Stanford Law Professors Ho and Ablavsky Garner Academic Awards

Stanford Law Press Release

July 21, 2022 – Daniel Ho, William Benjamin Scott and Luna M. Scott Professor of Law, Associate Director of the Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence, and Director of the Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab (RegLab), worked with the Santa Clara County Public Health Department in a collaboration that was awarded the Innovative Practice Gold Award for “the highest level of program innovation” to serve “community during the COVID-19 pandemic” by the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO). Co-authors included Stanford RegLab members Lisa Lu, Benjamin Anderson, Raymond Ha, and Derek Ouyang as well as members of Santa Clara County Public Health Department Alexis D’Agostino and Sarah L. Rudman.

Daniel Ho
Daniel Ho, William Benjamin Scott and Luna M. Scott Professor of Law

Additionally, a paper co-authored by Ho and RegLab members (Lucia Zheng ’22, Peter Henderson JD ’23, Neel Guha JD ’23, Brandon Anderson) “When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Dataset of 53,000+ Legal Holdings,” was awarded the 2021 Carole Hafner Best Paper Prize at the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law.

 Gregory Ablavsky, Professor of Law and Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar Professor, by courtesy, History
Gregory Ablavsky, Professor of Law and Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar Professor, by courtesy, History

Stanford Law Professor Gregory Ablavsky, the Helen L. Crocker Faculty Scholar and Professor, by courtesy, History, was awarded the J. Willard Hurst Book Prize for the 2022 best sociolegal history book by the Law and Society Association. Ablavsky’s book, Federal Ground: Governing Property and Violence in the First U.S. Territories, explained the growth of federal authority in the first two U.S. federal territories—the Northwest and Southwest. The book addressed the underlying questions of what federal power is and who its architects are. It also further identified how the federal government can be studied—not as a monolith, but as the outcome of many different struggles playing out at the grassroots levels.