2025 Summit Agenda
Registration
Guest Tickets
2025 Sponsors
Optional Tours and Activities
Sponsorship Information
Hotel Information
AJEI Conduct Policy
CLE/CJE Information
Federal Appellate Judges
Plenary 1: The Death of the Chevron Doctrine: The Future of Regulatory Power and Litigation
Plenary 5: Life of an Appeal in the Age of AI: From Trial Court to Appellate Decision
Plenary 3: R.E.S.P.E.C.T – LGBTQ Inclusion in the Courtroom and Workplace
Plenary 4: Writing Like the Greats in the 21st Century: An Advanced Appellate Writing Workshop
Plenary 2: Suter on Souter: A Justice Remembered
Plenary 6: Restoring Public Confidence in the Courts in a Highly Politicized Environment
Breakout 1: Originalism, Separation of Powers, and the Roberts Court
Breakout 2: Embracing Neurodiversity: Understanding, Accommodating, and Thriving in the Legal Profession
Plenary 7: Do Something! Ethical Responses to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct
Break-out 3: To Defer or Not to Defer: Evolving Standards of Review in the Digital Age
Breakout 4: The Ethical and Practical Challenges of Amicus Participation
Plenary 8: A Legacy of Leadership: From Football to the Law and Social Justice
Breakout 5: Concur and Dissent: When Great Minds Don’t Think Alike
Breakout 6: Advanced Legal Writing and Linguistics: Understanding “Any”
Plenary 9: Supreme Court Review: Civil and Criminal
Breakout 7: Standing: Who can Sue These Days? (And are State Courts More – or Less – Receptive?)
Breakout 8: Cutting Edge Scientific Knowledge or Junk Science?
Plenary 10: Military Criminal Justice: What You Should Know
Plenary 11: What about US? The Role of State Constitutional Rights Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions
Plenary 12: Stories in Courage: Fredrick McGhee and Civil Rights Advocacy in Minnesota
CAL Dine-Arounds
Save the Date 2025
Hotel Information
2021 AJEI Summit Panelist Bios
Protected: Opening Session: Hail to the Chiefs
Protected: Managing Stress and Strengthening Resiliency: Practical Strategies for Judges and Lawyers
Protected: Page-turners: How Judges Read in an E-filing Era
Protected: The Ethics of Building and Growing an Appellate Practice
Protected: The Great Digital Accelerator
Protected: Supreme Court Preview
Protected: Clients in the Courtroom: How In-House Counsel View Appeals & Appellate Courts
Protected: Hidden Cause, Visible Effect: Understanding the Supreme Court’s Shadow Docket
Protected: Writing from the Reader’s Perspective: How the English Language Really Works
Protected: Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, How Do We Dismantle Our Bias After All?
Protected: United States Supreme Court Civil Update
Protected: Curse or Blessing: How to Thrive Online Using Social Media in Today’s Legal World
Protected: United States Supreme Court Criminal Update
Protected: Storytelling for Advocates and Judges: How and Why We Should Incorporate Storytelling Techniques and Themes into our Work
Protected: War Crimes – From the Battlefield to the Courtroom
Protected: Preventing Wrongful Convictions by Ensuring the Reliability of Forensic Evidence
Protected: What Do Courts Do When Works of Faith Cross Works of Government
Protected: Top Tips for Top-Notch Oral Argument Answers
Protected: Courage: The Seminal Virtue in Advocacy and Judging
Protected: Canons of Construction: What is Their Role, if Any, in Modern Jurisprudence?
Protected: Certified Check or Erie Guess?
Protected: Legal Ethics 2.0: How Emerging Technologies Are Creating Novel Ethical Dilemmas
Health & Safety
2021 Summit
Registration
Federal Appellate Judges
Sponsorship Information
2021 Sponsors
2019 Summit Sponsors
Tours and Activities
Scholarships
CLE/CJE Information
Hotel Information
2026 Summit OverviewAbout AJEI
Board of Directors
Education Committee
Join Online 2024 Summit2024 Summit Agenda
2024 Sponsors
Protected: Plenary 1: When States Litigate, And How To Encourage (Or Discourage) State Involvement In Your Case
Protected: Plenary 2: How Adversary Nations Can Erode Public Trust in America’s Legal System
Protected: Plenary 3: Beyond the Gavel: Ethics and Wellness for the Legal Community
Protected: Plenary 4: The Collective-Action Constitution
Protected: Break-out 1: Ten Years After Ferguson – What’s Changed?
Protected: Break-out 2: Playing Chess: How Appellate Lawyers Can Shape the Record Long Before Appeal
Protected: Plenary 5: Fireside Chat with Former Solicitor General Neal Katyal
Protected: Plenary 6: Sound off the alarm! DEI is not officially dead—at least not in the legal profession!
Protected: Plenary 7: Sua sponte decision making and supplemental briefing: balancing appellate judges’ decisional discretion and parties’ interests
Protected: Break-out 3: Questions You Should Ask Before, and Must Be Able To Answer During, Appellate Oral Argument
Protected: Breakout 4: Can’t Take My Eyes Off of You: Transparency, Ethics, and the Judiciary
Protected: Plenary 8 – SCOTUS Update
Protected: Break-out 5: SCOTUS Criminal Law Update
Protected: Break-out 6: It’s Past Time for Real e-briefing
Protected: Plenary 9: The Ethical Tightrope: Navigating Media Influence and Judicial Integrity
Protected: Plenary 10: John Adams and Thurgood Marshall: Running Against the Wind to Gain Liberty and Justice for All
Protected: Break-out 7: When Justice Fails – Threats to an Independent Judiciary
Protected: Break-out 8: Legal Writing – A Workshop in Practical Linguistics
Protected: Plenary 11: Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: A Reflection on Its Legacy
Speaker Bios
Sponsorship Information
Optional Tours and Activities
2025 Summit Agenda
Registration
Guest Tickets
2025 Sponsors
Optional Tours and Activities
Sponsorship Information
Hotel Information
AJEI Conduct Policy
CLE/CJE Information
Federal Appellate Judges
Plenary 1: The Death of the Chevron Doctrine: The Future of Regulatory Power and Litigation
Plenary 5: Life of an Appeal in the Age of AI: From Trial Court to Appellate Decision
Plenary 3: R.E.S.P.E.C.T - LGBTQ Inclusion in the Courtroom and Workplace
Plenary 4: Writing Like the Greats in the 21st Century: An Advanced Appellate Writing Workshop
Plenary 2: Suter on Souter: A Justice Remembered
Plenary 6: Restoring Public Confidence in the Courts in a Highly Politicized Environment
Breakout 1: Originalism, Separation of Powers, and the Roberts Court
Breakout 2: Embracing Neurodiversity: Understanding, Accommodating, and Thriving in the Legal Profession
Plenary 7: Do Something! Ethical Responses to Judicial and Lawyer Misconduct
Break-out 3: To Defer or Not to Defer: Evolving Standards of Review in the Digital Age
Breakout 4: The Ethical and Practical Challenges of Amicus Participation
Plenary 8: A Legacy of Leadership: From Football to the Law and Social Justice
Breakout 5: Concur and Dissent: When Great Minds Don't Think Alike
Breakout 6: Advanced Legal Writing and Linguistics: Understanding "Any"
Plenary 9: Supreme Court Review: Civil and Criminal
Breakout 7: Standing: Who can Sue These Days? (And are State Courts More - or Less - Receptive?)
Breakout 8: Cutting Edge Scientific Knowledge or Junk Science?
Plenary 10: Military Criminal Justice: What You Should Know
Plenary 11: What about US? The Role of State Constitutional Rights Following Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions
Plenary 12: Stories in Courage: Fredrick McGhee and Civil Rights Advocacy in Minnesota
CAL Dine-Arounds
Save the Date 2025
Plenary 6: Restoring Public Confidence in the Courts in a Highly Politicized Environment
Restoring Public Confidence in the Courts in a Highly-Politicized Environment
This program will discuss how the events of the past several months in the United States compare to historical events in other countries that have regressed into “backsliding democracies” or authoritarian regimes, e.g., Hungary, Turkey, Poland, Venezuela, or successfully avoided a full regression. In particular, this program will examine how court systems have been marginalized or manipulated in those countries to hasten that regression. Professor Susan Stokes will provide a historical and comparative analysis from a political science perspective. Professor Stephen Vladeck will analyze significant rulings by the United States Supreme Court in litigation challenging actions taken by the executive branch, including the prolific use of executive orders to create and enforce new laws. The discussion, moderated by Judge Jeremy Fogel (Ret.) of the Berkeley Judicial Institute, will culminate in lessons that can be applied to the current situation in the United States to protect the independence of the courts and restore the rule of law in this highly-politicized environment.
Learning Objectives:
1. Discuss the historical context surrounding the process by which other countries have regressed from constitutional democratic rule to illiberal democracies or authoritarian rule.
2. Examine the rulings of the United States Supreme Court in litigation challenging actions taken by the executive branch, including the prolific use of executive orders to create and enforce new laws.
3. Discuss the lessons learned from other countries to ensure that the courts remain independent and retain the public’s trust and confidence.
Hon. Jeremy Fogel (Ret.), Executive Director, Berkeley Judicial Institute
Judge Jeremy Fogel is the Executive Director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute and a Professor at UC Berkeley Law School. The mission of the Berkeley Judicial Institute is to build bridges between judges and academics and to promote an ethical, resilient, and independent judiciary. Prior to his appointment at Berkeley, he served as Director of the Federal Judicial Center in Washington, DC (2011-2018), as a United States District Judge for the Northern District of California (1998-2011), and as a judge of the Santa Clara County Superior (1986-1998) and Municipal (1981-1986) Courts. He was the founding Directing Attorney of the Mental Health Advocacy Project from 1978 to 1981.
Judge Fogel has served as a faculty member for the Federal Judicial Center since 2002 and was a lecturer at Stanford Law School from 2003 until his relocation to Washington. He taught for the California Continuing Judicial Studies Program and California Judicial College from 1987 to 2010 and has served as a faculty member for legal exchanges in approximately twenty foreign countries. He received his B.A. from Stanford University in 1971 and his J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1974.
Judge Fogel has received numerous accolades, including the President’s Award for Outstanding Service to the California Judiciary from the California Judges Association, the Vanguard Award for notable contributions to intellectual property law from the State Bar of California, and, most recently, the Samuel E. Gates Litigation Award from the American College of Trial Lawyers, which is given from time to time to recognize “a lawyer who epitomizes ethical conduct, integrity, collegiality, and professionalism.”
Prof. Susan Stokes, Tiffany and Margaret Blake Distinguished Service Professor of
Professor Stokes is the Tiffany and Margaret Blake Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and Director of the Chicago Center on Democracy. She has written or co-authored six books on topics including democratic theory, distributive politics and clientelism, political behavior and participation, democratic erosion, and Latin American politics. She is President-elect of the American Political Science Association. She is past chair of APSA’s Comparative Politics and Democracy and Autocracy Sections, past chair of the Yale Political Science Department, and a founding member of Bright Line Watch. She is also an elected member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy of Arts Sciences.
Professor Stokes’ forthcoming book, The Backsliders: Why Leaders Undermine Their Own Democracies (expected in 2025), offers an explanation for the wave of democratic erosion or backsliding that has affected many countries in the early 21st century, including the United States, several European countries, and others in the Global South. The Backsliders uses state-of-the-art social science techniques and data to identify factors that put democracies at risk. The book also suggests strategies for resisting erosion and for repairing democratic institutions after backsliding leaders are no longer in power.
Prof. Steve Vladeck, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
Stephen I. Vladeck is a professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, and is a nationally recognized expert on the federal courts; the Supreme Court; national security law; and military justice.
Vladeck is author of the New York Times-bestselling book, “The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic,” which has won numerous awards, including the 2024 Order of the Coif Book Award. Vladeck is also a highly regarded appellate advocate, having argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous lower federal civilian and military courts. He has received numerous awards for his influential and widely cited legal scholarship, his prolific popular writing, his teaching, and his service to the legal profession—including the 2024 University of Texas President’s Research Impact Award and his selection by the Order of the Coif to serve as its Distinguished Visiting Professor for 2025.
Vladeck is CNN’s Supreme Court analyst and editor and author of “One First,” a popular weekly newsletter about the Supreme Court. He is also a co-author of Aspen Publishers’ leading national security law and counterterrorism law casebooks. And he is a member of the Board of Trustees of Amherst College (from which he received his B.A. summa cum laude with Highest Distinction in History and Mathematics in 2001) and EarthJustice—the nation’s premier nonprofit public interest environmental law organization.
Vladeck graduated from Yale Law School in 2004—where he was executive editor of the Yale Law Journal and won the Harlan Fiske Stone Prize for outstanding moot court oralist and shared the Potter Stewart Prize for best moot court team performance. After law school, he clerked for the Honorable Marsha S. Berzon on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Honorable Rosemary Barkett on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.