The erosion of the court’s public esteem is not due entirely to the tenor of its recent decisions, UC Berkeley law professor Jeremy Fogel, a former federal and California state judge and currently executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute, told the committee. Among other important factors, Fogel mentioned “a persistently hyperpartisan political environment … and the pervasiveness of social media as a source of misinformation and disinformation about the law, the judicial process and the judges and justices to whom that process is entrusted.”
“Millions of Americans live one purchase away from emptying their bank account, and they pay a steep price for oversights in account management,” writes Berkeley Law Professor Prasad Krishnamurthy. “Better regulation can stop banks from preying on consumer inattention so that overdrafts and NSF can truly function as a means of emergency credit, at least until better options emerge.”
Former federal judge Jeremy Fogel, now executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute at UC-Berkeley Law School, said in prepared remarks it was “awkward” for him to testify because he admires Roberts and understands the complications of adopting a code of ethics for the justices.
Jeremy Fogel, a former federal district judge and the executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute at the University of California, Berkeley Law School, said other federal judges on the lower courts would benefit alongside the public from the Supreme Court’s taking a more active stance on ethics.
“Part of this story is about how the system they created was vulnerable and all this information was available to someone else.”said Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley who specializes in criminal procedure and privacy.
“There should be no First Amendment right to use speech to cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety,” writes Dean Chemerinsky. “Based on oral arguments in the Supreme Court on April 19 in Counterman v. Colorado, however, it appears that the justices are likely to make it much harder to prove that speech is a threat.”
“I think the court is slower this year, but it has been pretty slow in recent years, too,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. “It does mean that there again will be a flurry of blockbuster decisions in June,” he added.
If the UN human rights commission chooses to investigate, a special rapporteur would fact-check the allegations in the communication, then issue “pointed” allegation letters to regulators, Chemours and other culpable parties detailing problems and posing questions, said Claudia Polsky, director of UC Berkley Law Clinic.
“The Special Rapporteur can’t compel any action,” said Claudia Polsky, director of UC Berkeley’s Environmental Law Clinic. “But if he decides to investigate the allegations and recommends the companies or agencies take any of the requested actions, the public attention often spurs alleged offenders to respond publicly.”
“They’re the most aggressive (regulations) of their kind,” said UC Berkeley environmental law Professor Ethan Elkind. “There are previous (federal) regulations on locomotive emissions, but these will be the first to really push for zero-emission locomotives.”
“The key is to separate the social insurance from the employer’s control and from employment entirely, because that gives employers that are unwilling to comply with the law a lot of leverage over their employees,” said Catherine Albiston, professor of law and sociology at the University of California, Berkeley.
“The ultimate liberty is the right to be left alone, and Dobbs established a clear mandate for state courts to define that right under their state constitutions,” write David Carrillo and Brandon V. Stracener of the California Constitution Center at Berkeley Law. “This is an opportunity for states to abandon their flawed lockstep doctrines, reassert themselves as the primary guarantors of individual liberty, and restore the state–federal balance of power in this area of the law.”
In a piece by Edward Wasserman, professor and former dean of UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism, Dean Chemerinsky said “The law is clear that retaliation against a person—that includes a corporation—for its speech violates the First Amendment. Gov. DeSantis and the Florida legislature have done exactly that, and said that is what they were doing, in its reprisal against Disney.”
Stephanie Campos-Bui, an assistant clinical professor of law at Berkeley Law and Policy Advocacy Clinic, said California law previously authorized the criminal legal system to charge people with over 90 different fees.
“Litigants should not be able to handpick a judge who then can issue a nationwide injunction throwing the entire country into chaos,” writes Dean Chemerinsky.
The court’s decision “is not obviously wrong,” said Dan Farber, an environmental law professor at UC Berkeley, who disagreed with the decision. “But I don’t think it’s crystal clear.”
“Many students come to Berkeley Law with the clear intention of positively impacting communities — whether it be here in the East Bay or globally,” said Laura Riley, director of Berkeley Law’s Clinical Program. “Clinics provide an opportunity to do that while growing advocacy skills that students take with them as they become attorneys.”
“The approach of finals made us realize that we had to say something,” said professor Chris Hoofnagle. “We want to make sure we have clear guidelines so that students don’t inadvertently attract an honor code violation.”
Mark Cohen, the Asia IP Project Director at the Berkeley Center for Law & Technology, told the Subcommittee that “China’s rise did not occur overnight. Rather, we have made profound mistakes in not identifying China’s increasing innovative capacity and we need to proceed now without the bureaucratic myopia, antique organizational structures and indifference to data that have haunted prior administrations.”
“Ideally, the court, on its own, would adopt an ethics code for its members, writes Dean Chemerinsky and Dennis Aftergut. “The absence of ethical rules is an unnecessary self-inflicted wound. Absent the court reforming itself, Congress must act and impose one on the justices. One would hope that the court would not be so foolish as to declare unconstitutional a law that is meant to regulate it.”
Prasad Krishnamurthy, a professor at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, favors raising the $250,000 cap to an unspecified amount. Recent decisions by regulators to cushion uninsured depositors from losses effectively render the $250,000 limit moot anyway, he argued.
Host Brittany Luse is joined by UC Berkeley Law professor Khiara M. Bridges to connect the dots between the recent legal battles over the abortion pill mifepristone and our constitutional right to privacy.
“This is an issue for the FDA – not the courts – to decide,” writes Dean Chemerinsky. “One would hope that even the conservative Supreme Court that overturned Roe v. Wade would recognize this and want to keep the federal judiciary out of the abortion issue. But given the anti-abortion views of a majority of justices, there is every reason to be very worried.”
“We had accepted that federal law would preempt state law, that it would be preposterous that one federal judge in one district in Texas—or in any other state—would be able to affect the availability of a drug that had had FDA approval for 20 years,” says Khiara M. Bridges, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley. “Now the things that we thought we knew about the relationship between federal law and state law, and the FDA’s ability to regulate, have been called into question.”
The Daily Californian sat down with Chemerinsky for a conversation about his career as a scholar and advocate, as well as why free speech — specifically on college campuses — matters.
“The Supreme Court has its lowest approval ratings in history,” writes Dean Chemerinksy and Dennis Aftergut. “Now, as much as ever, it is crucial that the justices make clear that they are not partisan hacks who just follow the Republican platform, but instead are committed jurists who follow the law. The recent decisions concerning mifepristone will give them just that opportunity.”
“The internet and social media provide instantaneous access to infinite information,” writes Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. “My hope is that the Supreme Court will not step in to this enormously complicated landscape.”
“Judges like to exercise control and Merchan is undoubtedly upset at Trump blatantly disobeying him,” writes Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. “But the better course in this situation is to do nothing and let Trump speak.”
“I am thrilled at the gift from Tom Clark to create a chair in constitutional law,” Dean Chemerinsky said in a statement. “This is obviously such a core area of our curriculum and scholarship; it is law that affects everyone in the most important and intimate aspects of our lives.”
Dean Chemerinsky said the law “is clearly established that when the press lawfully obtains something, they’re allowed to truthfully report it,” and Camacho obviously obtained the images lawfully here.
“Auto companies don’t want EV batteries associated with more destruction than they already have been,” said Ethan Elkind, director of the climate program at UC Berkeley’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment. “There has already been a lot of negative publicity around the mining for these metals: human rights abuses, child labor, deaths from mines collapsing. You can imagine the risk with the deep sea. If ecological damage of these sensitive undersea areas comes to light after mining begins, they don’t want to be a part of it.”
“Few thought the failure of a midsize regional bank posed a risk to the entire U.S. economy until last month, and it would be reasonable to expect that regulators in the future may lean on the systemic-risk exception in the law to once again justify bailouts,” said Berkeley Law professor Prasad Krishnamurthy.
Dean Erwin Chemerinksy writes about two cases to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the First Amendment and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Bragg “has fired a strong opening shot,” said Daniel Farber, a professor at the UC Berkeley Law School who studies presidential power. “But it’s only the beginning of the battle.”
“The prosecutor’s statement of facts tells a powerful story about a conspiracy to falsify business records for political gain,” said Daniel Farber, a UC Berkeley law professor. “But serious political misconduct doesn’t necessarily equate to a criminal offense, let alone a felony. The prosecutor’s challenge will be to prove fraudulent intent … and to connect this conduct to a separate crime.”
Host Bakari Sellers is joined by Amanda Tyler, author and professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, to discuss Donald Trump’s unprecedented legal troubles, co-authoring Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg’s final book, Justice, Justice Thou Shalt Pursue, and life lessons learned during the final months of Ginsburg’s life.
“With coordinated global reform, we can fight climate change while mining as sustainably as possible,” writes Ethan Elkind, director of the Climate Program at Berkeley Law’s Center for Law, Energy and the Environment. “We simply do not have an alternative if we are serious about tackling the climate crisis in an equitable and humane way.”
“The indictment of a former president of the United States is unprecedented,” writes Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. “But Donald Trump is unprecedented. There is much to be worried about in setting a precedent for the criminal prosecution of a former president. But it would be much worse to conclude that anyone, including the president, is above the law.”
Ethan Elkind, director of the Climate Program at the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, UC Berkeley School of Law discusses autonomous vehicles.
“I know some disagree and claim a right to shout down speakers, writes Dean Chemerinsky. “But the only way my speech can be free tomorrow is to support protection for speech that I dislike today. I also am hopeful that there is a benefit in hearing views different from our own, though it can be unsettling and even painful.”
UC Berkley School of Law’s Dean Erwin Chemerinsky joins Morning Joe to discuss a recent protest at Stanford University when Trump-appointed judge Kyle Duncan spoke at the school.
Ethan Elkind, director of the Climate Program at the Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, UC Berkeley School of Law discusses plans for more solar in California’s San Joaquin Valley and the key barrier to building in the region.
