Erwin Chemerinsky quoted in VICE news, November 12, 2018
“Congress by statute can create protection for the independent counsel,” said Chemerinsky. “There used to be such a law. That law expired and wasn’t renewed.”
Chemerinsky said the only way he can think of for Congress to protect Mueller now would be by introducing similar legislation.
Olga Mack writes for Above the Law, November 12, 2018
Hindsight is 20/20, and we often walk away from speeches or presentations thinking about what we could do differently. While you can’t turn back the clock, there is another way to benefit from this reflection: watching recordings of your speeches. Whenever possible, make sure you record your speeches or presentations. You can enhance your public speaking skills drastically by watching your recording and identifying ways to improve in areas that went poorly.
Ann Ravel quoted in Wired, November 19, 2018
But the opacity of Concealed Online’s business also exposes a blind spot for Facebook and for the regulation of digital political ads in general, says Ann Ravel, a UC Berkeley law professor and former FEC commissioner under President Obama.
Despite all of the noise about protecting elections in Washington and Silicon Valley over the last two years, digital political ads remain largely unregulated. “The law doesn’t cover them,” she says. “My opinion is that it should. This is the essence of where campaigning has gone now.”
Ravel says Facebook’s archive is “not sufficient.” As the case of Concealed Online shows, Facebook’s database can tell you what entity placed the ad, but it reveals little about who’s really behind it. That’s an issue that’s hardly specific to Concealed Online.
Robert Bartlett quoted in Hartford Courant, November 20, 2018
“Even controlling for credit worthiness, we see discriminatory effects in the rates at which borrowers obtain mortgages,” Bartlett said.
Researchers said the racial disparities could result from algorithms that use machine learning and big data to charge higher interest rates to borrowers who may be less likely to shop around. For example, the algorithms may take into account a borrower’s neighborhood — noting who lives in banking deserts — or other characteristics such as their high school or college. The consumers least likely to comparison shop also happen to be black or Latino.
Robert Bartlett quoted in HousingWire, November 20, 2018
Robert Bartlett, co-author of the study and professor at Berkeley Law, suggested there could be legal implications for lenders using these algorithms.
Bartlett said fair lending laws prohibit price discrimination and that courts have ruled that pricing variations can only be justified by credit risk.
“The novelty of our empirical design is that we can rule out the possibility that these pricing differences are due to differences in credit risk among borrowers,” Bartlett said.
Stephanie Campos-Bui quoted in OaklandPost, December 14, 2018
According to Stephanie Campos-Bui, supervising attorney with the Policy Advocacy Clinic at Berkeley Law, “Research has shown that fees can undermine public safety by increasing recidivism. This move by the Board will free up money to pay for basic necessities like housing, food, and clothing, and help ensure that people exiting the system will have a better chance of successfully reentering into their communities.”
Andrea Roth mentioned in ScienceNews, December 17, 2018
Innocent people looking for long-lost family may be surprised to find that putting their DNA on a public website opens them and their relatives to police scrutiny, says Andrea Roth, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley Law.
She and other critics charge that genetic genealogy searches put too many people under police scrutiny and should be regulated like law enforcement databases. For instance, California allows police to do family searches of law enforcement databases only as a last resort for the most serious crimes and limits what material can be used. Roth would go a step further: People whose DNA is collected as part of a genetic genealogy investigation and are not linked to the crime must have their data wiped from police databases.
Olga Mack writes for Above the Law, December 17, 2018
Smart contracts, self-executing code based on “if-then” encoded logic, provide an alternative way to transact. Increasingly though, regulators ask, “Who should be held responsible? Who should be held accountable?”
Elisabeth Semel quoted in NPR, December 14, 2018
In an interview with NPR, Elisabeth Semel, director of the Death Penalty Clinic at Berkeley Law school said that despite the fact that executions are up slightly from a 25-year low in 2016, “there’s no question that this is a dramatic downward trend.” Semel said Americans’ support of the death penalty has chilled since it reached a fervor during the “tough on crime” mentality of the 1980s and 90s. “I think there’s been a reassessment, just as there’s been a reassessment about mass incarceration,” Semel said. “It’s become less of a battle cry for politicians than it used to be.”
Erwin Chemerinsky quoted in [your]NEWS, December 17, 2018
But no matter how well intentioned, any attempt to control speech raises Constitutional issues. And the First Amendment is clear on the matter, says Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of Berkeley Law.
“First, the First Amendment applies only to the government, not to private entities,” Chemerinsky stated in an email to California. “Second, there is no legal definition of hate speech. Hate speech is protected by the First Amendment.”