeley Law
  • Twitter
  • Youtube
  • Instagram
  • Flickr
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • About
  • Getting Here
  • Contact Us
  • Job Openings
  • ABA Required Disclosures
  • Feedback
  • For Employers
  • Accessibility
  • Nondiscrimination
  • Privacy Policy
  • UC Berkeley

© 2022 UC Regents, UC Berkeley School of Law, All Rights Reserved.

Notice – Berkeley Law COVID-19 Protocols