Reasonably Speaking

The 2020 election is seeing unprecedented volatility leading up to November 3. Will this volatility make a difference, helping or hurting the system’s capacity to serve its purpose? This is the first of many questions about the 2020 election that this group of election law experts will tackle.

Since the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, civil unrest has spread throughout the United States, causing many American citizens to question racial equality in every corner of our society. In this episode we will explore one of those corners, the justice system, to discuss how our courts and judges are addressing the complex topic of racism and racial disparities. The panel also explores racial education programs for federal judges, the disparities in sentencing for Black men in the U.S., and the obligation judges and justices have to provide a justice system that works fairly for all Americans.

This episode will discuss the Supreme Court’s decision in Liu v. SEC, both the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and whether the Court’s reference to “equitable relief” includes the remedy of “disgorgement.” Douglas Laycock, who filed an amiscus brief in support of neither party, will lead this discussion.

On July 6, the Supreme Court of the United States held that states may replace and even punish “faithless electors,” the term used for a member of the U.S. Electoral College who does not vote for the presidential or vice presidential candidate they pledged to support. This episode will consider the implications of the Court’s ruling and reasoning for a broader set of questions on the Electoral College system and what might happen in this year’s election.

This episode of Coping with COVID shifts attention from one pandemic to another, the plague of excessive force by police officers. This is an old and longstanding problem receiving new attention in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd. Although we have witnessed these atrocities in the past, across the nation, citizens are coming together with a renewed strength to work together to find a solution.

In its April 2020 primary election, Wisconsin experienced serious problems in its absentee balloting processes, which led to a federal court case (RNC v. DNC) that the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately resolved on election eve. The problem was that in the face of the current pandemic, the number of voters who requested an absentee ballot overwhelmed the election officials’ ability to get the ballots to the voters in time to cast them. The result was the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of Wisconsin voters, controversy over the federal courts’ ability to remedy this disenfranchisement, and confusion of the voters. But that Supreme Court decision has done little to solve the problem or to reduce the possibility of an analogous controversy in the future. Indeed, this podcast will consider whether the risk of a similar problem in November is every bit as great. For instance, consider the challenge that would confront Pennsylvania – already taxed by having to administer a new mail-in voting law that for the first time will allow any voter to request an absentee ballot – if an outbreak or resurgence of COVID-19 occurs in Philadelphia in the weeks prior to Election Day.

Featuring one of the series of interviews that ALI is conducting as part of ALI’s Oral History Series, in this episode ALI Council Member Kenneth Frazier of Merck is interviewed by Alfred W. Putnam Jr. of Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath. This interview was conducted on January 22, 2020.

The current public health crisis has raised a variety of new challenges in the workplace. What is the employer's responsibility to keep employees safe? Is an employee able to refuse to work? Can an employee share medical information without adverse consequences? Join us for this episode of Reasonably Speaking when we are joined by lawyers and scholars who are on top of these and other very complex issues of fairness, privacy, safety and the law.

As we saw in the first episode of Season 2, our state and federal courts have adapted much of their work to digital platforms. But some procedures or litigation events do not easily or obviously translate to digital. In this episode, judges and court administrators reveal how procedures and processes that traditionally rely heavily on in-person interactions, such as jury trials or mediations, can be modified to accommodate social distancing. The panel also explores how complex litigation, including multidistrict litigation (MDL), is coping with COVID.

This episode features a previously un-aired portion of the season one episode “Long Road to Hard Truth: The 100 Year Mission to Create the National Museum of African American History and Culture.” On that episode, Judge Paul Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia sat down with Judge Robert Wilkins of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to talk about his book of the same title. During the recording of that episode, Judge Wilkins mentioned a personal experience that he went through in the 1990s, a lawsuit that he filed against the Maryland State Police. This lawsuit ended up being a game changer. Judge Friedman asked Judge Wilkins to share his story, which we now present in this standalone episode.

Don’t miss this episode, as we welcome Katherine Adams, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Apple; Ivan Fong, Senior Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary of 3M; Ken Frazier, Chairman and CEO of Merck; and Malini Moorthy, Vice President and Chief Deputy General Counsel of Medtronic, as they discuss how their companies are responding to the COVID crisis.

This episode explores one aspect of our ongoing project, Restatement of the Law Third, Torts: Concluding Provisions. Specifically, we'll be discussing medical malpractice.

In this third installment of the “Coping with COVID” series, ALI President David F. Levi is joined by six law school deans to discuss how their schools are adjusting to remote learning, including adapting experimental classes, clinics, and other hands-on courses to the online format. The deans also discuss how law schools are responding to the crisis by adjusting their admissions processes and re-allocating resources, all while maintaining a normal level of scholarly exchange and excitement. The panel also looks ahead to when schools may re-open as well as the effects of the pandemic on students outside of the classroom, including views on summer and permanent positions as well as bar exams.

"Coping with COVID: Legal Services Organizations on the Frontlines" welcomes several accomplished lawyers who lead legal services organizations and who are working hard to assist people with critical legal needs. Our country has long struggled to meet the needs of people who cannot afford legal services and the COVID crisis has only exacerbated these needs. These leaders discuss how they are persevering in their efforts to serve their clients and how the COVID crisis may be providing a push and a path toward long-term improvements in our system.

This is the first installment of a series of episodes on "Coping with COVID." Produced jointly by the Bolch Judicial Institute of Duke Law School and The American Law Institute, this series examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the legal system. Moderated by David F. Levi, ALI President and Director of the Bolch Judicial Institute, this episode features top state and federal judges as they discuss how our courts are meeting the challenge of continuing to administer our justice system during this crisis.