phd in law defense

Security Studies

Topics of study include:

Grand strategies of the major powers.
Arms competitions.
Coercive diplomacy.
Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
Rapid shifts in regional and global distributions of capabilities.
Insurgency, civil war, and regional political instability.
Military force composition and capability.
Civil-military relations.
Innovations in military technologies.

The cluster combines social science training in international security and national defense policy, focused study of specific regions of the world, and exploration of the technical and scientific aspects of proliferation, weapons innovations, terrorist and counterterrorist operations, and insurgency and counterinsurgency warfare. This is an in-residence program, though absences may be taken for approved field research.

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

PhD Defence Process: A Comprehensive Guide

Embarking on the journey toward a PhD is an intellectual odyssey marked by tireless research, countless hours of contemplation, and a fervent commitment to contributing to the body of knowledge in one’s field. As the culmination of this formidable journey, the PhD defence stands as the final frontier, the proverbial bridge between student and scholar.

In this comprehensive guide, we unravel the intricacies of the PhD defence—a momentous occasion that is both a celebration of scholarly achievement and a rigorous evaluation of academic prowess. Join us as we explore the nuances of the defence process, addressing questions about its duration, contemplating the possibility of failure, and delving into the subtle distinctions of language that surround it.

Beyond the formalities, we aim to shed light on the significance of this rite of passage, dispelling misconceptions about its nature. Moreover, we’ll consider the impact of one’s attire on this critical day and share personal experiences and practical tips from those who have successfully navigated the defence journey.

Whether you are on the precipice of your own defence or are simply curious about the process, this guide seeks to demystify the PhD defence, providing a roadmap for success and a nuanced understanding of the pivotal event that marks the transition from student to scholar.

Introduction

A. definition and purpose:, b. overview of the oral examination:, a. general duration of a typical defense, b. factors influencing the duration:, c. preparation and flexibility:, a. preparation and thorough understanding of the research:, b. handling questions effectively:, c. confidence and composure during the presentation:, d. posture of continuous improvement:, a. exploring the possibility of failure:, b. common reasons for failure:, c. steps to mitigate the risk of failure:, d. post-failure resilience:, a. addressing the language variation:, b. conforming to regional preferences:, c. consistency in usage:, d. flexibility and adaptability:, e. navigating language in a globalized academic landscape:, a. debunking myths around the formality of the defense:, b. significance in validating research contributions:, c. post-defense impact:, a. appropriate attire for different settings:, b. professionalism and the impact of appearance:, c. practical tips for dressing success:, b. practical tips for a successful defense:, c. post-defense reflections:, career options after phd.

Embarking on the doctoral journey is a formidable undertaking, where aspiring scholars immerse themselves in the pursuit of knowledge, contributing new insights to their respective fields. At the pinnacle of this academic odyssey lies the PhD defence—a culmination that transcends the boundaries of a mere formality, symbolizing the transformation from a student of a discipline to a recognized contributor to the academic tapestry.

The PhD defence, also known as the viva voce or oral examination, is a pivotal moment in the life of a doctoral candidate.

PhD defence is not merely a ritualistic ceremony; rather, it serves as a platform for scholars to present, defend, and elucidate the findings and implications of their research. The defence is the crucible where ideas are tested, hypotheses scrutinized, and the depth of scholarly understanding is laid bare.

The importance of the PhD defence reverberates throughout the academic landscape. It is not just a capstone event; it is the juncture where academic rigour meets real-world application. The defence is the litmus test of a researcher’s ability to articulate, defend, and contextualize their work—an evaluation that extends beyond the pages of a dissertation.

Beyond its evaluative nature, the defence serves as a rite of passage, validating the years of dedication, perseverance, and intellectual rigour invested in the research endeavour. Success in the defence is a testament to the candidate’s mastery of their subject matter and the originality and impact of their contributions to the academic community.

Furthermore, a successful defence paves the way for future contributions, positioning the scholar as a recognized authority in their field. The defence is not just an endpoint; it is a launchpad, propelling researchers into the next phase of their academic journey as they continue to shape and redefine the boundaries of knowledge.

In essence, the PhD defence is more than a ceremonial checkpoint—it is a transformative experience that validates the intellectual journey, underscores the significance of scholarly contributions, and sets the stage for a continued legacy of academic excellence. As we navigate the intricacies of this process, we invite you to explore the multifaceted dimensions that make the PhD defence an indispensable chapter in the narrative of academic achievement.

What is a PhD Defence?

At its core, a PhD defence is a rigorous and comprehensive examination that marks the culmination of a doctoral candidate’s research journey. It is an essential component of the doctoral process in which the candidate is required to defend their dissertation before a committee of experts in the field. The defence serves multiple purposes, acting as both a showcase of the candidate’s work and an evaluative measure of their understanding, critical thinking, and contributions to the academic domain.

The primary goals of a PhD defence include:

Presentation of Research: The candidate presents the key findings, methodology, and significance of their research.
Demonstration of Mastery: The defence assesses the candidate’s depth of understanding, mastery of the subject matter, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
Critical Examination: Committee members rigorously question the candidate, challenging assumptions, testing methodologies, and probing the boundaries of the research.
Validation of Originality: The defence validates the originality and contribution of the candidate’s work to the existing body of knowledge.

The PhD defence often takes the form of an oral examination, commonly referred to as the viva voce. This oral component adds a dynamic and interactive dimension to the evaluation process. Key elements of the oral examination include:

Presentation: The candidate typically begins with a formal presentation, summarizing the dissertation’s main components, methodology, and findings. This presentation is an opportunity to showcase the significance and novelty of the research.
Questioning and Discussion: Following the presentation, the candidate engages in a thorough questioning session with the examination committee. Committee members explore various aspects of the research, challenging the candidates to articulate their rationale, defend their conclusions, and respond to critiques.
Defence of Methodology: The candidate is often required to defend the chosen research methodology, demonstrating its appropriateness, rigour, and contribution to the field.
Evaluation of Contributions: Committee members assess the originality and impact of the candidate’s contributions to the academic discipline, seeking to understand how the research advances existing knowledge.

The oral examination is not a mere formality; it is a dynamic exchange that tests the candidate’s intellectual acumen, research skills, and capacity to contribute meaningfully to the scholarly community.

In essence, the PhD defence is a comprehensive and interactive evaluation that encapsulates the essence of a candidate’s research journey, demanding a synthesis of knowledge, clarity of expression, and the ability to navigate the complexities of academic inquiry. As we delve into the specifics of the defence process, we will unravel the layers of preparation and skill required to navigate this transformative academic milestone.

How Long is a PhD Defence?

The duration of a PhD defence can vary widely, but it typically ranges from two to three hours. This time frame encompasses the candidate’s presentation of their research, questioning and discussions with the examination committee, and any additional deliberations or decisions by the committee. However, it’s essential to note that this is a general guideline, and actual defence durations may vary based on numerous factors.

Sciences and Engineering: Defenses in these fields might lean towards the shorter end of the spectrum, often around two hours. The focus is often on the methodology, results, and technical aspects.
Humanities and Social Sciences: Given the theoretical and interpretive nature of research in these fields, defences might extend closer to three hours or more. Discussions may delve into philosophical underpinnings and nuanced interpretations.
Simple vs. Complex Studies: The complexity of the research itself plays a role. Elaborate experiments, extensive datasets, or intricate theoretical frameworks may necessitate a more extended defence.
Number of Committee Members: A larger committee or one with diverse expertise may lead to more extensive discussions and varied perspectives, potentially elongating the defence.
Committee Engagement: The level of engagement and probing by committee members can influence the overall duration. In-depth discussions or debates may extend the defence time.
Cultural Norms: In some countries, the oral defence might be more ceremonial, with less emphasis on intense questioning. In others, a rigorous and extended defence might be the norm.
Evaluation Practices: Different academic systems have varying evaluation criteria, which can impact the duration of the defence.
Institutional Guidelines: Some institutions may have specific guidelines on defence durations, influencing the overall time allotted for the process.

Candidates should be well-prepared for a defence of any duration. Adequate preparation not only involves a concise presentation of the research but also anticipates potential questions and engages in thoughtful discussions. Additionally, candidates should be flexible and responsive to the dynamics of the defense, adapting to the pace set by the committee.

Success Factors in a PhD Defence

Successful defence begins with a deep and comprehensive understanding of the research. Candidates should be well-versed in every aspect of their study, from the theoretical framework to the methodology and findings.
Thorough preparation involves anticipating potential questions from the examination committee. Candidates should consider the strengths and limitations of their research and be ready to address queries related to methodology, data analysis, and theoretical underpinnings.
Conducting mock defences with peers or mentors can be invaluable. It helps refine the presentation, exposes potential areas of weakness, and provides an opportunity to practice responding to challenging questions.
Actively listen to questions without interruption. Understanding the nuances of each question is crucial for providing precise and relevant responses.
Responses should be clear, concise, and directly address the question. Avoid unnecessary jargon, and strive to convey complex concepts in a manner that is accessible to the entire committee.
It’s acceptable not to have all the answers. If faced with a question that stumps you, acknowledge it honestly. Expressing a willingness to explore the topic further demonstrates intellectual humility.
Use questions as opportunities to reinforce key messages from the research. Skillfully link responses back to the core contributions of the study, emphasizing its significance.
Rehearse the presentation multiple times to build familiarity with the material. This enhances confidence, reduces nervousness, and ensures a smooth and engaging delivery.
Maintain confident and open body language. Stand tall, make eye contact, and use gestures judiciously. A composed demeanour contributes to a positive impression.
Acknowledge and manage nervousness. It’s natural to feel some anxiety, but channelling that energy into enthusiasm for presenting your research can turn nervousness into a positive force.
Engage with the committee through a dynamic and interactive presentation. Invite questions during the presentation to create a more conversational atmosphere.
Utilize visual aids effectively. Slides or other visual elements should complement the spoken presentation, reinforcing key points without overwhelming the audience.
View the defence not only as an evaluation but also as an opportunity for continuous improvement. Feedback received during the defence can inform future research endeavours and scholarly pursuits.

In essence, success in a PhD defence hinges on meticulous preparation, adept handling of questions, and projecting confidence and composure during the presentation. A well-prepared and resilient candidate is better positioned to navigate the challenges of the defence, transforming it from a moment of evaluation into an affirmation of scholarly achievement.

Failure in PhD Defence

While the prospect of failing a PhD defence is relatively rare, it’s essential for candidates to acknowledge that the possibility exists. Understanding this reality can motivate diligent preparation and a proactive approach to mitigate potential risks.
Failure, if it occurs, should be seen as a learning opportunity rather than a definitive endpoint. It may highlight areas for improvement and offer insights into refining the research and presentation.
Lack of thorough preparation, including a weak grasp of the research content, inadequate rehearsal, and failure to anticipate potential questions, can contribute to failure.
Inability to effectively defend the chosen research methodology, including justifying its appropriateness and demonstrating its rigour, can be a critical factor.
Failing to clearly articulate the original contributions of the research and its significance to the field may lead to a negative assessment.
Responding defensively to questions, exhibiting a lack of openness to critique, or being unwilling to acknowledge limitations can impact the overall impression.
Inability to address committee concerns or incorporate constructive feedback received during the defense may contribute to a negative outcome.
Comprehensive preparation is the cornerstone of success. Candidates should dedicate ample time to understanding every facet of their research, conducting mock defences, and seeking feedback.
Identify potential weaknesses in the research and address them proactively. Being aware of limitations and articulating plans for addressing them in future work demonstrates foresight.
Engage with mentors, peers, or advisors before the defence. Solicit constructive feedback on both the content and delivery of the presentation to refine and strengthen the defence.
Develop strategies to manage stress and nervousness. Techniques such as mindfulness, deep breathing, or visualization can be effective in maintaining composure during the defence.
Conduct a pre-defense review of all materials, ensuring that the presentation aligns with the dissertation and that visual aids are clear and supportive.
Approach the defence with an open and reflective attitude. Embrace critique as an opportunity for improvement rather than as a personal affront.
Clarify expectations with the examination committee beforehand. Understanding the committee’s focus areas and preferences can guide preparation efforts.
In the event of failure, candidates should approach the situation with resilience. Seek feedback from the committee, understand the reasons for the outcome, and use the experience as a springboard for improvement.

In summary, while the prospect of failing a PhD defence is uncommon, acknowledging its possibility and taking proactive steps to mitigate risks are crucial elements of a well-rounded defence strategy. By addressing common failure factors through thorough preparation, openness to critique, and a resilient attitude, candidates can increase their chances of a successful defence outcome.

PhD Defense or Defence?

The choice between “defense” and “defence” is primarily a matter of British English versus American English spelling conventions. “Defense” is the preferred spelling in American English, while “defence” is the British English spelling.
In the global academic community, both spellings are generally understood and accepted. However, the choice of spelling may be influenced by the academic institution’s language conventions or the preferences of individual scholars.
Academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding language conventions, and candidates are often expected to adhere to the institution’s preferred spelling.
Candidates may also consider the preferences of their advisors or committee members. If there is a consistent spelling convention used within the academic department, it is advisable to align with those preferences.
Consideration should be given to the spelling conventions of scholarly journals in the candidate’s field. If intending to publish research stemming from the dissertation, aligning with the conventions of target journals is prudent.
If the defense presentation or dissertation will be shared with an international audience, using a more universally recognized spelling (such as “defense”) may be preferred to ensure clarity and accessibility.
Regardless of the chosen spelling, it’s crucial to maintain consistency throughout the document. Mixing spellings can distract from the content and may be perceived as an oversight.
In oral presentations and written correspondence related to the defence, including emails, it’s advisable to maintain consistency with the chosen spelling to present a professional and polished image.
Recognizing that language conventions can vary, candidates should approach the choice of spelling with flexibility. Being adaptable to the preferences of the academic context and demonstrating an awareness of regional variations reflects a nuanced understanding of language usage.
With the increasing globalization of academia, an awareness of language variations becomes essential. Scholars often collaborate across borders, and an inclusive approach to language conventions contributes to effective communication and collaboration.

In summary, the choice between “PhD defense” and “PhD defence” boils down to regional language conventions and institutional preferences. Maintaining consistency, being mindful of the target audience, and adapting to the expectations of the academic community contribute to a polished and professional presentation, whether in written documents or oral defences.

Is PhD Defense a Formality?

While the PhD defence is a structured and ritualistic event, it is far from being a mere formality. It is a critical and substantive part of the doctoral journey, designed to rigorously evaluate the candidate’s research contributions, understanding of the field, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
The defence is not a checkbox to be marked but rather a dynamic process where the candidate’s research is evaluated for its scholarly merit. The committee scrutinizes the originality, significance, and methodology of the research, aiming to ensure it meets the standards of advanced academic work.
Far from a passive or purely ceremonial event, the defence involves active engagement between the candidate and the examination committee. Questions, discussions, and debates are integral components that enrich the scholarly exchange during the defence.
The defence serves as a platform for the candidate to demonstrate the originality of their research. Committee members assess the novelty of the contributions, ensuring that the work adds value to the existing body of knowledge.
Beyond the content, the defence evaluates the methodological rigour of the research. Committee members assess whether the chosen methodology is appropriate, well-executed, and contributes to the validity of the findings.
Successful completion of the defence affirms the candidate’s ability to contribute meaningfully to the academic discourse in their field. It is an endorsement of the candidate’s position as a knowledgeable and respected scholar.
The defence process acts as a quality assurance mechanism in academia. It ensures that individuals awarded a doctoral degree have undergone a thorough and rigorous evaluation, upholding the standards of excellence in research and scholarly inquiry.
Institutions have specific criteria and standards for awarding a PhD. The defence process aligns with these institutional and academic standards, providing a consistent and transparent mechanism for evaluating candidates.
Successful completion of the defence is a pivotal moment that marks the transition from a doctoral candidate to a recognized scholar. It opens doors to further contributions, collaborations, and opportunities within the academic community.
Research presented during the defence often forms the basis for future publications. The validation received in the defence enhances the credibility of the research, facilitating its dissemination and impact within the academic community.
Beyond the academic realm, a successfully defended PhD is a key credential for professional advancement. It enhances one’s standing in the broader professional landscape, opening doors to research positions, teaching opportunities, and leadership roles.

In essence, the PhD defence is a rigorous and meaningful process that goes beyond formalities, playing a crucial role in affirming the academic merit of a candidate’s research and marking the culmination of their journey toward scholarly recognition.

Dressing for Success: PhD Defense Outfit

For Men: A well-fitted suit in neutral colours (black, navy, grey), a collared dress shirt, a tie, and formal dress shoes.
For Women: A tailored suit, a blouse or button-down shirt, and closed-toe dress shoes.
Dress codes can vary based on cultural expectations. It’s advisable to be aware of any cultural nuances within the academic institution and to adapt attire accordingly.
With the rise of virtual defenses, considerations for attire remain relevant. Even in online settings, dressing professionally contributes to a polished and serious demeanor. Virtual attire can mirror what one would wear in-person, focusing on the upper body visible on camera.
The attire chosen for a PhD defense contributes to the first impression that a candidate makes on the examination committee. A professional and polished appearance sets a positive tone for the defense.
Dressing appropriately reflects respect for the gravity of the occasion. It acknowledges the significance of the defense as a formal evaluation of one’s scholarly contributions.
Wearing professional attire can contribute to a boost in confidence. When individuals feel well-dressed and put-together, it can positively impact their mindset and overall presentation.
The PhD defense is a serious academic event, and dressing professionally fosters an atmosphere of seriousness and commitment to the scholarly process. It aligns with the respect one accords to academic traditions.
Institutional norms may influence dress expectations. Some academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding attire for formal events, and candidates should be aware of and adhere to these norms.
While adhering to the formality expected in academic settings, individuals can also express their personal style within the bounds of professionalism. It’s about finding a balance between institutional expectations and personal comfort.
Select and prepare the outfit well in advance to avoid last-minute stress. Ensure that the attire is clean, well-ironed, and in good condition.
Accessories such as ties, scarves, or jewelry should complement the outfit. However, it’s advisable to keep accessories subtle to maintain a professional appearance.
While dressing professionally, prioritize comfort. PhD defenses can be mentally demanding, and comfortable attire can contribute to a more confident and composed demeanor.
Pay attention to grooming, including personal hygiene and haircare. A well-groomed appearance contributes to an overall polished look.
Start preparation well in advance of the defense date. Know your research inside out, anticipate potential questions, and be ready to discuss the nuances of your methodology, findings, and contributions.
Conduct mock defenses with peers, mentors, or colleagues. Mock defenses provide an opportunity to receive constructive feedback, practice responses to potential questions, and refine your presentation.
Strike a balance between confidence and humility. Confidence in presenting your research is essential, but being open to acknowledging limitations and areas for improvement demonstrates intellectual honesty.
Actively engage with the examination committee during the defense. Listen carefully to questions, respond thoughtfully, and view the defense as a scholarly exchange rather than a mere formality.
Understand the expertise and backgrounds of the committee members. Tailor your presentation and responses to align with the interests and expectations of your specific audience.
Practice time management during your presentation. Ensure that you allocate sufficient time to cover key aspects of your research, leaving ample time for questions and discussions.
It’s normal to feel nervous, but practicing mindfulness and staying calm under pressure is crucial. Take deep breaths, maintain eye contact, and focus on delivering a clear and composed presentation.
Have a plan for post-defense activities. Whether it’s revisions to the dissertation, publications, or future research endeavors, having a roadmap for what comes next demonstrates foresight and commitment to ongoing scholarly contributions.
After successfully defending, individuals often emphasize the importance of taking time to reflect on the entire doctoral journey. Acknowledge personal and academic growth, celebrate achievements, and use the experience to inform future scholarly pursuits.

In summary, learning from the experiences of others who have successfully defended offers a wealth of practical wisdom. These insights, combined with thoughtful preparation and a proactive approach, contribute to a successful and fulfilling defense experience.

You have plenty of career options after completing a PhD. For more details, visit my blog posts:

7 Essential Steps for Building a Robust Research Portfolio

Exciting Career Opportunities for PhD Researchers and Research Scholars

Freelance Writing or Editing Opportunities for Researchers A Comprehensive Guide

Research Consultancy: An Alternate Career for Researchers

The Insider’s Guide to Becoming a Patent Agent: Opportunities, Requirements, and Challenges

The journey from a curious researcher to a recognized scholar culminates in the PhD defence—an intellectual odyssey marked by dedication, resilience, and a relentless pursuit of knowledge. As we navigate the intricacies of this pivotal event, it becomes evident that the PhD defence is far more than a ceremonial rite; it is a substantive evaluation that validates the contributions of a researcher to the academic landscape.

Upcoming Events

Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
Visit for Research Internships Worldwide

S.J.D. Program

The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) is Harvard Law School’s most advanced law degree, designed for aspiring legal academics who wish to pursue sustained independent study, research and writing. In recent years we have created a vibrant intellectual community of young scholars from around the world, most of whom will secure teaching positions in their home countries, the U.S., or third countries. We typically have around 60 S.J.D. candidates (most of whom are in residence) representing 25-30 countries, drawn primarily from among Harvard’s top LL.M. graduates. Ultimately, candidates are expected to produce a dissertation that will constitute a substantial and valuable contribution to legal scholarship.

There are five stages to the S.J.D. program:

Completion of a study plan which includes course work
Successful completion of an oral examination
Two presentations at the S.J.D. Colloquium
Submission and acceptance of a doctoral dissertation
Successful oral defense of the dissertation

The first two of these requirements—preparation and completion of a study plan, and successful completion of the oral (general) examination—are normally completed during the first year or two of study. The S.J.D. candidate normally completes the remaining requirements—presentations at the S.J.D. colloquium, submission and acceptance of the dissertation, and oral defense of the dissertation—during the three years after completion of the oral examination.

Each S.J.D. candidate pursues the degree under the supervision of an overall faculty supervisor selected by the candidate and approved by the Committee on Graduate Studies. This supervisor must be a full-time member of the Harvard Law School faculty.

Program of Study

Academic life, teaching and fellowship opportunities, current s.j.d. candidates and recent graduates, recent s.j.d. achievements, connect with s.j.d. alumni, modal gallery, gallery block modal gallery.

Search form

Criminology, Law and Society Ph.D. program

The Ph.D. program in Criminology, Law and Society is ranked #2 in the US News and World Reports rankings. The program focuses on the causes, manifestations, and consequences of crime; the impacts of crime on society; social regulation; the civil justice system; the social and cultural contexts of law; and the interactive effects of law and society. With high-caliber faculty and an interdisciplinary perspective, the program aims to develop students’ theoretical and methodological sophistication to prepare them for faculty positions at major universities and colleges or for research, training, and administrative work in the justice system.

Program Overview

In this doctoral program, students must pass nine (9) required courses and four (4) electives, all with a grade of B or higher. For a description of the following courses and others, please visit the UCI Course Catalogue .

Students are also required to complete a Second Year Project, pass comprehensive examinations (comps), prepare & defend a dissertation proposal, and prepare & defend a dissertation.

Second Year Project/Master's Thesis

Beginning in their first year, students initiate independent research projects under faculty supervision. Approaches to research vary widely and may include questionnaire and survey analysis, systematic field observation, computer simulation, archival searches, ethnographies, oral histories, and legal analysis. This project is further expanded on and completed during the second year. This Second Year Project is designed to introduce students to developing their own research projects and writing for an academic audience. The report of the Second Year Project should be comparable in scope and format to articles that appear in leading journals within the field of criminology, law and society. Each project is evaluated and approved by the advisor and one other faculty member.

Students may submit the written report of their Second Year Project as a Master's Thesis for an M.A. in Social Ecology. For the Ph.D. degree, however, an M.A. is not required, and most students move directly to the completion of the doctoral requirements.

Comprehensive Exams

The comprehensive examination (comps) is an untimed take-home written exam consisting of two essays, to be completed in the third year of graduate study. The goal of comps is to allow graduate students to demonstrate mastery of major theoretical, substantive, and methodological issues in both criminology and law & society. The examination consists of two sections – criminology, and law & society. Beginning in 2021, students must complete the exam by the first day of classes in the Winter Quarter of their third year (adjusted for any Leaves of Absence), and must pass all sections of the exam by the last day of classes in Winter Quarter of their third year (adjusted for any Leaves of Absence). Students who do not pass one or both sections on the first attempt will retake the failed section(s) in the subsequent quarter. Students are allowed to take the exam twice, but must pass all sections according to this timeline.

Dissertation

During the fourth year of study, students draft and defend a proposal for dissertation research. The proposal is developed under the guidance of a faculty advisor, and clearly presents the research questions, theories, and methods which will inform the doctoral dissertation project. Once students complete the proposal, they must defend the proposal to a committee comprised of the faculty advisor and four other faculty members. Upon approval of the defense, the student will advance to candidacy for the Ph.D. Students generally complete the proposal defense by the end of the fourth year.

Once students have advanced to candidacy, they spend their remaining time at UCI completing data collection and analysis for their dissertation. Following the completion of the written dissertation, students must orally defend their project to a committee comprised of the faculty advisor and two other faculty members. The dissertation defense usually occurs in the fifth or sixth year. Upon passage of the oral defense and approval of the committee, the student has completed all of the requirements of the Ph.D. program.

(Return to top)

Program Learning Outcomes

Graduate Student Emphases

UCI offers graduate students the opportunity to earn emphases in several substantive areas. Many of our students earn one or more of these emphases, and several of our faculty are associated with the emphases-granting departments.

Asian American Studies

This graduate emphasis is a formal component of graduate studies at the University of California, Irvine, in addition to the fulfillment of requirements towards the Ph.D. or M.F.A. degree in an array of fields in the Schools of Humanities, Social Sciences, Social Ecology, and the Arts. Designed to complement existing graduate degree-granting programs by providing interdisciplinary training in Asian American Studies, this particular specialty is comprised of four courses: two foundation courses introducing theories, methods, and historical and contemporary special topics in Asian American Studies; one elective course in Asian American Studies; and one related elective course in a student’s specific discipline or area of study. Learn more...

Critical Theory Emphasis

The Critical Theory Emphasis (CTE) graduate specialty is the curricular arm of UCI's Critical Theory Institute (CTI). Scholars of Critical Theory explore and develop theoretical models to analyze and critique cultural forms from literature and art to more general systems of information, social relations, and symbolic categories of race, gender and ethnic identity. The goal of the CTE is to promote the study of shared assumptions, problems and commitments of the various discourses in the arts, humanities and social sciences. Learn more...

Graduate Feminist Emphasis

The Department of Gender and Sexuality Studies at UCI offers a graduate emphasis in Feminist Studies for students pursuing Ph.D. or Master's programs across the campus. Participating in the GFE provides students with advanced interdisciplinary training in Feminist Studies, and offers them an opportunity to become part a network of feminist scholars at UCI and beyond. GFE students are subscribed in our email listserv , which features current job openings, fellowship information, and important news about our upcoming events. Learn more...

Law, Society and Culture Emphasis

The Center for Law, Society and Culture sponsors the LSC Emphasis. This concentration is designed a) to instill an intellectual ethic on inter -disciplinarity among participating students early in their training and b) to create trans -disciplinary communities of emerging socio-legal scholars whose intellectual development is enhanced by formal and informal exchange across diverse fields. In the spring of each year, students in their first through third years of graduate study are invited to apply to the Emphasis, which is composed of 4 inter-connected components: 1) a year-long theory and research seminar, with each quarter taught by one faculty member from a different school at UCI; (2) cross-disciplinary mentorship and advising; (3) ongoing professionalization opportunities and responsibilities; and (4) a culminating intellectual project. Each student is assigned a faculty mentor outside of his or her home department and will meet with that mentor on a monthly basis to discuss the student's ongoing research. Learn more...

Race and Justice Studies Emphasis

Students from any UCI state-supported graduate or professional program, including J.D., Master’s and M.F.A. students, are eligible to apply to the Emphasis in Race and Justice Studies (RJS), housed in the Department of Criminology, Law and Society (CLS). The Race and Justice Studies Emphasis is comprised of four requirements that promote inclusive excellence in graduate training at UCI: (1) A first-year mentorship proseminar offered over three quarters by faculty from across campus whose research and teaching foster inclusive excellence; (2) one RJS-approved course offered under the supervision of the Emphasis; (3) a writing seminar in which a paper developed through the Emphasis will be workshopped and revised toward publication; and (4) a public presentation which translates the student’s RJS-influenced research for an interdisciplinary audience. Learn more...

Visual Studies

The Emphasis in Visual Studies offers a focus on Visual Studies available to Ph.D. and M.F.A. students in all departments at UCI. Satisfactory completion of this concentration is certified by the Graduate Advisor in Visual Studies and is noted in the student's dossier. Learn more...

Research Centers

Students in the Ph.D. program often work with various Research Centers, including the Center for Evidence-Based Corrections , the Center in Law, Society and Culture , the Center for Psychology and Law , the Newkirk Center , the Irvine Lab for the Study of Space and Crime , and the Metropolitan Futures Initiative .

Financial Support

Students in the Ph.D. program have a variety of financial support options. The most common sources of support are Teaching Assistantships and Research Assistantships.

Research Assistantship. Many students work with faculty on research projects funded by external grants or university monies. As with Teaching Assistants, RAs generally work for up to 20 hours per week and are involved in a wide variety of research activities (e.g., data collection and analysis, article preparation, etc.). Compensation for RAs is roughly equivalent to that for a Teaching Assistant, and covers fees and tuition.

Teaching Assistantship. Ph.D. students in CLS are eligible for 12 quarters of support as a Teaching Assistant (TA), making this the most common means of financial support. TAs work up to 20 hours a week, are responsible for assisting the professor with many common classroom tasks (e.g., creating exams, grading papers, etc.), assist students understand course material and meet course requirements, and experience the opportunity to practice the art of teaching (usually through discussion sections and/or guest lecturing). To maintain their eligibility, students must be in good academic standing and must have a satisfactory record as a Teaching Assistant . Some students may even receive a TAship after this 12-quarter period (subject to CLS and Graduate Divivsion approval). A Teaching Assistantship is not only an important means of financial support (a monthly salary plus fees and tuition coverage), but the work also serves a vital role in training Ph.D. candidates, particularly those who intend to pursue academic careers.

Additional funding is available through student loans, departmental and university fellowships, and outside funding sources. In addition to support during the academic year, students are often able to secure research grants from the Department for the summer. These grants are allotted on the basis of academic standing and financial need.

Award Opportunities

Listed below are the CLS Department awards current students have the opportunitiy to be nominated or apply for.

Arnold Binder Award
Dickman Award
Gil Geis Award
Kitty Calavita Award
Michelle Smith-Pontell Award
Peer Mentoring Award

Graduate Student Housing

A number of housing alternatives are available for graduate students at UCI. Two apartment complexes and a residence hall are available exclusively for graduate students and those with families who wish to live on campus. In addition, there are many off-campus options, including apartments/houses at the beach or apartment complexes just across the street from the university. Due to their affordability and convenience, more than half of our graduate students choose to live on campus.

Among the on-campus options are Verano Place Apartments, Palo Verde Apartments, and Vista del Campo/VdC Norte. Verano Place includes 862 units which are one-, two-, or three-bedroom unfurnished apartments. Palo Verde is designed solely for graduate students and post-doctoral students, and consists of 204 apartments that range from studio to three-bedroom apartments. Vista del Campo is a privately owned and managed apartment community located on the UCI campus, offering furnished apartments to single students who are sophomores, juniors, seniors, or graduate students. For information on all of these housing options, please visit the UCI Housing website .

For more information, please contact:

Irice Castro Assistant Director of Graduate Student Services [email protected] 949-824-1874

Follow us on social media

School of Law

Ph.D. in Law

The Ph.D. in Law prepares graduates for global leadership in the judiciary, academia, business and government. Since 1966, the program has offered a select number of diverse students the opportunity to attain their highest professional aspirations and career goals. A preeminent center for interdisciplinary legal studies, UW Law offers a global focus and innovative approach to integrating legal scholarship within the humanities and social sciences, medicine and global health, business and technology, and environmental and public policy.

The Ph.D. program is designed to provide a rich and thorough foundation in research methodologies, jurisprudence, legal theory, policy, dissertation preparation and ready access to specialized elective coursework from within the law school and university-wide research centers, institutes and schools. Throughout the program, our graduate students receive individualized attention from exceptional faculty and staff.

With its long and respected history, the Ph.D. program provides students with a global alumni network. Alumni are committed supporters and mentors and lead in many sectors around the world.

The Ph.D. program requires a minimum of three years’ study, at least two years of which are comprised of coursework taken while in residence at the UW. Ph.D. candidates must complete 90 credits. A minimum of 60 credits must be taken at the UW including a minimum of 27 dissertation credits. Some of the credits earned in an LL.M. program may be counted among the 60 credits.

Doctoral dissertation committees are led by faculty experts from UW Law and include members with deep knowledge and expertise from across the university. Students can customize their studies with interdisciplinary coursework, independent study, field research, global internships and externships.

See full curriculum

Current Ph.D.s in Law
PhD Admissions

The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) Program

Bios of Current S.J.D. Candidates

The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) is a research doctorate in law and is the highest degree conferred by the University of Virginia School of Law. It is designed for highly qualified, independent students who wish to pursue an extended program of research under the supervision of a faculty member, leading to the submission of a dissertation that makes an original and substantial contribution to legal scholarship.

The School of Law’s S.J.D. program is intended primarily for aspiring legal academics. Graduates have joined the faculty of law schools and universities in many countries, including Canada, China, Egypt, Ghana, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, Mexico, New Zealand, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Taiwan, the United Kingdom and the United States. Others have pursued careers in international organizations, governments and private practice worldwide.

Current students and graduates of the School of Law’s LL.M. program may apply for admission to the S.J.D. program. The Graduate Committee also considers applications from students who have received, or will receive at the end of the academic year during which they apply, the LL.M. degree with high academic standing from another leading U.S. law school. The admission standards are described on the Application Instructions page.

All students enrolled in the S.J.D. program are required to design and complete an individualized first year study plan approved by their faculty supervisor and the Chair of the Graduate Studies Committee, consisting of a combination of reading lists, course audits, independent research and/or other training designed to prepare the candidate to write his or her dissertation. Students are expected to remain in residence in Charlottesville for at least one additional academic year after completing their first year program.

S.J.D. candidates pay tuition at a substantially reduced research rate . The Law School does not provide financial aid to S.J.D. candidates.

For further information on the requirements to obtain the S.J.D., see Degree Requirements .

For information on applying to the S.J.D. program, see S.J.D. Application Instructions .

Academic Calendar
J.D. Curriculum
Current Courses
Concentrations
Academic Policies
Study Abroad
Graduate Studies (LL.M. and S.J.D.)
Dual-Degree Programs
Programs and Centers
Experiential Learning
Educating Legal Scholars
Faculty Scholarship
The Free Exchange of Ideas at UVA Law
Admissions Process
J.D. Application Information
Virginia Residency
Online Status Checker
Make Online Seat Deposit
Transfer Students
Brochures and Key Websites
ABA Required Disclosures
Diversity, Equity and Belonging
Admitted Students
Graduate Studies
Financial Aid
Karsh-Dillard Scholarships
Student Organizations
Academic Journals
Student Government
The Honor System
Living in Charlottesville
Awards, Fellowships and Honors
Moot Court and Trial Advocacy
Legal Writing Fellows
Student Affairs
Student Records
Career Development
Law IT/Computing
Courts & Commerce Bookstore
Employment Resources for Students
Office of Private Practice Staff
Resources for Private Practice Employers
Public Service Center Staff
Funding for Public Service
Program in Law and Public Service
Resources for Public Service Employers
Office of Judicial Clerkships Staff
The Pro Bono Program
About the School
Facts & Statistics
Consumer Information (ABA Required Disclosures)
Event Calendar
Video & Audio
Subscribe and Connect
University of Virginia

Ph.D. Program

The ph.d. in law degree.

The Ph.D. in Law degree program is designed to prepare J.D. graduates for careers as legal scholars and teachers through a doctoral program aimed at the production of a substantial body of academic research and writing under the close supervision of a three-member faculty dissertation committee. Unlike programs designed for students who wish to learn about law from the disciplinary perspectives of the social sciences or the humanities, the Ph.D. in Law is directed at students who wish to pursue advanced studies in law from the perspective of the law. This program offers emerging scholars an opportunity to contribute to the development of law as an academic field, and it provides an alternate pathway into law teaching alongside existing routes such as fellowships, advanced degrees in cognate fields, legal practice, and clerkships.

Because our entering Ph.D. students will have already completed their J.D. degrees, the anticipated course of study toward the Ph.D. in Law degree is three academic years and two summers in residence. In their first two semesters, Ph.D. students will enroll in courses designed to help them acquire the background and research skills needed to complete a dissertation in their field of interest and to prepare them for qualifying examinations that test the depth and breadth of the literacies and skills they have acquired. During their second year, students will prepare a dissertation prospectus and begin work on a dissertation. The dissertation may take the form of either three law review articles or a book-length manuscript and will make up a portfolio of writing that will be essential for success in the job market. Ph.D. students will also gain experience in the classroom, and receive the full support of Yale Law School’s Law Teaching Program , which has had remarkable success in placing graduates in tenure-track positions at leading law schools.

Ph.D. students receive a full-tuition waiver, a health award for health insurance coverage, and a stipend to cover their year-round living expenses, as well as support for participation in national and international conferences.

Applications for admission to the Ph.D. in Law program are available starting on August 15. The deadline for submission of all materials is December 15. Applicants to the Ph.D. in Law program must complete a J.D. degree at a U.S. law school before they matriculate and begin the Ph.D. program. Any questions about the program may be directed to Gordon Silverstein, Assistant Dean for Graduate Programs, at [email protected] .

Watch Gordon Silverstein, Assistant Dean for Graduate Programs, describe the Ph.D. program at Yale Law School.

Section Menu

Student Profile Videos

Rafael Bezerra Nunes LLM

A student perspective on getting an LLM at Yale Law School, constitutional law, and the graduate programs community.

Maria Gracia Naranjo Ponce ’22 LLM

A perspective on the intellectual international community of the LL.M. program, and how she developed her research ideas on tax law.

Fernando Loayza Jordán LLM

A student perspective on the LLM program and studying tax law at Yale Law School.

Graduate Student Life

2020 and 2021 Graduate Programs alumni before their in-person ceremony in May 2022

2020 and 2021 Graduate Programs alumni celebrate in the YLS Courtyard with Assistant Dean Gordon Silverstein before their in-person ceremony in May 2022

2022 Graduate Program degree candidates with Dean Heather K. Gerken in April 2022

At Yale, I treasured being part of a close community of students, faculty, alumni, practitioners, and staff committed to understanding and critiquing the law. I draw on lessons I learned from that community every day in my career as an economic justice lawyer.

PhD Justice, Law & Criminology

You are here: american university school of public affairs phd programs phd justice, law & criminology.

PhD Justice, Law & Criminology (On-Campus)

Prepare for university teaching and research, and a career as an authority and leader in fields related to justice, law, criminology, and homeland security.

(202) 885-6230

[email protected]

Kerwin Hall, Room 306 on a map

At the Epicenter of Effectiveness

The PhD in Justice, Law & Criminology in the School of Public Affairs draws from the breadth and depth of resources across American University. Our program is rooted in contemporary theory, principles, practices, and research methods in criminology, criminal justice, terrorism and homeland security studies, and legal studies. Students come here not only for the academics, but for the chance to work firsthand with experts in our nation's capital.

Our students organize their programs around two fields of study. Our department offers options in three fields: Justice, Law & Society, and Terrorism & Political Violence. PhD students select one of these as their primary field. Their secondary field may be one of the other two, or they can take courses in Political Methodology or Public Policy from other departments in the School of Public Affairs. Students also have the flexibility to select relevant coursework from other schools at AU, or to take courses in another PhD-granting department at AU or through the Consortium of Universities of the Washington Metropolitan Area, which includes George Washington University, Georgetown University, George Mason University, University of Maryland, and others.

Connection & Impact

SPA's PhD in Justice, Law & Criminology puts our students in the middle of one the best places to influence change in crime and policing, terrorism and homeland security, and the criminal justice system. They dive into research that addresses today's most pressing challenges and produce scholarship with real-world connection and immediate impact.

Each of our doctoral programs reflects values that guide the School of Public Affairs. We encourage engagement and discourse to influence policy makers; formulate critical thinking skills that are crucial to advancing lines of inquiry; cultivate strong leadership skills; prioritize evidence-based reasoning and analytics when addressing societal issues; and challenge the guideposts on equity, fairness, and inclusion to ground students in the institutions of justice and the rule of law. Along the way, we champion truth and self-awareness, as students undertake personal and professional journeys.

The PhD degree in Justice, Law & Criminology requires 36 credit hours of coursework.

All students must complete 12 credits of research design and methodology courses, 12 credits in their primary field of study, and 12 credits in their secondary field of study.

As work on the dissertation project progresses, students register for dissertation credit in order to maintain enrollment. They take Doctoral Continuing Enrollment (JLC-898) and Doctoral Dissertation (JLC-899) after their dissertation proposals are approved.

A minimum grade point average of 3.20 in all coursework is required to remain in good standing and to earn the degree. Full-time status is considered to be nine credit hours per semester.

Students advance to PhD candidacy by successfully completing all required courses, passing the oral qualifier and two written comprehensive exams (one in each of their fields of study), and defending their dissertation proposals. To earn the degree, students must pass a final oral defense of the dissertation.

More information about course requirements can be found here .

For more information, please contact the SPA Graduate Admissions Office at 202-885-6230 or [email protected] .

Applicants are considered and students admitted for the fall semester only. Please refer to the application deadlines page for the deadline to apply.

While previous academic or professional work in justice, law, or criminology is not required, applicants need to demonstrate a serious commitment to a career in this field. The personal statement on reasons for pursuing graduate study in the program is essential, along with the other required application materials .

We accept PhD applicants for full-time study only. Students must be funded either by the School of Public Affairs or by an external sponsoring organization (self-funding is not permitted for newly-admitted doctoral students).

The PhD in Justice, Law & Criminology is a 36-credit-hour program for students who already have a related master’s degree. To estimate the cost of tuition, please see the current cost per credit hour for graduate students.

Unless applicants expect to be funded through a reliable external source, they must request consideration for funding on their application. Upon acceptance into the program, students selected for AU funding are granted a fellowship with full funding for four years of study, contingent on maintaining satisfactory progress each year, with opportunities for further funding available.

As a requirement for the fellowship, students work 20 hours a week with a faculty member. If at all possible, our graduate office will assign students to faculty members with expertise in their areas of research interest.

Students must advance to candidacy by the end of their third year of study to continue receiving funding and to maintain their enrollment.

Justice, Law, & Criminology Department
Curriculum & Requirements
Program Handbook

90 percent of SPA graduates are employed or in graduate school, or both within six months of graduation

Law and Political Science

Whether one examines a president’s power over government agencies, legislative responses to judicial decisions, or the impact of international agreements, law and politics are often so interdependent that it is difficult to define one without reference to the other. Lawyers work within institutions that are shaped by the politics of agencies, courts, legislatures, the electorate, and the international system. Legal institutions, in turn, have reciprocal effects on the distribution, use, and limits of political power.

Accordingly, research at the intersection of law and political science investigates some of the most interesting and fundamental questions in both fields. These include (among others): How do law enforcement agencies police themselves to avoid corruption, when their own personnel often have such strong incentives to resist oversight? Why and when do federal agencies or international organizations sometimes issue regulations contrary to the interests of those who created them? Who has power within legislative assemblies, and how is that power shaped by developments outside the legislature? What explains differences in the institutions of representative government across jurisdictions? How (much) does money influence politics under different systems of campaign finance regulation? What explains the votes of regulatory commissioners on telecommunications policy? What forces make it easier (or harder) for a country to comply with international law? How should legal responsibilities be allocated across organizations? How do laws and law-like systems of social norms affect public attitudes or corporate behavior? And how do independent regulatory institutions emerge in developing countries?

In preparing students to tackle such questions, Stanford’s JD/PhD program in political science combines a first-rate legal education with training from one of the strongest political science departments in the world. Stanford’s rich heritage in areas pertaining to law, politics, and policy is also reflected in institutions bridging disciplines within Stanford and connecting the university to the policy world.

These resources help Stanford provide an unparalleled experience for the next generation of cutting-edge scholars in law and political science. The program also prepares graduates to become leaders in other settings where it is valuable to understand the political context, consequences, and origins of laws and legal institutions. In recent years, students from Stanford’s JD/PhD program in political science have joined the faculties at Columbia, MIT, Cornell, Northwestern, the University of Southern California, the University of San Diego, and elsewhere. Others have pursued careers in government, research institutes, or private law practice.

Course Requirements

As many as 54 quarter units of approved courses may be counted toward both degrees. No more than 31 quarter units of courses that originate outside the law school may count toward the law degree.

A partial list of regular workshop series (at which students are welcome) includes:

Legal Studies Workshop (Law School)
American Politics Workshop (Political Science)
International Relations Workshop (Political Science)
Comparative Politics Workshop (Political Science)
Social Science and International Security Workshop (Freeman Spogli Institute)
Organizational Behavior and Social Psychology Workshop (Graduate School of Business)
Political Economics Workshop (Graduate School of Business)
Political Theory Workshop (Freeman Spogli Institute and Political Science)
Law and Economics Workshop (Law School)
Seminar on Collective Choice (Hoover Institution)

Note to applicants: The Knight-Hennessy Scholars program awards full funding to Stanford graduate students from all disciplines, with additional opportunities for leadership training and collaboration across fields. Joint Degree applicants are encouraged to apply to the Knight – Hennessy Scholars Program. Please be aware that the Knight-Hennessy Scholars applications are due in early Autumn one year prior to enrollment. View dates and deadlines: knight-hennessy.stanford.edu/dates-and-deadlines .

Gerhard Casper

Professor of Law, Emeritus
President Emeritus of Stanford University
Peter and Helen Bing Professor in Undergraduate Education, Emeritus
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI Stanford)
Senior Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR)

Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar

Visiting Scholar

Nora Freeman Engstrom

Ernest W. McFarland Professor of Law
Co-Director, Deborah L. Rhode Center on the Legal Profession

Thomas C. Heller

Lewis Talbot and Nadine Hearn Shelton Professor of International Legal Studies, Emeritus
Faculty Director, Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance

Deborah Hensler

Judge John W. Ford Professor of Dispute Resolution

Daniel E. Ho

William Benjamin Scott and Luna M. Scott Professor of Law
Professor of Political Science
Professor of Computer Science (by courtesy)
Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI)
Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for Economic and Policy Research
Director of the Regulation, Evaluation, and Governance Lab (RegLab)

Erik G. Jensen

Director of the Rule of Law Program
Lecturer in Law

Pamela S. Karlan

Kenneth and Harle Montgomery Professor of Public Interest Law
Co-Director, Supreme Court Litigation Clinic

Nathaniel Persily

James B. McClatchy Professor of Law
Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Co-Director, Cyber Policy Center
Professor, by courtesy, Political Science
Professor, by courtesy, Communications

Robert L. Rabin

A. Calder Mackay Professor of Law

Jane S. Schacter

William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law

University of Rochester

Search Rochester.edu

Graduate Education and Postdoctoral Affairs

PhD Defense

Preparing for a PhD Defense

Table of contents, preparing to start, nominate a faculty member to serve as chair for your defense, selecting a defense date, international students and work visas, registration categories for defense, dissertation writing and guidelines, preparing your dissertation for defense, registering your dissertation for the final oral exam, know the rituals.

Use PowerPoint

Public Lecture

Dress Professionally

Items to Bring to the Defense

The Closed Examination

Address Questions with Confidence

Student Status

Final corrected copies of the dissertation, publishing your final dissertation, binding your final dissertation, before defense.

Before you can start your thesis you must:

Complete all courses, exams, and research requirements
Meet with your advisory committee to ensure that everyone agrees that the work is ready to defend
Decide on a date for the defense
Inform your graduate administrator that you have started the process to prepare for your defense

A chair is appointed for each PhD oral defense to monitor and promote fairness and rigor in the conduct of the defense. To help eliminate pre-established judgments on the candidate’s work, the chair should be from a different program/department than the student. For more information about chair responsibilities, read the instructions for the chair .

You must identify a faculty member to serve as chair for your defense. The chair must be:

A current full-time faculty member at assistant professor rank or higher
Outside the department offering the degree program, or outside your advisor's department (interdisciplinary degree programs only)
Someone who has not had prior involvement in your research

The selection of the chair is subject to the approval of the department/program, th Arts, Sciences and Engineering dean of graduate education and postdoctoral affairs, and the University dean of graduate studies.

The chair must be physically present during the entire defense, including the public oral presentation (if applicable) and the questioning session. The chair is welcome to read and comment on the dissertation and/or the defense presentation, but this is not required. The chair does not need to be an expert in your research area.

It is your responsibility to get a copy of the final dissertation to the chair at least one week prior to the defense.

You should begin scheduling the actual defense date three months in advance to ensure that your advisor, committee members, and chair are able to be present and that rooms are available on the date and time selected.

Defenses can be held on any day the University’s Graduate Studies Office is open (not weekends, evenings, holidays, or the days between Christmas and New Year’s). Check the academic calendar for important dates and deadlines.

Use the PhD calendar to determine the deadline dates for getting your paperwork to the Office of Graduate Education and Postdoctoral Affairs and department committee.

When all committee members and your chair agree to a specific date and time for the defense, inform your graduate administrator as soon as you possibly can, but no later than six weeks prior to your defense date . Your graduate administrator will advise you of any program-specific requirements for the defense as well as work with you to prepare for your thesis defense. They will also help you determine who will schedule the room for your thesis defense.

You should provide your committee members at least two weeks to read and comment on your dissertation before the date you need to register your dissertation.

Participating Via Video Conferencing

While you, your advisor, and the chair must all be physically present in the room for the defense, other committee members are allowed to participate in the defense remotely via Skype or other video conferencing technology so long as all committee members agree to the arrangement. This must also be approved by the AS&E dean of graduate education and postdoctoral affairs and the University dean of graduate studies before the dissertation is registered for defense.

Someone other than you and your committee must handle the IT setup and be on standby for any problems. If anyone involved finds that remote participation is interfering with the defense, he or she can request that the defense be rescheduled.

We strongly recommend that international students meet with an International Services Office (ISO) representative as soon as permission to start writing is granted. The ISO will provide information on visa options, documentation, and timelines for applying for a visa for employment in the United States.

You will register for one of the following categories while preparing your defense:

999: Dissertation —Indicates the PhD student has completed all of the requirements for the degree except the dissertation and is in residence as a full-time student
995 : Continuation of Enrollment —Indicates the PhD student has completed all of the requirements for the degree except the dissertation and is not in residence as a full-time student

See the registration page for more information about these categories.

The Preparing Your Doctoral Dissertation manual is a great resource to help you bring your dissertation up to the required standard of organization, appearance, and format for the University of Rochester. Before preparing the defense copy of your dissertation, check the contents of the manual carefully to help avoid mistakes that can be time-consuming and costly to correct.

Before beginning your dissertation, you should consult with your advisor for your department or program’s preferred style guide (APA, MLA, Chicago).

Including material produced by other authors in your dissertation can serve a legitimate research purpose, but you want to avoid copyright infringement in the process. For detailed instructions on avoiding copyright infringement, please see ProQuest’s Copyright Guide .

The University requires that you provide copies of the dissertation to your committee members and exam chair. You should check with your committee members to see if they prefer printed or electronic copies (or both). Printed copies do not need to be printed on heavyweight, expensive paper unless there is the need to do so for figures and images.

Printing and binding a dissertation can be expensive. You can use the Copy Center or FedEx Office to print and bind your dissertation.

In order to register your dissertation, you or your graduate administrator will need to create a record on the Graduate Studies PhD Completion website . This record will include:

Degree information
Past degrees
Contact information
The defense version of your dissertation as a PDF
Other relevant documents

The version of your dissertation attached to your online record is considered the registration copy.

When your PhD completion record is finalized, committee members will receive emails with links to access your record and approve your dissertation to progress to defense. You’ll need to provide copies of the dissertation identical to the registration copy to all members of your committee, including the chair, at least two weeks before the record is finalized. Everyone but the chair is required to comment or sign off on the dissertation before it is submitted.

There may be deadlines for registering your dissertation specific to your program. Consult with your graduate administrator to ascertain those deadlines and follow them carefully.

After all committee members have provided their approval, your thesis will be reviewed by your faculty director/department chair, the AS&E dean of graduate education and postdoctoral affairs, and the office of the University dean of graduate studies. When all of these officials have approved your committee and dissertation for defense, your dissertation is considered registered. You will be able to track these approvals in your online record and will receive a confirmation email when approvals are complete.

The GEPA Office and the AS&E dean of graduate education and postdoctoral affairs, as well as the University Graduate Studies Office, may make corrections to the PDF of your dissertation. This annotated copy of your dissertation, along with the original version, will be stored in the PhD completion website. You are not allow to distribute updated versions of your dissertation prior to the defense, but be sure to incorporate any corrections before uploading your final dissertation to ProQuest®.

After the defense, if the committee has required major revisions to be approved by one or more of its members, it is your responsibility to provide them with the corrected final version for their approval. They will be asked to submit written confirmation of that approval to the University Graduate Studies Office. Failure to do so could delay conferral of your degree.

After the defense, you will receive additional instructions by email for completion of all PhD degree requirements.

It is important to walk into the defense knowing that your committee wants you to pass. Even if criticism is harsh, it is meant to be constructive. The defense is not solely an opportunity for the committee to compliment and congratulate you for the work you have done. It is also meant to challenge you and force you to consider tough questions.

The Defense

The best way to prepare for your defense is to regularly attend the defenses of your colleagues throughout your graduate program, not just several weeks prior to your own defense.

You can also talk to people in your department who already defended to find out what their defenses were like. You should also speak with your advisor to get a sense of his/her specific expectations of a defense.

Guidelines for Presentations

Use PowerPoint or Other Software to Create Slides

You should prepare a presentation of the research that comprises the thesis. Your slides should encapsulate the work and focus on its most salient contributions. In preparing, ask yourself these questions: “What do I want people to know about my thesis? What is the most important information that I can present and talk about?”

Here are some basic tips:

Use text large enough to be read by the audience (especially text from figures)
Ensure graphics and tables are clear
Don’t clutter your slides—if necessary, have things come up on mouse clicks
Use spell check and proofread your slides
Practice your presentation with your peers
Work on pronunciation, if required
Time your presentation to ensure it will fit the allotted time while allowing time for questions

If your defense includes a public lecture, we recommended that you do a trial run a day or two before in the room that has been booked for your lecture. This will allow you to familiarize yourself with the space and the equipment and to address any problems that arise during the trial run.

Plan your public lecture to allow enough time for questions. Present enough information so that the audience understands what you did, why you did it, what the implications are, and what your suggestions are for future research.

Friends and family are welcome to attend your public lecture. Faculty and students in the audience are given the opportunity to ask questions.

Plan to dress professionally for the defense in the same way you would if presenting a paper at a conference or for a job interview. You will be standing for a long time on the day of your defense. You might want to keep this in mind when selecting the shoes you will wear for your defense.

Essentials for your public lecture include:

Your presentation
A laser pointer
A copy of your dissertation
A pen or pencil
A bottle of water

You will be asked to leave the room while your committee reviews your program of study, and decides whether:

The thesis is acceptable/not acceptable
Whether members will ask sequential questions or whether each member will be allotted a specific time period for questioning

The person to start the questioning is designated. You will be called back into the examining room and questioning will begin. After all questions have been addressed, you will be asked to leave the room while your committee decides the outcome of the exam. You will be asked to return to the room to be informed of the outcome by the chair of your exam committee.

Listen to the entire question no matter how long it takes the faculty member or student to ask it (take notes if necessary).
Pause and think about the question before answering.
Rephrase the question.
Answer the question to the best of your ability; if you do not know the answer, remain calm and say so in a professional way.
Remember that no one will know the ins and outs of the thesis and your research materials as well as you. You are the foremost expert in the thesis topic and YOU know the research involved. Be positive!

Possible outcomes include:

Acceptable with minor or no revisions (no further approval required)
Acceptable with major revisions in content or format (in this case, one or more committee members must be responsible for overseeing and approving the major revisions before the final copies are submitted)
Not acceptable

After the Defense

You can submit the final corrected copies of your dissertation as soon as you address any remaining comments that were brought up during the defense or noted in the registration copy of your dissertation, which will be returned to you usually within a few days before or after the defense. You can take up to one semester following the defense to address any comments, during which you can remain a full-time student. Your degree conferral date will depend on when you submit the final corrected copies of your dissertation.

The day after your defense, you will receive an email from the University dean of graduate studies that provides instructions on how to:

Submit the final corrected copies of your dissertation through ProQuest
Provide authorization for the release of your dissertation through UR Research
Complete a mandatory online exit survey
Verify to the University dean of graduate studies’ office that the dissertation has been submitted

The University of Rochester requires all doctoral candidates to deposit their dissertations for publication with ProQuest Dissertation Publishing and with the University libraries. Hard copies are not required. The library receives an electronic copy of the dissertation from ProQuest, but students must give the University permission to obtain it.

For questions regarding publishing through ProQuest, contact Author Relations at [email protected] or (800) 521-0600 ext. 77020.

Check with your graduate administrator to see if your department wants a bound copy of your dissertation, and, if so, how the cost of binding is covered.

If you want a bound copy for yourself or your family, you can purchase one through ProQuest .

Everything You Need To Know Before Doing A PhD In Law

So, you’ve mastered the art of legalese, conquered the casebooks, and now the allure of a PhD in Law beckons.

Moreover, Before you dive headfirst into the world of legal academia, let’s unravel the mysteries and demystify the process of pursuing a Doctor of Philosophy in Law. Buckle up, future legal scholars – here’s the lowdown.

What Is A PhD In Law?

Here we go, inquisitive ones, be ready to fasten your belts as we unravel a PhD in the law. Not just a degree, it becomes a journey into the unfamiliar landscape of the legal system, which I don’t find in the legal dramas on TV.

Let’s go back to the beginning. A Ph.D. in Law is not just that common type of degree with which you merely learn statutes and it is over.

It is the peak of the academic legal world, the Jedi Master level of legal education . Paint it as your golden opportunity to truly explore the intrigues of legal waters no man has gone before and come out the expert on it.

The Commitment Factor

You want to be a law scholar? Be ready for the most serious and everlasting promise you ever made. This is not a sprint but a marathon. Consider the time span of three to five years in the intellectual field.

You and your research are about to embark on a very long journey – one which lasts for a lifetime – like a sophisticated legal romance novel without the clichéd dialogue.

What’s Your Legal Niche?

As a first step, determine what legal arena interests you most before embarking upon this stupendous travel. Humanize: Be it environmental law, human rights, or any secretive realm like space law – name your legal match. Your PhD is your spending your love for that particular area of law.

Supervisors

Alright, so in your head, be the superhero (since in actual fact, you kinda are). There is no superhero who doesn’t need a devoted and brave sidekick, isn’t it? Congratulations! It’s time to meet your boss; your Gandalf and your Batman, your Robin and your Spiderman.

They guide, mentor, and rarely even offer to make the mother of all bombs that will change your entire worldview as a student.

The Research Proposal

Each masterpiece is made of ideas, and a plan, and your PhD is not an exception. Off you go – the proposal of research – your route to academic triumph. With a successful occurrence of this, you are sure to be on the way to deciphering the riddles of legal academia.

Funding Your Legal Education

Let’s address the elephant in the room: funding. However, if a PhD degree is your intellectual calling, your landlord will still demand that you pay the rent. Study the scholarships, grants , and funding programs. Your money machine has to have some brain muscle.

Life Beyond the Law Library

Contrary to the common belief, the PhD is not only about joining a sleepy library. Join legal conferences, socialize with fellow legal brains, as well as, take a moment to watch your favorite TV series on Netflix. It’s a matter of sanity in the middle of the legal ruin.

And here comes the climax – your D-Day – the defense of the thesis. Conceive it as the legal Olympics; there you defend your intellectual property. Sail through that and you’ll be a litigious Doctor of Philosophy.

How To Get A Ph.D. In Law?

So, you’ve got the legal bug, the burning desire to delve into the intricacies of the law beyond what your LLB or JD provided . A Ph.D. in Law is calling your name, and you’re ready for the challenge. Let’s break down the roadmap to turning those legal dreams into reality.

Finding Your Passion

Before you plunge into the Ph.D. abyss, ask yourself, “What legal puzzle keeps me up at night?” Identify your legal passion; it’s the compass that’ll guide you through the academic labyrinth. Whether it’s environmental law, criminal justice, or the wild world of international law, find your legal muse.

Crafting Your Research Proposal

Picture your Ph.D. journey as a grand adventure, and the research proposal is your treasure map. It’s not just a formality; it’s your chance to articulate your research vision. Be clear, concise, and convincing – your academic destiny hangs in the balance.

Choosing Your Supervisor Wisely

Meet your academic Yoda – your supervisor. This isn’t just a partnership; it’s a mentorship. Choose someone who not only knows the legal ropes but also aligns with your research interests. They’ll be your guiding star through the academic galaxy.

Funding Your Legal Crusade

Let’s be real; pursuing a Ph.D. isn’t a cheap date. Explore scholarship options, grants, and funding opportunities.

Moreover, your brilliance deserves financial backing, so don’t shy away from funding Fandango.

Crafting Your Magnum Opus

Your thesis is the pièce de résistance of your Ph.D. Think of it as a legal manuscript that’ll make waves in academia. Dive deep, conduct rigorous research.

Moreover, present your findings with flair. It’s your chance to contribute something significant to the legal conversation.

Balancing Act of PhD in law

As you immerse yourself in the legal wilderness of writing, remember to balance work and life. Yes, the library is your second home, but don’t forget to attend conferences, network, and occasionally indulge in some self-care.

Moreover, A burnt-out Ph.D. candidate is nobody’s idea of success.

Defending Your Intellectual Fortitude

The day has arrived – your thesis defense. It’s your chance to showcase the intellectual muscle you’ve been flexing for years. Be confident, articulate, and ready to tackle questions.

Moreover, This is the final showdown before you emerge as a legal Jedi.

How Long Does It Take To Get A PhD In Law?

Alright, future legal scholars, you’ve decided to take the plunge into the world of a Ph.D. in Law. But let’s address the elephant in the courtroom – just how long is this academic escapade going to take?

Buckle up; we’re about to navigate the twists and turns of the Ph.D. timeline .

The Legal Marathon: Setting Realistic Expectations

First things first – a Ph.D. in Law is no sprint. It’s a marathon, a scholarly expedition into the depths of legal academia.

While the specific timeline can vary, the average duration is typically three to five years.

Moreover, It’s not just a degree ; it’s a commitment to becoming the Jedi Master of your legal niche.

The Proposal Prelude: Year One

Year one kicks off with the grand proposal dance. This is where you pitch your tent in the academic campground. You’ll be refining your research question, crafting that all-important proposal, and finding your academic bearings.

Moreover, It’s the year of laying the groundwork for the epic journey ahead.

Supervisory Bonding: Years One and Two

Enter the academic Yoda – your supervisor. The early years are all about forging that mentorship, refining your research design, and diving into the sea of legal literature.

Moreover, This phase is where you build the foundation for your thesis and develop the crucial academic muscle required for the journey.

Funding Fandango: Concurrent with Years One and Two

Ah, the funding quest – it’s like searching for the golden key to the academic kingdom. While not everyone embarks on this quest simultaneously, securing funding often happens alongside the initial years of research.

Moreover, Scholarships, grants, and financial backing become your academic sidekicks.

The Write-Up Wilderness: Years Two to Four of PhD in law

Welcome to the write-up wilderness, where the real magic (and sometimes madness) happens. Years two to four are all about immersing yourself in the legal labyrinth, conducting research, and crafting that magnum opus of a thesis.

Moreover, It’s where you refine your legal arguments and contribute your unique perspective to the academic conversation.

Thesis Tango: Years Four and Five of PhD in law

As you waltz into years four and five, it’s showtime – the thesis defense is looming on the horizon. This is the crescendo of your academic symphony.

Moreover, Nail the defense, and you emerge as a Doctor of Philosophy in Law, ready to wield your legal prowess in the wider world.

Life Beyond Law School: The Aftermath of PhD in law

Congratulations, Doctor! The journey might be over, but the adventure is just beginning. Whether you choose academia, policymaking, or even intergalactic legal consultancy (who knows?).

Moreover, the world of law is now your oyster.

What Can You Do With A PhD In Law?

So, you’ve conquered the academic summit, and now you’re armed with a shiny new PhD in Law. But wait, what’s next? Fear not, intrepid legal scholar, because the world is your jurisdiction.

Let’s explore the myriad paths that open up when you wield the mighty title of Doctor of Philosophy in Law.

Academic Odyssey: Shaping the Legal Minds of Tomorrow

One of the classic moves post-PhD is diving into academia. Picture yourself as the wise sage of the law school , molding eager minds and imparting your wisdom.

Moreover, You become the beacon of legal enlightenment, guiding the next generation of lawyers and thinkers.

Policy Architect: Building Legal Bridges Beyond Academia

Ever dreamed of influencing policy and shaping the legal landscape beyond the ivory tower? With a PhD in Law, you’re equipped to dive into the world of policy-making.

Moreover, Become the architect of legal frameworks, advising governments and organizations on navigating the complex waters of law and justice.

Legal Luminary in Practice: Consulting and Expert Testimony

Step into the limelight as a legal expert sought after by law firms , corporations, or even governments. Your expertise becomes a valuable commodity.

Moreover, From consulting on intricate legal matters to providing expert testimony in courtrooms.

Moreover, your PhD is your ticket to becoming a legal luminary in the practical realm.

International Law Trailblazer: Navigating Global Legal Waters From Your PhD in law

With a PhD in Law, you’re not confined by borders. Dive into the dynamic world of international law. Whether it’s shaping global policies, working with international organizations, or advocating for human rights on a global scale.

Moreover, your expertise can have a far-reaching impact.

Research Maestro: Contributing to Legal Scholarship

Fuel your passion for research by continuing to make waves in legal scholarship. Your PhD isn’t just a culmination; it’s a launchpad for further exploration.

Moreover, Contribute articles, publish books, and be the driving force behind advancements in legal knowledge.

Corporate Counsel with a Twist: Navigating Legal Complexities From Your PhD in law

Corporations are always in need of legal wizards to navigate the ever-evolving legal landscape. Your PhD sets you apart.

Moreover, bringing a depth of understanding and critical thinking that can be invaluable in corporate legal departments.

Legal Entrepreneur: Carving Your Own Niche From Your PhD in law

Feel the entrepreneurial spirit bubbling within? Your PhD can be the foundation for launching your own legal consultancy or business.

Whether it’s providing specialized legal services or developing innovative legal solutions, the entrepreneurial path is yours to carve.

Interdisciplinary Explorer: Bridging Law with Other Fields From Your PhD in law

The beauty of a PhD is its interdisciplinary potential. Blend law with other fields like technology, business, or even environmental science.

Moreover, Become a trailblazer at the intersection of law and diverse domains, solving complex problems that span multiple disciplines.

Beyond Earth: Legal Consultancy for Space Ventures

Okay, this one might be a bit out there, but in the era of space exploration, who’s to say your legal expertise can’t extend beyond Earth?

Moreover, Imagine being the go-to legal consultant for interstellar ventures – because why not dream big?

Final Thoughts

Congratulations, Doctor of Philosophy in Law !

Moreover, wait, is it the end or merely the prologue? The legal world is your oyster now. Whether you choose academia, policymaking, or intergalactic diplomacy – the journey has molded you into a legal maestro.

So, future legal scholars, armed with this roadmap, venture forth into the world of legal academia. Your PhD adventure awaits, filled with twists, turns, and the occasional ‘Eureka!’ moment. May your legal curiosity know no bounds!

A Comprehensive Guide To Legal Billing
A Guide To Understand The Job Role Of A Legal Recruiter
A Guide To Understanding What To Gift For Law Students

Nilanjana is a lawyer with a flair for writing. She has a certification in American Laws from Penn Law (Pennsylvania University). Along with this, she has been known to write legal articles that allow the audience to know about American laws and regulations at ease.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Connect Us on Social Media

Admission to the defense - PhD in Law

Applications of PhD candidates for the admission to the defense of their thesis are managed by Tilburg Graduate Law School.

Procedure and forms

Information on the procedure and forms can be find in the PhD Regulations of Tilburg University .

Date of your defense

To fix a date for your defense, please contact the secretary of the University's Doctorate Board:

Please allow for a period of six months before the estimated date of your defense ceremony to arrange such matters as the application for a date of defense and the appointment of your PhD committee, the approval of your manuscript by the PhD committee, printing your thesis, and submitting 35 copies to the Secretariat of the Doctorate Board (three weeks before the ceremony).

Search our website

Other sources.

Publications
Library collection
Study guide
Univers Online

Find persons

Experts & Expertise
Press officers

Find organizations

Research institutes

Tilburg University Warandelaan 2 5037 AB Tilburg

+31 (0)13 466 9111

Contact TGLS

Contact the Tilburg Graduate Law School (TGLS)

Doctoral Programs

group of students converse outside class

2024 Best Law Schools

Ranked in 2024

A career in law starts with finding the school that fits you best. With the U.S. News

A career in law starts with finding the school that fits you best. With the U.S. News rankings of the top law schools, narrow your search by location, tuition, school size and test scores. Read the methodology »

Here are the 2024 Best Law Schools

Stanford university, yale university, university of chicago, duke university, harvard university, university of pennsylvania (carey), university of virginia, columbia university, new york university.

SEE THE FULL RANKINGS

Try MyLaw Rankings

Create your own custom rankings of the Best Law Schools based on your preferences. Think about your ideal law school experience as you take this five- minute quiz. Don't sweat it — you can continue to customize your list once you receive your school matches.

Clear Filters

Stanford , CA

# 1 in Best Law Schools (tie)

N/A TUITION AND FEES

575 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

173 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the Law School at Stanford University is $85. The student-faculty ratio is... Read More »

TUITION AND FEES

Enrollment (full-time), median lsat (full-time).

New Haven , CT

$73,865 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

633 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

175 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the Law School at Yale University is $85. Its tuition is full-time: $73,865... Read More »

$73,865 (full-time)

Chicago , IL

# 3 in Best Law Schools

$77,952 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

594 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

The Law School at University of Chicago has an application deadline of March 1. The full-time program application fee... Read More »

$77,952 (full-time)

Durham , NC

# 4 in Best Law Schools (tie)

$75,738 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

754 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

170 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the School of Law at Duke University is $80. Its tuition is full-time... Read More »

$75,738 (full-time)

Cambridge , MA

$75,008 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

1,758 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

174 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the law school at Harvard University is $85. Its tuition is full-time... Read More »

$75,008 (full-time)

$76,934 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

808 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

172 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the law school at University of Pennsylvania (Carey) is $80. Its tuition is... Read More »

$76,934 (full-time)

Charlottesville , VA

$71,200 (in-state, full-time) TUITION AND FEES

$74,200 (out-of-state, full-time) TUITION AND FEES

898 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

171 MEDIAN LSAT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the School of Law at University of Virginia is $85. Its tuition is full-time... Read More »

$71,200 (in-state, full-time)

$74,200 (out-of-state, full-time)

New York , NY

# 8 in Best Law Schools

$81,292 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

1,357 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the Law School at Columbia University is $85. Its tuition is full-time... Read More »

$81,292 (full-time)

# 9 in Best Law Schools (tie)

$80,014 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

1,413 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the School of Law at New York University is $85. Its tuition is full-time... Read More »

$80,014 (full-time)

Northwestern University (Pritzker)

$74,552 (full-time) TUITION AND FEES

763 ENROLLMENT (FULL-TIME)

The full-time program application fee at the School of Law at Northwestern University (Pritzker) is $75. Its tuition is... Read More »

$74,552 (full-time)

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE

Dual Degree Programs

iCourts PhD in Law

In 2014 the Department of Political Science and iCourts launched a dual degree program that allows Northwestern doctoral students to qualify for a Doctorate in Law from iCourts at the University of Copenhagen Faculty of law.

Dual degrees require students to have doctoral advisors and to complete the mandated requirements of both institutions. Northwestern students generally apply to the iCourts dual degree program after completing their coursework and qualifying exams, thus in their 3 rd year of doctoral studies. Successful applicants qualify for iCourts doctoral funding that can be used for research and dissertation writing.

Admission to the University of Copenhagen Law Faculty’s PhD program requires a Masters degree (or equivalent) and approval of a doctoral project, which includes an individual plan indicating how the student will meet the requirements for iCourts’ 3-year doctoral program. Northwestern students may apply at any time, but before beginning the dual degree program students must have a Master degree and have completed qualifying exams for the Northwestern PhD. Northwestern-based applicants need a letter of support for their proposal written by a Northwestern-based dissertation advisor.

Requirements for the University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law PhD

PhD Plan: A faculty member from iCourts will be added to dual degree dissertation committees. Within the first 3 months of enrollment in the iCourts doctoral program, students must develop a Phd plan that serves the purpose of project management. The Department of Political Science’s doctoral prospectus serves as the basis of this plan.
Status reports: The iCourts program requires bi-yearly status reports. Any change in the Phd plan must be approved by Northwestern and iCourts doctoral advisors as well as of the head of the Phd school at the Faculty of Law in Copenhagen.
Coursework: The University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law requires 30 units of ECTS coursework (the equivalent of 6 months of full-time course work) at the PhD level. Northwestern coursework may be used to fulfill this requirement if courses are considered to be above masters level. The head of the Phd school at the Faculty of Law must approve ECTS credit.
Teaching: The University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law requires teaching experience. Teaching at Northwestern may qualify upon approval to the head of PhD school at the Law Faculty in Copenhagen. iCourts funding packages may be decreased if students do not also teach at the University of Copenhagen.
Residency: Dual degree students are expected to spend at least six months in residence at iCourts.
Roundtable presentation : Students are required to do a roundtable presentation at iCourts where projects are presented and discussed. This generally occurs within the first six months of enrollment.
Pre-Dissertation Colloquium: No later than six months prior to completing the doctoral program candidates must present their research before their committee. This requirement may be fulfilled by an electronic (virtual) meeting, but it is better fulfilled by a public presentation at iCourts where an outside commentator/discussant poses questions and suggests improvements.
Dissertation Defense: Students write one doctorate that must qualify at both institutions. University of Copenhagen requires dissertations to be approved by an assessment panel of three experts, of which two must be external. These external members are usually tenured professors that by definition are not members of the dissertation committee. The panel will be chaired by a member of the University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law. The two other members of the committee generally come from other universities and at least one member is from a university abroad (usually from another European country). The panel writes an assessment report, usually 10-15 pages long, and determines whether the thesis is suited to pass a public defense. The public defense usually takes about 2 hours. This defense does not substitute for a Northwestern defense, which must also occur for a Northwestern degree to be conferred.
Funding: iCourts has generous funding for their doctoral students. This funding is intended to cover research and writing. The Graduate School at Northwestern will defer one year of a Northwestern graduate student’s funding package, at most, for a student’s return from Copenhagen.

Cybersecurity Guide

From scholar to expert: Cybersecurity PhD options

In this guide

Industry demand
2024 rankings
Preparation
Considerations
School listings

The cybersecurity landscape is not just growing—it’s evolving at a breakneck pace. And what better way to stay ahead of the curve than by pursuing a PhD in cybersecurity?

This advanced degree is no longer confined to the realm of computer science. Today, it branches into diverse fields like law, policy, management, and strategy, reflecting the multifaceted nature of modern cyber threats.

If you’re looking to become a thought leader in this dynamic industry, a PhD in cybersecurity offers an unparalleled opportunity to deepen your expertise and broaden your horizons.

This guide is designed to give prospective cybersecurity PhD students a general overview of available cybersecurity PhD programs. It will also outline some of the factors to consider when trying to find the right PhD program fit, such as course requirements and tuition costs.

Industry demand for PhDs in cybersecurity

Like other cutting-edge technology fields, until recently, cybersecurity PhD programs were often training grounds for niche positions and specialized research, often for government agencies (like the CIA, NSA, and FBI), or closely adjacent research organizations or institutions.

Today, however, as the cybersecurity field grows to become more pervasive and consumer-oriented, there are opportunities for cybersecurity PhDs to work at public-facing companies like startups and name-brand financial, software, infrastructure, and digital service firms.

One trend that is emerging in the cybersecurity field is that cybersecurity experts need to be well-versed in a variety of growing threats. If recent headlines about cybersecurity breaches are any indication, there are a number of new attack vectors and opportunities for cybercrime and related issues. Historically, committing cybercrime took resources and a level of sophistication that required specialized training or skill.

But now, because of the pervasiveness of the internet, committing cybercrime is becoming more commonplace. So training in a cybersecurity PhD program allows students to become an experts in one part of a growing and multi-layered field.

In fact, this trend of needing well-trained, but adaptable cybersecurity professionals is reflected by the move by cybersecurity graduate schools to offer specialized master’s degrees , and many companies and professional organizations offer certifications in cybersecurity that focus on particular issues related to cybersecurity technology, cybersecurity law , digital forensics , policy, or related topics.

That said, traditional research-oriented cybersecurity positions continue to be in demand in academia and elsewhere — a trend that will likely continue.

One interesting facet of the cybersecurity field is trying to predict what future cybersecurity threats might look like and then develop tools and systems to protect against those threats.

As new technologies and services are developed and as more of the global population begins using Internet services for everything from healthcare to banking — new ways of protecting those services will be required. Often, it’s up to academic researchers to think ahead and examine various threats and opportunities to insulate against those threats.

Another key trend coming out of academic circles is that cybersecurity students are becoming increasingly multidisciplinary.

As cybersecurity hacks impact more parts of people’s everyday lives, so too do the academic programs that are designed to prepare the next generation of cybersecurity professionals. This emerging trend creates an enormous amount of opportunity for students who have a variety of interests and who are looking to create a non-traditional career path.

The best cybersecurity PhD programs for 2024

Capella university, georgia institute of technology, northeastern university, marymount university, school of technology and innovation, nova southeastern university, college of computing & engineering, purdue university, stevens institute of technology, worcester polytechnic institute, university of illinois at urbana-champaign, mississippi state university, new york institute of technology.

These rankings were compiled from data accessed in November 2023 from the Integrated Post-Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and College Navigator (both services National Center for Education Statistics). Tuition data was pulled from individual university websites and is current as of November 2023.

What is required to get a PhD in cybersecurity?

Good news first: Obtaining a PhD in a field related to cybersecurity will likely create tremendous employment opportunities and lead to interesting and dynamic career options.

Bad news: Getting a PhD requires a lot of investment of time and energy, and comes with a big opportunity cost (meaning you have to invest four to five years, or longer, or pursue other opportunities to obtain a doctoral degree.

Here’s a quick breakdown of what is required to get a PhD in cybersecurity. Of course, specific degree requirements will vary by program. One growing trend in the field is that students can now obtain degrees in a variety of formats, including traditional on-campus programs, online degree programs , and hybrid graduate degree programs that combine both on-campus learning with online learning.

Related resources

Online PhD in cybersecurity – A guide to finding the right program
Cybersecurity degree programs
Podcast episodes and expert interviews

Preparing for a cybersecurity doctorate program

Cybersecurity is a relatively new formalized technology field, nonetheless, there are several ways that students or prospective PhD candidates can get involved or explore the field before and during a graduate school program. A few examples of ways to start networking and finding opportunities include:

Join cybersecurity organizations with professional networks

Specialized professional organizations are a good place to find the latest in career advice and guidance. Often they publish newsletters or other kinds of information that provide insights into the emerging trends and issues facing cybersecurity professionals. A couple of examples include:

The Center for Internet Security (CIS) is a non-profit dedicated to training cybersecurity professionals and fostering a sense of collaboration. The organization also publishes information and analysis of the latest cybersecurity threats and issues facing the professional community.

The SANS Institute runs several different kinds of courses for students (including certification programs) as well as ongoing professional cybersecurity education and training for people working in the field. The organization has several options including webinars, online training, and live in-person seminars. Additionally, SANS also publishes newsletters and maintains forums for cybersecurity professionals to interact and share information.

Leverage your social network

Places like LinkedIn and Twitter are good places to start to find news and information about what is happening in the field, who the main leaders and influencers are, and what kinds of jobs and opportunities are available.

Starting a professional network early is also a great opportunity. Often professionals and members of the industry are willing to provide guidance and help to students who are genuinely interested in the field and looking for career opportunities.

Cybersecurity competitions

Cybersecurity competitions are a great way to get hands-on experience working on real cybersecurity problems and issues. As a PhD student or prospective student, cybersecurity competitions that are sponsored by industry groups are a great way to meet other cybersecurity professionals while getting working on projects that will help flesh out a resume or become talking points in later job interviews.

The US Cyber Challenge , for example, is a series of competitions and hackathon-style events hosted by the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate and the Center for Internet Security to prepare the next generation of cybersecurity professionals.

Internships

Internships also continue to be a tried and true way to gain professional experience. Internships in technical fields like cybersecurity can also pay well. Like the industry itself, cybersecurity internships are available across a wide range of industries and can range from academic research-oriented to more corporate kinds of work.

Things to consider when choosing a cybersecurity PhD program

There are many considerations to evaluate when considering any kind of graduate degree, but proper planning is essential to be able to obtain a doctoral degree. It’s also important to note that these are just guidelines and that each graduate program will have specific requirements, so be sure to double-check.

What you will need before applying to a cybersecurity PhD program:

All undergraduate and graduate transcripts
A statement of intent, which is like a cover letter outlining interest
Letters of reference
Application fee
Online application
A resume or CV outlining professional and academic accomplishments

What does a cybersecurity PhD program cost?

Obtaining a PhD is a massive investment, both in terms of time and money. Cybersecurity PhD students are weighing the cost of becoming an expert in the field with the payoff of having interesting and potentially lucrative career opportunities on the other side.

Degree requirements are usually satisfied in 60-75 hours, so the cost of a doctoral degree can be well into the six-figure range. Here’s a more specific breakdown:

Tuition rates

The Cybersecurity Guide research team looked at 26 programs that offer a cybersecurity-related PhD degree. Here’s a breakdown of tuition rates (all figures are based on out-of-state tuition).

$17,580 is the most affordable PhD program option and it is available at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

$86,833 is the average cost of a cybersecurity PhD and is based on tuition rates from all 26 schools.

$197,820 is the most expensive cybersecurity PhD program and is available at Indiana University Bloomington.

The good news is that by the time students get to the PhD level there are a lot of funding options — including some graduate programs that are completely funded by the university or academic departments themselves.

Additionally, funding in the form of research grants and other kinds of scholarships is available for students interested in pursuing cybersecurity studies.

One example is the CyberCorps: Scholarships for Service program. Administered by the National Science Foundation, PhD students studying cybersecurity are eligible for a $34,000 a year scholarship, along with a professional stipend of $6,000 to attend conferences in exchange for agreeing to work for a government agency in the cybersecurity space after the PhD program.

Frequently asked questions about cybersecurity PhD programs

Most traditional and online cybersecurity graduate programs require a minimum number of credits that need to be completed to obtain a degree. On average, it takes 71 credits to graduate with a PhD in cybersecurity — far longer (almost double) than traditional master’s degree programs. In addition to coursework, most PhD students also have research and teaching responsibilities that can be simultaneously demanding and great career preparation.

At the core of a cybersecurity doctoral program is a data science doctoral program, you’ll be expected to learn many skills and also how to apply them across domains and disciplines. Core curriculums will vary from program to program, but almost all will have a core foundation of statistics.

All PhD candidates will have to take a series of exams that act as checkpoints during the lengthy PhD process. The actual exam process and timing can vary depending on the university and the program, but the basic idea is that cybersecurity PhD candidates generally have to sit for a qualifying exam, which comes earlier in the program (usually the winter or spring of the second year of study), a preliminary exam, which a candidate takes to show they are ready to start the dissertation or research portion of the PhD program, and a final exam where PhD students present and defend their research and complete their degree requirements.

A cybersecurity PhD dissertation is the capstone of a doctoral program. The dissertation is the name of a formal paper that presents the findings of original research that the PhD candidate conducted during the program under the guidance of faculty advisors. Some example cybersecurity research topics that could potentially be turned into dissertation ideas include: * Policies and best practices around passwords * Ways to defend against the rise of bots * Policies around encryption and privacy * Corporate responsibility for employee security * Internet advertising targeting and privacy * The new frontier of social engineering attacks * Operation security (OpSec) strategy and policy * Network infrastructure and defense * Cybersecurity law and policy * The vulnerabilities of biometrics * The role of ethical hacking * Cybersecurity forensics and enforcement

A complete listing of cybersecurity PhD programs

The following is a list of cybersecurity PhD programs. The listing is intended to work as a high-level index that provides enough basic information to make quick side-by-side comparisons easy.

You should find basic data about what each school requires (such as a GRE score or prior academic work) as well as the number of credits required, estimated costs, and a link to the program.

Arizona State University

Aim: Equip students with in-depth expertise in cybersecurity.
Study Modules: Delve into advanced computer science subjects and specific cybersecurity courses.
Research Component: Students undertake groundbreaking research in the cybersecurity domain.

Carnegie Mellon University

CNBC Collaboration: A joint effort between Carnegie Mellon and the University of Pittsburgh to train students in understanding the brain's role in cognition.
Training Program: Students take four main neuroscience courses and participate in seminars and ethics training.
Course Integration: Whether students have a B.S. or M.S. degree, they can combine the CNBC and ECE Ph.D. courses without extra workload.

Colorado School of Mines

Research Focus: Cybersecurity: Studying online security and privacy.
Cost and Financial Aid: Provides details on program costs and available financial support.
Current Mines Community: Offers specific information for those already affiliated with Mines.

Indiana University Bloomington

Focus Areas: Options include Animal Informatics, Bioinformatics, Computer Design, and more.
Information Sessions: The university holds events to guide potential students about admissions and study options.
Minor Requirement: All Ph.D. students must complete a minor, which can be from within the Luddy School of Informatics or from another approved school at IU Bloomington.

Iowa State University

Details: The program is open to both domestic and international students.
Time to Complete: Ph.D.: About 5.2 years
Goals: Students should gain deep knowledge, follow ethics, share their findings, and do advanced research if they're writing a thesis.
Learning Goals: Master core areas of Computer Science, achieve in-depth knowledge in a chosen subfield, obtain expertise to perform original research, and demonstrate the ability to communicate technical concepts and research results.
Duration: Median time to earn the doctorate is 5.8 years.
Application Information: The program is open to both domestic and international students.
Program's Aim: The Ph.D. program is tailored to produce scholars proficient in leading research initiatives, undertaking rigorous industrial research, or imparting high-level computer science education.
Entry Routes: The program welcomes both students holding a B.S. degree for direct admission and those with an M.S. degree.
Dissertation's Role: It stands as the pivotal component of the Ph.D. journey. Collaboration between the student, their dissertation director, and the guiding committee is essential.

Naval Postgraduate School

Program Essence: The Computer Science Ph.D. is a top-tier academic program in the U.S.
Admission Criteria: Open to military officers from the U.S. and abroad, U.S. governmental employees, and staff of foreign governments.
Curriculum: Designed to deepen knowledge in computing, with a focus on the needs of the U.S. Department of Defense.
Emphasis on Research: The college showcases its strength in research through sections dedicated to Research Areas, affiliated Institutes & Centers, ongoing Research Projects, and specialized Labs & Groups.
Holistic Student Growth: The college promotes a comprehensive student experience, spotlighting Clubs & Organizations, campus Facilities, and tech Systems.
Guidance for Future Students: Provides tailored insights for students considering joining at various academic levels, from Undergraduate to PhD.
Broad Learning: The program covers many areas, from software and policy to psychology and ethics, reflecting the wide scope of cybersecurity.
Course Design: Students learn foundational security topics first and then dive into specialized areas, like cyber forensics.
Successful Alumni: Past students now work in places like NASA, Amazon, and Google.
Feature: Students can apply to up to three different campuses and/or majors using a single application and fee payment.
Preparing for a Globalized World: Courses such as Global Supply Chain Management equip students for international careers.
Tech-Forward Curriculum: Purdue's commitment to advanced technology is evident.

Rochester Institute of Technology

Cyberinfrastructure Focus: The program dives deep into how hardware, data, and networks work together to create secure and efficient digital tools.
Broad Applications: The program uses computing to solve problems in fields like science, arts, and business.
Success Rate: All RIT graduates from this program have found relevant roles, especially in the Internet and Software sectors.

Sam Houston State University

Program's Objective: The course aims to nurture students to be technically adept and also to take on leadership roles in the digital and cyber forensic domain across various industries.
Assessments: Students undergo comprehensive tests to evaluate their understanding.
Research Paper (Dissertation): Once students reach the doctoral candidacy phase, they must produce and defend a significant research paper or dissertation.
Funding: All Ph.D. students get financial help, so they can start their research right away.
Teachers: The program has top experts, including those who've made big discoveries in computer science.
Research Areas: Students can study the latest topics like AI, computer vision, and online security.

The University of Tennessee

Study Areas: Options include Cybersecurity, Data Analytics, Computer Vision, and more.
Tests: You'll have to pass a few exams, including one when you start, one before your final project, and then present your final project.
Courses: Some specific courses are needed, and your main professor will help decide which ones.
Big Exam: Before moving forward, you'll take a detailed exam about your research topic.
Final Step: You'll present and defend your research project to experts.
Overview: This program is for those with a degree in Computer Science or similar fields. It has special focus areas like Cybersecurity and Machine Learning.

University of Arizona

Study Plan: Students start with learning research basics and then dive into modern tech topics.
Support for Students: All PhD students get funding that covers their studies, a stipend, and health insurance. Money for travel to conferences is also available.
After Graduation: Alumni work at top universities and big companies like Google and Microsoft.

University of California-Davis

About the Program: Students engage in deep research, ending with a dissertation.
Jobs After Graduation: Roles in companies or academic positions.
Vibrant Community: Beyond academics, students join a supportive community, enriching their Ph.D. experience.

University of Colorado - Colorado Springs

Recognition: UCCS is recognized by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of Homeland Security for excellence in Information Assurance Education.
Course Approval: The NSA has approved UCCS's courses as meeting national security training standards.
Overview: This program focuses on vital areas like cyber security, physical security, and homeland security.

University of Idaho

Partnership with NSA and DHS: The university is part of a program to boost cyber defense education.
Recognition: The University of Idaho is among the institutions recognized as Centers of Academic Excellence in Cyber Defense.
Objective: To minimize vulnerabilities in the national information infrastructure.
Overview: This program is meticulously crafted to deliver premier legal education to its students.
Courses: Encompasses a balanced mix of traditional legal doctrines, theoretical viewpoints, and hands-on practical experiences.
Aim: The primary objective is to equip students with top-notch legal education.

University of Missouri-Columbia

Seminars: PhD students should attend 20 seminars. If they were previously Master's students, their past attendance counts.
Timeline Requirements: Comprehensive Exam must be completed within five years of starting the program.
Dissertation and Publication: At least one journal paper must be submitted, accepted, or published.

University of North Carolina at Charlotte

Faculty: The faculty members are renowned for their impactful research contributions on a global scale.
Curriculum: The curriculum is versatile, catering to individuals aiming for academia as well as those targeting roles in the corporate, commerce, or public sectors.
Program: A blend of theoretical and hands-on research is emphasized, offering a well-rounded educational experience.

Virginia Tech

Seminars and Ethics: Students attend special seminars and complete training on scholarly ethics and diversity.
Guidance: Each student gets a faculty advisor. A group of faculty members, called a committee, also guides them.
Major Exams: Students go through four main stages: a qualifying process, a preliminary proposal, a research presentation, and a final defense.
Strong Research: WPI's PhD program is recognized for its excellent research contributions.
Practical Focus: The program teaches students to tackle real tech challenges.
Modern Labs: Students use the latest labs like the Human-Robot Interaction Lab.

Dakota State University

Program Goal: Train students to handle and prevent cyber threats.
Awards: The university has received top cybersecurity awards.
What You'll Learn: Research skills, cyber defense techniques, and ethical decision-making.

New Jersey City University, College of Professional Studies

About: Focuses on best practices in areas like national security, cyber defense, and crisis communication.
Recognitions: The program has been honored by the National Security Agency since 2009 and was recognized for excellence in intelligence studies.
Jobs: Graduates are prepared for top roles in sectors like government and education.
Program Content: The course dives deep into modern cybersecurity topics, from new tech and artificial intelligence to specialized research areas.
Location Benefits: The university is near many cybersecurity companies and government agencies, giving students unique opportunities.
For Working People: It's crafted for professionals, allowing them to experience various cybersecurity roles, from tech firms to government.
Completion Time: Students have up to ten years from starting to finish their dissertation.
Program: Trains students for roles in academia, government, and business.
Multidisciplinary Approach: The program combines both technical and managerial aspects of cybersecurity, offering a comprehensive understanding of the field.

The University of Rhode Island

Research Focus: The Ph.D. program is centered around a big research project in Computer Science.
Qualifying Exams: Students take exams on core topics, but some might get exemptions if they're already skilled in certain areas.
Equal Opportunity: The University of Rhode Island is committed to the principles of affirmative action and is an equal opportunity employer.

University of North Texas

Team Effort: The program is a collaboration between various UNT departments for a well-rounded view of cybersecurity.
Goals: The course aims to develop critical thinkers who are passionate about the role of information in our lives and can work across different fields.
Skills Gained: Students will learn about research, teaching methods, decision-making, leadership, and analyzing data.

New York University Tandon School of Engineering

Scholarships: Many students get scholarships that pay for tuition and give a monthly allowance.
Research Interest: Research areas include cybersecurity, computer games, web search, graphics, and more.
Experience: Students can also research in NYU's campuses in Shanghai or Abu Dhabi.
One Degree for All: Every student gets the same Ph.D., regardless of their specific area of study.
Research Focus: The program emphasizes deep research and prepares students for advanced roles.
Major Project: Students work on a big research project, adding new knowledge to the computing world.
Program: Prepares students for leadership roles in different sectors.
Opportunities: Qualified students might get opportunities as Research or Teaching Assistants.
Overview: Focuses on advanced research and modern technologies.

Augusta University

Goal: The program prepares students for research roles and to make new discoveries in tech.
Benefits: A Ph.D. opens up leadership opportunities in tech sectors.
Overview: It focuses on new discoveries in areas like security, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality.

University of Texas at San Antonio

Financial Support: Full-time students can get funding, which covers tuition and offers roles like teaching assistants.
Job Prospects: UTSA trains students for jobs that are in high demand, using data from official sources.
Overview: The program focuses on in-depth research and teaching.

University of Central Florida

Mix of Subjects: Students can take courses from different areas, giving them a broad view of security topics.
Many Job Options: Graduates can work in government, big companies, or teach in universities.
Hands-on Learning: The program offers research, study projects, and internships for real-world experience.

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

https://www.vitae.ac.uk/doing-research/doing-a-doctorate/completing-your-doctorate/your-viva/your-phd-viva

This page has been reproduced from the Vitae website (www.vitae.ac.uk). Vitae is dedicated to realising the potential of researchers through transforming their professional and career development.

Vitae members' area

Defending your doctoral thesis: the PhD viva

Format for defending a doctoral thesis.

Every institution will have specific regulations for the thesis defence. In some countries or institutions, the convention is for thesis defences to be public events where you will give a lecture explaining your research, followed by a discussion with a panel of examiners (opponents). Both your examiners and the audience are able to ask questions.

In other countries, including the UK, the oral examination is usually conducted behind closed doors by at least two examiners, usually with at least one being from another institution (external examiner) and an expert in your topic of research. In the UK the supervisor does not participate in the viva, but may be allowed to observe. Sometimes someone from your own institution is appointed as an independent chair. Although it is now becoming more common for the candidate to have an opportunity to give a public lecture in UK institutions, this does not form part of the examination and may or may not be attended by the examiners.

Viva preparation

Take the preparation for your viva seriously and devote a substantial amount of time to it. The viva preparation checklist may be useful to help you prepare.

Your institution may offer courses on viva preparation and there may be opportunities to organise a practice viva. Take advantage of these opportunities: they can be extremely valuable experiences.

Things you may wish to take with you

your thesis – mildly annotated if you wish
a list of questions that you might be asked and your planned responses
any questions that you want to ask your examiners
additional notes which you have made during your revision
list of minor corrections that you have come across during your revision.

During the viva

Your study will have strengths and weaknesses: it is essential that you are prepared to discuss both. You could think of any weaknesses as an opportunity to demonstrate your skill at critical appraisal. Examiners will seek to find and discuss weaknesses in all theses. Do not interpret criticism as indication of a possible negative outcome.

Examiners have different personalities, styles and levels of experience. Sometimes a candidate may feel that a challenge is made in a confrontational way. Experienced, effective examiners will not be inappropriately confrontational, but some will. Do not take offence. A relaxed, thoughtful, and non-confrontational response from you will help re-balance the discussion. Having an independent chair can help maintain a constructive environment.

Useful tips for during your viva:

Ask for clarification of ambiguous questions or ask for the question to be repeated if necessary
Take time to think before answering
Be prepared to ask questions and enter into a dialogue with your examiners
Be prepared to discuss your research in context of other work done in your field
Be ready to admit if you don't know the answer to a question
Be prepared to express opinions of your own

You are not expected to have perfect recall of your thesis and everything that you have read and done. If you get flustered, or need to refer to notes your examiners will understand. They have been in your situation themselves!

After your viva

There are several possible outcomes of a thesis defence. Most commonly, your examiners will recommend to your institution that you are awarded your degree subject to minor corrections, although in some instances they might ask for more substantial work.

Bookmark & Share

Browser does not support script.

Go to…

Diversity & inclusion
Our connections
Postgraduate study

Professional military education

MA International Security & Strategy
MA Defence Studies
MRes Defence Studies
MSc Defence Innovation
MA Military & Security Studies
Research centres & groups

PhD programmes

At defence studies, we are proud of our thriving body of research students who enhance our research community and culture.

Our research degrees draw upon the expertise of a large and multidisciplinary department. Our acknowledged strength in the field of diplomatic and military history is complemented by world-class research into numerous aspects of contemporary and future warfare, such as security and defence policy, strategy, land, air and maritime doctrine and operations, proxy warfare, conflict termination, space power, and the relationship between artificial intelligence, military operations and conflict.

In addition, we offer tremendous expertise across a range of non-military subject areas such as regional and area studies, international security organisations, gender, war and violence, domestic and international terrorism, peacebuilding, political economy, and ethics. Such breadth of research offers our students the intellectual tools to expand and enhance their knowledge and understanding of all aspects of conflict, defence, security, and strategy.

We attract studentships from a variety of sources, including the ESRC and the AHRC, as well as the MacArthur Foundation, the UK Ministry of Defence and the US Department of Defense. Our research students are supported through their affiliation with a number of research groups and themes , which sponsor seminars and provide opportunities for interaction with established researchers.

My advisor has been consistently engaged and attuned to my progress, his guidance for the project has made it more relevant and topical. My experience working with him has been exceptional. I truly appreciate the opportunity to be at King's Kerry Lynn Nankivell, DSD PhD Student

World-leading interdisciplinary research from the Defence Studies Department.

Research Centres and groups

Research Centres and Groups in the Department promote the development and dissemination of new…

Defence Studies Research MPhil/PhD

The Defence Studies Department’s unique position as an academic department based at the Defence Academy heavily influences its research. Sitting at the heart of security and defence education in the United Kingdom, it is able to draw on the experiences and knowledge of not only UK military officers, but officers from a wide range of allied nations. The Department’s research is therefore able to benefit from and influence defence thinking and policymaking not just in the UK, but across the world.

View further details about our MPhil/PhD programme

Before applying for an MPhil/PhD you will need to consider a potential supervisor. Every university, and sometimes different areas within universities, use somewhat different and changing ranking systems for academic positions. The specific people in Defence Studies who are currently available can be searched here .

Please consult staff members’ academic profiles for more information on their supervisory interests and make contact with them directly regarding your application. Only when you have an agreed supervisor can you progress to make a formal application through the Admissions Office. Even if your topic is related to Defence Studies, you may also find it useful to search for supervisors in other departments, including War Studies , and in other schools within the Faculty of Social Science and Public Policy, such as Global Affairs and Politics and Economics .

At the heart of your application is your research proposal. The ability to identify and propose a viable research project is a major indicator of your potential for doctoral study.

Email your research proposal (approximately 6 pages) and personal statement to your proposed supervisor and/or Defence Studies Department’s Admissions Tutor . Your research proposal should explain precisely the field of study that you wish to contribute to, as well as any current research gaps, what you want to do, and how you propose to do it. Meanwhile, your personal statement should outline your reasons for pursuing doctoral research.

If your proposed supervisor and/or Admissions Tutor encourages you to apply, you will need to submit an online application via the application portal: King’s Apply .

Preparing a research proposal can take time. A good research proposal typically includes the following components:

A clear statement of the proposed research question.
An explanation of the importance and originality of the proposed topic.
A section outlining the key literature and academic work associated with your proposed topic. This section may refer to the lack or shortcomings of existing academic work in your proposed area.
A section describing not only your proposed methodology, but also an explanation of why this methodology is the most appropriate for the proposed topic.
An overview of the key research questions that you wish to answer.
A prospective chapter outline of the proposed thesis.
A timetable showing a realistic plan, including critical milestones, for the completion of your research and writing within three years.
A concluding section showing why this research should be conducted specifically here, within the Defence Studies Department, rather than anywhere else.

We attract studentships from a variety of sources, including the ESRC and the AHRC, as well as the MacArthur Foundation, the UK Ministry of Defence, and the US Department of Defense. Below are some of the funding opportunities available:

KCL Postgraduate Funding Database

This database contains both taught and research funding opportunities and allows you to conduct a search by a number of filters including subject area and country of domicile.

Find out more

London Interdisciplinary Social Science Doctoral Training Partnership (LISS-DTP)

The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded London Interdisciplinary Social Science DTP (LISS DTP) awards postgraduate research studentships in the social sciences at three partner institutions – King’s College London, Queen Mary University of London, and Imperial College.

Find out more about LISS-DTP funding

London Arts & Humanities Partnership (LAHP)

The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) funded London Arts and Humanities Partnership has up to 90 studentships per year available for postgraduate research students studying arts and humanities disciplines at King’s College London, London School of Economics and Political Science, Queen Mary University of London, Royal Central School of Speech and Drama, Royal College of Art, Royal College of Music, School of Advanced Study or University College London.

Find out more about LAHP funding

Alternative Guide to Postgraduate Funding

King’s College London has a subscription to the Alternative Guide to Postgraduate Funding. This is a web resource for current and prospective postgraduate students who are looking to fund Masters, PGCE, or PhD study in the UK through grants from the voluntary sector.

PhD in Law and Security

Ensuring democracy

Presentation

This course will be discontinued at the end of the 2023/24 academic year. The Law and Security specialisation is available in the PhD in Law .

Law and Security represent an emerging scientific area in Portugal, reflecting the multidisciplinary and diverse nature of knowledge most relevant to the current context, both national and international, in which a Culture of Security is essential to the affirmation of the Democratic Rule of Law.

The present 3rd Cycle of Law Studies corresponds to the consolidation of an already significant teaching and research experience, not only in the Master in Law and Security, but also in the work developed within the scope of CEDIS – Center for Research & Development in Law and Society of the Faculty of Law of the NOVA University of Lisbon, with the collaboration of the Institute of Law and Security.

The PhD in Law and Security integrates two phases: the completion of a PhD course (90 ECTS) and the preparation of an original thesis (150 ECTS), designed specifically to obtain the degree of Doctor in Law and Security.

Coordination

Frederico de Lacerda da Costa Pinto

Laura Íñigo Álvarez

Scientific commission.

President: Frederico de Lacerda da Costa Pinto | Board Members: Laura Íñigo Álvarez (non-taught component) | Felipe Pathé Duarte (taught component)

The first two semesters of this cycle are organized around the acquisition of skills and knowledge in this area in order to enable solid investigation, framed according to the theoretical problems of the disciplines structuring the course.

The curricular units that are proposed are composed of seminars focused on themes that are considered relevant to the training of students, ensuring the flexibility in specific themes to be addressed. During this 1st year, the curricular units focus on what we call the hard theoretical core of the course.

The remaining 6 semesters will be fully dedicated to research leading to the doctoral thesis. These 6 semesters provide adequate time for the research, which is allocated according to the availability of research centers and consultation materials.

The 8 semesters that make up this cycle are designed for full-time and face-to-face students.

Certification

Code of Good Practices

Objectives and Structure of the Curricular Units

Tuition fees.

Total Tuition Fee – National and International Student: 9600.00€
Annual fee for the taught component – National and International Student: 3600.00€
Total Tuition Fee for Non-curricular phase – National and International Student: 2000.00€ (from the 3rd semester on)
Tuition Fee for Additional Non-Curricular semester – National and International Student: 1000.00€

Applications

From the 2021/22 academic year onwards, the Law and Security specialty has been included in the PhD in Law. Those interested in a PhD in this area should apply to the PhD in Law .

PhD Programme in Law

Amsterdam Law School welcomes talented researchers who are interested in writing a legal doctoral thesis.

PhD Research at the Amsterdam Law School

The doctoral programme

PhD admissions procedure

PhD education programme

Cookie Consent

The UvA uses cookies to ensure the basic functionality of the site and for statistical and optimisation purposes. Cookies are also placed to display third-party content and for marketing purposes. Click 'Accept all cookies' to consent to the placement of all cookies, or choose 'Decline' to only accept functional and analytical cookies. Also read the UvA Privacy statement .

Educate your inbox

Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else.

Thank you. Please check your inbox to confirm.

Jules Epstein, The Conversation Jules Epstein, The Conversation

Leave your feedback

Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-to-watch-for-in-trump-trials-closing-arguments-from-a-law-school-professor

What to watch for in Trump trial’s closing arguments, from a law school professor

After more than four weeks of often sordid testimony , accusations of lying and even a warning from Judge Juan M. Merchan to a witness to stop giving him the side-eye , lawyers in the hush-money case involving former President Donald Trump are expected to make their closing arguments on May 28, 2024.

WATCH: How Trump’s alleged hush money payments led to his charges in New York

In a jury trial, opening statements are meant to provide jurors a narrative framework to organize all the bits and pieces of evidence and testimony.

Closing arguments are not meant to simply regurgitate the testimonies of all 22 witnesses or review the roughly 200 exhibits. For both prosecutors and defense attorneys, the closing arguments serve to tell the jury why the evidence is believable or not, why and how the facts are linked or not and, most importantly, why their decision to either acquit or convict is moral and just.

Keep it simple

As a I teach law school students and practitioners , that moral message in closing arguments should link back to themes already woven into the trial.

In this criminal case, one of four filed against Trump , Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged the former president with 34 counts of falsifying business records to hide a $130,000 payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels as part of an effort to influence voters’ knowledge about him before the 2016 presidential election.

Trump entered a plea of not guilty and did not testify .

For the prosecution, that moral message, as prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said earlier in the trial, is this: “It was election fraud, pure and simple.”

For the defense, its closing argument should include an equally direct statement, much like what Trump defense attorney Todd Blanche has said: “President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney’s office should never have brought this case.”

There is at least one more purpose in closing arguments. It is to arm jurors with the arguments they need – either to shut down naysayers or gently persuade those in doubt – for when the real battle occurs, inside the jury room during deliberations. One way to do that is to find language from the instructions the judge will give to the jury, restate them in plain English and, in effect, make it look as if they are aligned with the judge and the law.

Less is more

A major goal of both prosecutors and defense attorneys is to untangle all of the evidence and testimony. They must cut through the distracting details and tell jurors, in effect, “Now you know why this witness was important” or “the document doesn’t lie – it shows you …”

Prosecutors in this case must focus on why Trump was involved in the alleged conspiracy and what he knew about the alleged payments.

In my experience over 45 years, the wise path is to start the closing argument with the big picture of “What did we have to prove?” and then answering in a series of bullet points that explain how they proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt.

READ MORE: Defense rests in Trump’s New York hush money trial without the ex-president taking the stand

To this end, a limited and focused use of exhibits is best – not each and every bit of evidence. Less is more also regarding salacious details, the adultery and Trump’s own vulgar words . The jury just needs the reminder – they’ll recall the details.

With star witness Michael Cohen , an attorney and Trump’s former fixer, it may be different. The prosecution can’t hide from his lies and flaws, which Trump’s defense attorneys hammered home to the jury, so it’s up to the prosecution to embrace Cohen’s failures .

Put simply, prosecutors must show that it doesn’t matter how big a liar Cohen has been in his past if, in this case, he has the receipts to back up his testimony.

A reasonable doubt?

For defense attorneys, their goal is to reassert Trump’s innocence and argue that there is plenty of reasonable doubt in the prosecution’s case.

That means pounding away at Cohen’s lack of credibility and denying that any crime was committed. If anything, they may argue, these alleged crimes were no more than bookkeeping errors that Trump didn’t know about.

But if the defense portrays everything as lies, as Trump has claimed, they may paint themselves into a corner. If the jury believes, for example, that Stormy Daniels was telling the truth when she said she had sex with Trump, then Trump’s denials may work against his lawyer’s defense strategy.

The defense has one more daunting task: to strike the balance between attacking Cohen and explaining why the lawyer Trump hired is not corroborated by the reams of evidence – and Trump’s own words.

And the defense must decide what its goal is. Is it an outright acquittal, or a hung jury in which a unanimous decision was unable to be reached?

If it is the latter, expect to have a major push on Cohen’s failings and a lack of corroboration in the hope that at least one juror will stand firm and say, “That’s just not enough.”

But the last word in these final arguments goes to the prosecutors. Because they must prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, they will give their closing argument last and know what they have to respond to.

Support Provided By: Learn more

Trump’s plans for health care and reproductive rights if he returns to White House

Politics May 22

Kansas public defenders are overworked and understaffed, according to current standards

Public Board of Indigent Defense Services didn't get the $11 million it requested from the state of Kansas to help it hire new employees and retain current staff.

The agency has gotten more funding in recent years, but the pay still lags behind comparable positions in law. Simultaneously, a national study suggest public defenders are assigned about three times as many cases as they could reasonably handle.

High caseloads, as well as the difficulty attracting and retaining attorneys, has led to other states releasing defendants when no public attorney is available.

Origins of public defender caseloads

In 1973, the National Advisory Commission Justice Standards established that public defenders should be able to work up to 150 felony cases, 400 misdemeanors per year or 200 juvenile cases per year. The NACJS accounted for nearly 400 standards in criminal justice information systems, recruitment of minorities, community policing, speedy trials and offender rehabilitation.

Most of the recommendations like ending plea bargaining, pushing for every state to criminalize handgun possession and capping maximum sentences for most crimes to five years, didn't get implemented. But the caseloads for public defenders have been surprisingly sticky and were the main contributor to public defense workloads for 50 years.

"The old standards were problematic for a variety of cases. They were 150 felonies, which could be murder cases or could be low-level thefts and they were kind of counted the same," said Heather Cessna, executive director of the Kansas Board of Indigent Defense Services.

The standards didn't come from a methodology or assessment, and was just one of 400 recommendations proposed by the NACJS. Caseloads weren't even on the agenda, and were calculated as an afterthought according to Stephen Hanlon, an attorney that studied caseloads in partnership with the American Bar Association.

And the 50-year-old standards weren't updated to account for the time needed to review things like body cameras and advances in forensic science. But over the past several years, state's have been measuring their caseloads on a new standard.

Kansas has 30% of public defenders needed in the court system

In September 2023, the American Bar Association released a national study on the workloads of public defenders after several state-level assessments had been released. In Kansas , it projected that the state only had about 30% of the needed public defenders necessary to give constitutionally protected defense to its clients.

It also found the state employed less than a third of the legal assistants, a fifth of the investigators and administrative specialists and needed 133 more mental health and social workers — the state currently employs just one. Kansas isn't far off from most states, which are usually heavily deficient in the number of attorneys employed in public defense.

The standards the ABA assessed public defender caseloads with was more nuanced than the NACJS standards, breaking down the amount of time that would be needed based on the severity of the cases from low level probation violations to felonies carrying life sentences.

Kansas BIDS only covers felony offences and contracts out private attorneys for lower-level crimes.

"A lot of the deficit is in the lower level of case type because that's where people are taking pleas very early, no investigation is happening. The difference between what ought to be happening and what is happening tends to be the largest at the volume-case processing court," said Malia Brink, deputy director of the ABA's national workload study.

Too few prospective attorneys are attending law school

The ABA report says Kansas would need to hire 277 additional attorneys on top the 123 already employed. It's unlikely Kansas could meet that demand without drastically restructuring the entire public defense structure.

In 2022, public defense entities had a turnover rate of about 20%, meaning nearly one in five public defenders left that year. In 2023, with a pay raise that included a one-time $4 million investment from the state and a 5% bump for all statewide employees, the Board of Indigent Defense Services more than halved the attorney turnover rate.

"I think we've made some significant strides. I think it's just not enough. It kind of turns into a drop in the bucket," Cessna said.

Comparable employees like prosecutors are hired at the county level, so they can be more nimble when responding to the current market. Also, public defense is competing with a relatively small number of law school graduates.

The two law schools in Kansas, the University of Kansas and Washburn University, had a combine 228 incoming students in 2022. The number of first-year law students nationwide drastically declined after peaking in 2010 at 52,000 students. Since then the number hovered around 38,000.

Public defenders paid far less than prosecutors in same jurisdictions

The studies on public defender pay, workload and well-being often mention that they're underpaid compared to the attorneys at the other side of the courtroom. Public defenders are paid about 28% less than their prosecutor counterparts in the same jurisdiction.

Jonathon Noble, chief public defender with the Northeast Conflicts Office who previously worked as a prosecutor, said it's hard to compare the two jobs on the workload given to them. A prosecutor's job is to "put on a show" while the defense attorney has to poke holes in the state's case.

"Putting that case together, getting everybody there who's supposed to be there to testify, that is very difficult and very stressful. You do have a lot of interaction with victims in the case. But you don't have the interaction to the same degree that a defense attorney has with their client where you really have to walk through every single stage of the proceeding," Noble said.

Public defenders often are have a less-than stellar reputation. A study in Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law and Society reported that about 83% of people said court-appointed attorneys are more concerned with quickly resolving cases than their privately retained peers, and only about half of respondents said public defenders fight zealously for their clients.

The incentives seem like opposites between privately retained and publicly appointed counsel. Overburdened public defenders may want to resolve cases quickly rather than drag out the process, while by-the-hour private attorneys may maximize their time on a case.

"There is a perception that public defenders are not real attorneys, and that your job is to manufacture pleas to get the case over with as quickly as possible," Noble said.

Noble said there might be some truth to that sentiment when public defenders are as overburdened as they historically have been. But, there are also bad prosecutors and private attorneys as well.

"It's just like anything else, there's good and there's bad," Noble said.

But ultimately, only a defendant can decide to take a plea, and when doing so must affirm to the court that they are satisfied with their counsel.

"The public defender does not decide whether to accept a plea. The public defender describes the plea agreement to the person charged. The public defender may recommend either accepting or declining a plea agreement based on criminal law, the person’s criminal history, provisions of the plea agreement, and other relevant factors," said Lisa Taylor, public information director of the Kansas Office of Judicial Administration.

Are public defense systems meeting Sixth Amendment standards?

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a public trial of anyone committed of a crime, and the Supreme Court guaranteed that people must be provided legal representation in court in Gideon v. Wainwright . And the representation must be "appropriately sufficient."

"It's not a high bar," Cessna said. "It's not like you're hiring the best law firm on the face of the earth and they're putting 16 associates and three partners on this case level of criminal defense, you're talking the minimum that is required in order to meet the Sixth Amendment requirements."

Brink said when there are so many cases to deal with, public defenders aren't spending as much time investigating the case and conducting legal research to adequately help their clients.

"A lot of what gets taken away from clients when attorneys don't have time is the ability to do all the things that would go into the attorney being able to demonstrate that not only that they know you, but they know your case," Brink said.

When public defense systems are found to be so overburdened that they can no longer adequately represent their clients to Sixth Amendment standards, they stop taking cases. In that case, jails will start releasing lower-level offenders who are in jail for things like methamphetamine possession while retaining more serious cases.

In 2021 the American Civil Liberties Union said the state is at risk of being sued for providing inadequate representation.

Some attorneys cite recent improvements but problems persist

The pay increase and implementation of modern caseload standards have had an impact on wellbeing for Kansas's public defenders. The percent of public defenders who said the lack of pay or promotions as the primary source for dissatisfaction fell from 45% to 28% — but workload and lack of attorneys rose from 17% to 28%.

But things seem to be improving, with 46% of attorneys saying things have improved over the past year, 36% saying it was the same and 18% reporting a decrease in workplace well-being. Moreover, only 9.8% said they don't feel supported by the BIDS administration.

Still, only 40% of public defenders said they feel they have enough time to provide optimal representation, even with BIDS directing offices to abide by modern workload standards.

"When I took over here, they already started complying with the preliminary findings of the workload studies," Noble said. "So I try to keep everyone around a case weigh of about 100 or 120 (hours per case), which is still higher than the results of the national average. It's just not feasible based on the amount of people that we have, or can have, to really abide by those."

With the extreme high number of attorneys needed to represent defendants, another way to reduce demand on public defenders is to reimagine what crimes get prosecuted.

"There are cases that you could say, maybe what we should do is actually have a citation level case that gets cleared if they, for example, are willing to meet with a caseworker rather than spend 30 to 60 days in jail," Brink said. "The other thing that the caseload studies show is that sentencing drives time."

In other words, when the state seeks more severe punishments then defendants will seek more comprehensive, complicated and time-consuming ways of litigating their case.

"You can look not at total decriminalization, but also sentencing reform to bring some of that down," Brink said.

The problems in public defense amount to problems in the entire criminal justice system. About 85% of adult felonies in the state are represented by court-appointed attorneys.

"The situation in public defense does reflect something about the overall quality of justice we're able to produce right now," Brink said. "There is a real myth of equitable justice, and I think the caseload studies really are showing those gaps."

Protesters say Arizona Diamondbacks owner supports tougher immigration law

Hispanic advocates gathered outside Chase Field on Saturday to protest the owner of the Arizona Diamondbacks for his apparent support of legislators who have advanced stricter immigration enforcement.

Barrio Defense Committees, led by Phoenix-based advocate Salvador Reza, and a group of about 10 protesters were adjacent to Chase Field's west side to accuse Ken Kendrick's wife of helping to fund an immigration enforcement bill, House Concurrent Resolution 2060, which could go before Arizona voters this November.

"They're giving money to the people who want to deport us, that's why we're here today," said Reza, citing a $5,000 donation by Kendrick's wife, Randy, to Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen.

Warren could have stopped the bill with his seniority position, according to Reza.

The group said if the Republican-controlled Legislature had passed its own border enforcement bill, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs likely would have vetoed it.

Reza said HCR 2060 could affect anyone in Arizona, giving any law enforcement agency in the state the ability to deport someone.

"They're basically making every police here in Arizona into the Border Patrol," Reza said.

Reza said Kendrick previously donated to legislators such as Russell Pearce in 2010 to support the progress of the immigration enforcement law known as SB 1070.

"We saw this movie before, this is like the sequel," Reza said.

Protesters call for busy Saturday baseball crowd to protest against DBacks

Between chants like "Boycott DBacks, boycott hate," and "These racist laws have to go," protesters gave short blurbs of information explaining Kendrick's apparent association with the immigration bill.

"By contributing to the DBacks, you are contributing to hate," said one of the protesters.

The protesters' message spread out as hundreds of Diamondbacks fans passed through the streets, with the megaphoned chants amplifying through Chase Field's west side entrances.

"A lot of the people that come to the Diamondbacks games are Mexicans, Cubans, whatever ... we're here to remind him (Kendrick)," Reza said.

Last week, Barrio Defense Committees reported that a protest on May 18 outside Chase Field ended when the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office and DBacks security threatened to arrest protesters for trespassing.

Sheriff's Office spokesperson Sgt. Joaquin Enriquez confirmed about 12 protesters were asked to cross the street and leave the right of way outside Chase Field, but that no arrests were made, and the protest continued peacefully.

While the protesters were not confronted by law enforcement on Saturday, Valley Metro security guards told protesters they could not stand in front of ticket machines located on the Third Street/Jefferson Street station platform but were allowed to stay at the location otherwise.

If Kendrick responded to the protesters' claims, Reza said he hoped the Diamondbacks owner would lobby politicians to not support the bill.

Pamphlets were distributed explaining HCR 2060's potential to deport immigrants and alleging that Kendrick benefited from the Sheriff's Office enforcement, a situation further exacerbated by $9.8 million approved for the team by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.

"We're ready to go, we're ready to fight at every level, the streets, the electoral, the legislative, we'll do it again just like last time," said Reza as his fellow protesters let out unrelenting chants.

Reza said he and Barrio Defense Committees planned to start a national boycott against Arizona for the creation of bills like HCR 2060.

Advancing: Arizona GOP wants voters to weigh in on immigration. The plan is now one step closer to the ballot

The corporate offices of the Diamondbacks did not respond to a request for comment on Barrio Defense Committees' allegations.

Election 2024
Entertainment
Newsletters
Photography
Personal Finance
AP Investigations
AP Buyline Personal Finance
AP Buyline Shopping
Press Releases
Israel-Hamas War
Russia-Ukraine War
Global elections
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Election Results
Delegate Tracker
AP & Elections
Auto Racing
2024 Paris Olympic Games
Movie reviews
Book reviews
Personal finance
Financial Markets
Business Highlights
Financial wellness
Artificial Intelligence
Social Media

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the media after attending the day’s proceedings at his hush money trial, in New York, Monday, May 20, 2024. Social media users are falsely claiming that Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let Trump’s legal team call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify. (Sarah Yenesel/Pool Photo via AP)

Copy Link copied

CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial .

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter.

THE FACTS: As the trial continued Tuesday , social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

“The expert witness that we have, the best there is in election law, Brad Smith, he’s considered the Rolls Royce, or we’ll bring it back to an American car, Cadillac, but the best there is,” Trump said on his way out of court on Monday. “He can’t testify. He’s not being allowed to testify.”

The former president reiterated this falsehood several more times in his post-trial comments, claiming that Merchan was blocking Smith’s testimony “because he’s going to say we did nothing wrong.” He also posted about it on his social media platform Truth Social later that evening, calling Merchan’s decision “election interference.”

Other social media users then repeated Trump’s claim.

“Biden-Donor Judge Merchan won’t allow the former FEC Commissioner to testify on behalf of Trump because he would have said that Trump did not violate any federal election laws!” reads one X post that had received more than 5,700 likes and shares as of Tuesday. “This trial is totally rigged!”

But Smith was permitted to testify . The defense decided not to call him after Merchan reaffirmed a pretrial ruling that limited what he could have spoken about. The defense rested its case on Tuesday after calling two witnesses to testify — Daniel Sitko , a paralegal who works in the law office of Trump attorney Todd Blanche, and Robert Costello , a former federal prosecutor in New York.

Merchan said that, if called, Smith could give general background about the FEC — for example, it’s purpose and the laws it enforces — and provide definitions for terms such as “campaign contribution.” He rejected the Trump team’s renewed efforts to have Smith define three terms in federal election law on the basis that doing so would breach rules preventing expert witnesses from interpreting the law. Nor could Smith opine on whether the former president’s alleged actions violate those laws.

The judge said if Smith did testify, the prosecution would then be permitted to call an expert of its own, resulting in a “battle of the experts” that “would only serve to confuse and not assist the jury.”

Smith, who was appointed to the FEC by former President Bill Clinton, acknowledged in an X post on Monday that he did not testify because of a decision made by the defense. He added that he had intended to testify about complicated background knowledge necessary to understanding the case, rather than about the law.

“Judge Merchan has so restricted my testimony that defense has decided not to call me,” Smith wrote. ___ This is part of the AP’s effort to address widely shared false and misleading information that is circulating online. Learn more about fact-checking at AP .

Trump trial updates: Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge's recusal

F ormer President Donald Trump is on trial in New York City, where he is facing felony charges related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. It marks the first time in history that a former U.S. president has been tried on criminal charges.

Trump last April pleaded not guilty to a 34-count indictment charging him with falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment his then-attorney Michael Cohen made to Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.

Latest Developments

Judge issues written decision denying defense's bid for sanctions.

In a written order issued today, Judge Juan Merchan denied a defense motion to sanction prosecutors for the late production of evidence in the case earlier this year.

In March, attorneys for former President Trump requested that Judge Merchan sanction prosecutors and adjourn the trial after federal prosecutors turned over more than 100,000 pages of potential evidence just ahead of the trial. Defense lawyers argued that the prosecutors engaged in "widespread misconduct including the suppression of evidence" and sought to interfere with the 2024 election.

After an in-person hearing on March 25, Merchan denied the request to adjourn the trial and promised to follow up with a written decision, which he issued today.

"This court found that the Defendant would not suffer any prejudice as a result of the document production at issue because the Defendant was given a reasonable amount of time to prepare and respond to the material," the order said.

Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge's recusal

New York's Appellate Division has upheld Judge Juan Merchan's decision not to recuse himself from former President Trump's hush money case.

Trump's defense team had sought Merchan's recusal based on his daughter's work for a consulting firm with Democratic clients.

A panel of appellate judges ruled that Trump failed to prove the judge overstepped his authority by denying a defense motion for recusal.

"Petitioner has failed to establish that the court acted in excess of its jurisdiction by denying his motion," today's order said. "Petitioner also has not established that he has a clear right to recusal."

The judges also found that the defense appeal was procedurally improper since they waited too long to appeal Merchan's August 2023 recusal order, then rushed to the Appellate Division before Merchan ruled on their more recent recusal motion.

The appellate court also upheld Merchan's decision denying Trump's argument that some of his social media posts were covered by presidential immunity.

The appeals court said Trump could include both appeals in its general appeal of the verdict should he be found guilty.

The court also denied Trump's request for a change of venue for the trial, which Trump had sought before the trial began last month.

The former president has repeatedly criticized Judge Merchan as "conflicted" throughout the trial.

Trump says he didn't testify in part because of his 'past'

Donald Trump said Wednesday that he didn't take the stand in his hush money trial because he didn't agree with the judge's rulings -- and because he was seemingly worried about information that could have come out during cross-examination.

"He made rulings that makes it very difficult to testify," Trump said in an interview on WABC Radio, referring to Judge Juan Merchan. "Anything I did, anything I did in the past, they can bring everything up, and you know what, I've had a great past -- but anything."

"The other reason is because they have no case," Trump said. "In other words, why would -- why testify when they have no case?"

Trump had originally indicated he would testify, saying on April 12 that "I would testify, absolutely." But he subsequently appeared to back away from the idea, falsely telling reporters on May 2 that the limited gag order in the case -- which prohibits extrajudicial statements about witnesses and jurors -- prevented him from testifying.

The next day in court, Judge Merchan directly addressed Trump to clarify that he has an "absolute right" to testify and that the limited gag order does not apply to his statements in court.

"I want to stress, Mr. Trump, that you have an absolute right to testify at trial, if that is what you decide to do after consultation with your attorneys," Merchan said.

-Lalee Ibssa, Soo Rin Kim and Kelsey Walsh

In final clash, lawyers spar over retainer instructions

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, at the end of the afternoon's pre-charge conference, argued that the jury's instructions should include that retainer agreements are legally required for lawyers to begin conducting work for a client.

Prosecutors have argued that Trump falsified records because he characterized Michael Cohen's hush money reimbursement as legal expenses pursuant to a retainer agreement. Defense lawyers have argued that Cohen was paid by the company for years and never had a retainer agreement with Trump -- or needed to.

"It is in fact the law," Steinglass said about the requirement to have a retainer.

"We don't think that's right, judge," defense attorney Emil Bove responded.

Judge Juan Merchan said he would review the rules before making a decision.

The judge subsequently ended the conference, telling the attorneys he would aim provide them with the final jury instruction by the end of the day Thursday so they can prepare over the weekend, ahead of the jury getting the case next week.

The proceedings will resume on Tuesday morning with summations.

Judge denies defense language related to 'advice of counsel'

Judge Merchan flatly told the defense that former President Trump could not make an advice-of-counsel argument.

The judge said the defense was being "disingenuous" by raising it now when Trump was given a deadline months ago to say whether he would invoke the defense that, in his conduct, he was relying on the advice of lawyers.

"It was concerning when notice was not given initially. It was concerning when the term was changed to 'presence of counsel.' I couldn't believe when I saw in your submission, 'involvement of counsel,'" Merchan told the defense regarding their efforts to advance that argument.

"My ruling is the jury will not hear that instruction from the bench, nor are you permitted to make that argument, period," Merchan said.

"I am not being disingenuous with Your Honor," defense attorney Emil Bove said before he attempted to argue in favor of the defense.

"You said that already, Mr. Bove," Merchan said. "This is an argument you have been advancing for many many months. ... It is denied. It is not going to happen."

Trump, at the defense table, scribbled a note and passed it to defense attorney Todd Blanche.

Judge will keep original instructions on Cohen's guilty plea

The defense returned to the question of Michael Cohen's 2018 guilty plea and AMI's non-prosecution agreement with the federal government.

Defense attorney Emil Bove called it a "critical issue" the jury could infer Trump's guilt based on his association with Cohen and AMI executive David Pecker.

Prosecutor Josh Steinglass called the curative language the defense suggested "outrageous," and Judge Merchan said he would stick to what he told the jury during the evidentiary phase of the trial: That the guilty plea of Cohen and the non-prosecution agreement of AMI could be used to judge witness credibility -- but could not be used as an inference of the defendant's guilt.

Defense seeks clarification on effect of 'Access Hollywood' tape

Defense lawyers asked Judge Merchan to include an instruction for jurors that clarifies how prominent Republicans and members of the public reacted to the release of the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape.

Witnesses like Trump aides Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout testified about the effect of the video, which led prominent Republicans like John McCain withdrawing their endorsement of Trump and the Republican National Committee considering finding a new candidate.

Prosecutors pushed back on the defense request, describing it as "confusing" and "unnecessary."

"The nature of the reaction by the Republican Party by other prominent Republican senators by other members of the public -- the fact that was the reaction -- had an impact on the listener being the defendant," prosecutor Josh Steinglass argued.

Prosecutors have argued that the immense public backlash to the Access Hollywood motivated Trump to kill the Stormy Daniels story in the days before the election.

Judge Merchan said he would review the relevant portions of the transcript before making a decision, but said he was inclined to agree with the state, suggesting the proposed instruction would be denied.

Attorneys hash out additional jury instructions

Following a break, Judge Merchan told the parties that he had worked through his own notes and asked the lawyers for each side to weigh in on what he might have missed.

The defense sought an instruction about former President Trump regarding bias.

"We don't think that this is necessary, this charge," prosecutor Josh Steinglass said in response. "I don't think instructing the jury that they shouldn't hold bias against the defendant is necessary -- voir dire has satisfied this problem, I think."

The defense also sought an instruction that hush money payments are not inherently illegal. Prosecutors opposed it, arguing the request amounts to the judge making the defense argument for them.

Defense attorney Emil Bove also asked for an instruction that "hush money is not illegal."

"What the defense is asking," Colangelo responded, "is for you to make their argument for them."

The judge agreed with Colangelo, saying that including that language would be "taking it too far."

"I don't think it's necessary," Merchan said.

Defense argues Cohen's tax crime isn't relevant

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that the jury should not consider Michael Cohen's tax crimes as one of the crimes Trump advanced by allegedly falsifying business records when he repaid Cohen for the Stormy Daniels hush payment.

Bove argued that Cohen was unaware of the alleged tax crimes when then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg "grossed up" his reimbursement to accommodate for taxes on the payment.

Cohen testified he did not think of the tax law at the time, telling jurors, "I just wanted to get my money back."

I won't 'change the law,' judge tells defense regarding jury charge

Defense attorney Emil Bove tried to make the argument that this particular case is unusual because Trump is not a typical defendant.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo responded that's precisely why the standard language should be used.

"No one is above the law," he said.

Judge Merchan settled the matter and ruled against the defense.

"I understand what you mean when you say it's an important case," he said. "But what you're asking me to do is to change the law, and I'm not going to do that."

Trump trial updates: Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge's recusal

Jurors to decide Trump hush money case after closing arguments next week

Former president Donald Trump did not testify in the case, which will be on hiatus for the rest of this week after the defense rested

NEW YORK — Donald Trump ’s defense team rested its case Tuesday without calling him to the stand, wrapping up testimony and setting the stage for closing arguments next week in a historic trial that could impact the upcoming presidential election.

A jury of 12 New Yorkers will soon be given the momentous task of issuing judgment in the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president — one who is also the presumptive 2024 Republican nominee and has denounced the proceedings in regular diatribes outside the courtroom.

Jurors, their identities shielded from the public, have spent the last five weeks hearing testimony in the case, in which Trump is charged with falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment before the 2016 presidential election to the adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, who had alleged a sexual encounter with him.

They learned about tabloid “catch and kill” tactics for buying stories and not publishing them, and how Trump’s campaign panicked when the “Access Hollywood” recording , in which he bragged about grabbing women’s genitals, was publicized weeks before the 2016 election. And they listened to darker testimony, too, including Daniels’s depiction of what sounded at times like nonconsensual sex with Trump.

Throughout it all, Trump sat nearby at the defense table, sometimes glowering and sometimes closing his eyes, with a rotating coterie of political allies and acolytes often flocking into the courtroom behind him.

After prosecutors and defense attorneys make their closing arguments next Tuesday, the judge will charge the jury, giving them the complex legal road map meant to guide them toward a verdict. Then the jurors will begin deliberations. Their decision could have far-reaching consequences for American politics and law, with Trump barreling toward a November rematch with President Biden .

Trump hush money trial

Prosecutors and defense attorneys spent Tuesday afternoon at a hearing known as a charging conference, where they sparred over what, exactly, jurors should be told before deliberations. Both sides submitted suggested jury instructions or changes in certain wording, but New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan said he is not likely to accept changes from New York State’s standard jury instructions without good reason.

“Where there are standard pattern instructions, I don’t deviate,” Merchan said. He told attorneys he would send them a draft of his instructions on Thursday, and further discussions or proposed changes could follow from both sides.

How the judge instructs the jury is a pivotal and often dull part of the process. Like reading furniture assembly instructions written in an unfamiliar language, juries can often struggle with the dense terminology of a judge’s charge. It is common during deliberations for panels to ask for specific parts of the charge to be read back to them so they can try to better understand the instructions.

In this trial, Merchan’s charge will be particularly important because of the legal framework that prosecutors built toward indicting Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. That crime can be charged as a misdemeanor, but it can be elevated to a felony if the records were falsified in furtherance of another crime.

Prosecutors argue that the other crime in this case was violating state election law 17-152 — conspiracy to promote or prevent an election . That law makes it a misdemeanor when two or more people “conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”

Prosecutors have said in court that the “unlawful means” at issue in Trump’s case were a violation of federal campaign law — meaning that the charges against him are really a three-step process.

The key witness against Trump , his former lawyer Michael Cohen, testified that he paid $130,000 to Daniels, the adult-film actress, to prevent her from going public with her claim of a night of sex with Trump years earlier. Cohen says he was reimbursed by Trump the following year in payments disguised as a legal retainer. Those transactions, according to prosecutors, amount to falsified business records.

Trump has long assailed this case — along with the three other indictments he faces in Florida, Georgia and Washington, D.C. — as politically motivated. He frequently lambasted the New York prosecution in remarks to reporters in a hallway outside the courtroom.

Leaving court Tuesday, Trump again attacked Merchan, saying the judge, who immigrated to the U.S. from Colombia as a child, was biased against him. “Take a look at where he comes from,” Trump said.

At the charging conference, the prosecutors and defense team debated how best to explain all of the labyrinthine legalese to a jury made up mostly of non-lawyers . The judge’s determinations of the legal threshold for conviction may have a huge impact on what jurors think of the evidence — assuming they can follow the charging language.

While a judge decides the law, a jury’s job is to decide the facts. Throughout a trial, those roles typically do not overlap much. But the charging conference is a pivotal moment when the judge is preparing to formally turn the case over to the jurors — with a set of instructions.

Merchan seemed poised to rule against prosecutors over what may be a critical issue in deliberations — whether to tell the jury that Trump can be convicted if the panel finds that falsified records entries were “reasonably foreseeable” based on his actions.

“I don’t like the reasonably foreseeable language,” Merchan said.

Prosecutors want the jury to be told that Trump’s role in the alleged crimes doesn’t need to be explicit — that he “made or caused” the false business records to be made. But defense attorneys pushed back on that.

Merchan also grew annoyed that the defense team tried to get language into the charge suggesting that Trump made decisions based on the involvement of his lawyers. The judge has previously ruled that since Trump has not sought to make an “advice of counsel” defense, he cannot try to raise the issue with the jury.

“I find it disingenuous,” Merchan said.

When Emil Bove, one of Trump’s attorneys, stood up to speak further, Merchan said: “Please don’t get up. … This is something you have been trying to get through to the jury for many, many months. It’s denied, it’s not going to happen.”

As Merchan made those remarks, Trump muttered something to his attorney Susan Necheles and shook his head slightly. He appeared bothered by the judge’s comments and his decision.

The charging conference, taking place on the 20th day of Trump’s trial, came a few hours after the final witness testimony in the case. Robert Costello, an attorney who had advised Michael Cohen in 2018 and was called by Trump’s side, finished his testimony in the morning, returning after his behavior on the stand greatly angered Merchan a day earlier .

Defense lawyers rested when Costello finished. They did not call Trump, which was a highly risky legal option that never seemed likely — but that Trump repeatedly teased as a possibility in many of his public rants about the trial.

Had Trump taken the stand, prosecutors could have asked him about a host of other issues, including a recent civil court case in which a judge concluded that he and others carried out a financial fraud and his two court losses to the writer E. Jean Carroll, who sued him for defamation.

During his second day on the stand, Costello was less confrontational with the judge, though he grew testy when a prosecutor suggested he was operating on behalf of Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump when he gave Cohen legal advice in 2018. Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger read an email in which Costello, writing about Cohen, said, “perhaps we have been played here.”

“Do you want me to explain it?” Costello asked.

“No,” Hoffinger replied.

When she asked a follow-up question, Costello replied sarcastically, “Now, you do want me to explain it?”

The defense had called Costello as part of their broader effort to paint Cohen, the most critical witness against Trump, as an untrustworthy liar. Prosecutors, in turn, attacked Costello, suggesting he worked in 2018 as a kind of stalking horse for then-President Trump and Giuliani, a longtime personal friend of Costello’s.

Hoffinger pointedly asked Costello if he was trying to exact his own kind of revenge against Cohen after their legal discussions soured.

“You still have a lot of animosity against Michael Cohen don’t you?” she asked. Costello denied that he did.

She then noted that he testified last week to the House of Representatives about Cohen, at the time that Cohen was testifying in Trump’s trial.

“It was an effort by you to intimidate Michael Cohen?” Hoffinger asked.

“Ridiculous, no,” Costello answered.

Bove finished up the evidentiary portion of the trial by asking questions aimed at showing that Costello, like most everyone else who dealt with Cohen , found him to be an erratic and unbelievable hothead.

“Did you ever pressure Michael Cohen to do anything?” Bove asked.

“I did not,” Costello replied.

“Did you ever have control over Michael Cohen?” Bove asked.

“Completely not,” Costello said.

Berman reported from Washington. Marianne LeVine in New York contributed to this report.

Trump New York hush money case

Former president Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial is underway in New York. Follow live updates from the trial.

Key witnesses: Several key witnesses, including David Pecker and Stormy Daniels, have taken the stand. Here’s what Daniels said during her testimony . Read full transcripts from the trial .

Gag order: New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan has twice ruled that Trump violated his gag order , which prohibits him from commenting on jurors and witnesses in the case, among others. Here are all of the times Trump has violated the gag order .

The case: The investigation involves a $130,000 payment made to Daniels, an adult-film actress , during the 2016 presidential campaign. It’s one of many ongoing investigations involving Trump . Here are some of the key people in the case .

The charges: Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Falsifying business records is a felony in New York when there is an “intent to defraud” that includes an intent to “commit another crime or to aid or conceal” another crime. He has pleaded not guilty . Here’s what to know about the charges — and any potential sentence .

IMAGES

Preparing for PhD Defense: The Ultimate Guide, dissertation defense tips
PhD in Law
Defending a PhD thesis like a boss!- an in-depth Guide
Preparing For Your PhD Oral Defense: Tips And Tricks
What Is A Dissertation Defense?: Dissertation Defense Tips For PhDs ( PhD Defense )
Mastering Your Thesis Defense: An In-depth Guide

VIDEO

A week as a Cambridge PhD student
How was my PhD at Sant'Anna: Let's meet Guilherme Pratti Dos Santos Magioli, PhD student in Law
Phd Defence of Talitha R.M. Dubow
G.K Goswami, Mr. IPS. LLM, PhD (Law). M.Sc., Topic: Wrongful convictions and challenges in India
What Matters for Your PhD Defense Talk
Talk

COMMENTS

PhD in Law
Ph.D. students must successfully complete a minimum of 90 credits including at least 60 course credits and 27 dissertation credits (LAW 800—minimum two credit hours per quarter). With the approval of the Ph.D. Program Director and Steering Committee, an appropriate master's degree from an accredited institution may substitute for up to a ...
Security Studies
Security Studies. This five-year program is designed to prepare Ph.D. students for rigorous, policy-relevant research on the major threats to international and national security and the relevant strategies, institutions, and capabilities that will be needed to confront those threats. Topics of study include: Grand strategies of the major powers.
PhD Defence Process: A Comprehensive Guide for 2024
The PhD defence, also known as the viva voce or oral examination, is a pivotal moment in the life of a doctoral candidate. PhD defence is not merely a ritualistic ceremony; rather, it serves as a platform for scholars to present, defend, and elucidate the findings and implications of their research. The defence is the crucible where ideas are ...
S.J.D. Program
The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) is Harvard Law School's most advanced law degree, designed for aspiring legal academics who wish to pursue sustained independent study, research and writing. In recent years we have created a vibrant intellectual community of young scholars from around the world, most of whom will secure teaching positions in their […]
Criminology, Law and Society Ph.D. program
The Ph.D. program in Criminology, Law and Society is ranked #2 in the US News and World Reports rankings. The program focuses on the causes, manifestations, and consequences of crime; the impacts of crime on society; social regulation; the civil justice system; the social and cultural contexts of law; and the interactive effects of law and society.
Ph.D. in Law
The Ph.D. in Law prepares graduates for global leadership in the judiciary, academia, business and government. Since 1966, the program has offered a select number of diverse students the opportunity to attain their highest professional aspirations and career goals. A preeminent center for interdisciplinary legal studies, UW Law offers a global ...
The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) Program
Bios of Current S.J.D. Candidates The Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.) is a research doctorate in law and is the highest degree conferred by the University of Virginia School of Law. It is designed for highly qualified, independent students who wish to pursue an extended program of research under the supervision of a faculty member, leading to the submission of a dissertation that makes an ...
Ph.D. Program
The deadline for submission of all materials is December 15. Applicants to the Ph.D. in Law program must complete a J.D. degree at a U.S. law school before they matriculate and begin the Ph.D. program. Any questions about the program may be directed to Gordon Silverstein, Assistant Dean for Graduate Programs, at [email protected].
PhD Justice, Law & Criminology
The PhD in Justice, Law & Criminology is a 36-credit-hour program for students who already have a related master's degree. To estimate the cost of tuition, please see the current cost per credit hour for graduate students.. Unless applicants expect to be funded through a reliable external source, they must request consideration for funding on their application.
Doctor of Science of Law (JSD)
The Doctor of the Science of Law (JSD) is the Law School's most advanced law degree, and is considered a doctorate equivalent to a Ph.D. It is designed for those interested in becoming scholars and teachers of law including interdisciplinary approaches to law. Study toward the degree is open only to a small number of exceptionally well ...
Law and Political Science
In recent years, students from Stanford's JD/PhD program in political science have joined the faculties at Columbia, MIT, Cornell, Northwestern, the University of Southern California, the University of San Diego, and elsewhere. Others have pursued careers in government, research institutes, or private law practice.
Preparing for a PhD Defense
Nominate a Faculty Member to Serve as Chair for Your Defense. A chair is appointed for each PhD oral defense to monitor and promote fairness and rigor in the conduct of the defense. To help eliminate pre-established judgments on the candidate's work, the chair should be from a different program/department than the student.
Everything You Need To Know Before Doing A PhD In Law
First things first - a Ph.D. in Law is no sprint. It's a marathon, a scholarly expedition into the depths of legal academia. While the specific timeline can vary, the average duration is typically three to five years. Moreover, It's not just a degree; it's a commitment to becoming the Jedi Master of your legal niche.
Admission to the defense
Schedule. Please allow for a period of six months before the estimated date of your defense ceremony to arrange such matters as the application for a date of defense and the appointment of your PhD committee, the approval of your manuscript by the PhD committee, printing your thesis, and submitting 35 copies to the Secretariat of the Doctorate ...
Doctoral Programs
Ph.D. Berkeley Law's Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program offers a unique interdisciplinary graduate program leading to Ph.D. degrees for students interested in the scholarly study of legal ideas and institutions, policy analysis and applied research, and other areas. Learn more here.
2024 Best Law Schools
Here are the 2024 Best Law Schools. Stanford University. Yale University. University of Chicago. Duke University. Harvard University. University of Pennsylvania (Carey) University of Virginia ...
iCourts PhD in Law
Coursework: The University of Copenhagen Faculty of Law requires 30 units of ECTS coursework (the equivalent of 6 months of full-time course work) at the PhD level. Northwestern coursework may be used to fulfill this requirement if courses are considered to be above masters level. The head of the Phd school at the Faculty of Law must approve ...
List of Cybersecurity PhD Programs
$17,580 is the most affordable PhD program option and it is available at the Georgia Institute of Technology. ... (OpSec) strategy and policy * Network infrastructure and defense * Cybersecurity law and policy * The vulnerabilities of biometrics * The role of ethical hacking * Cybersecurity forensics and enforcement ...
Defending your doctoral thesis: the PhD viva
Once you have submitted your thesis you will be invited to defend your doctorate at a 'viva voce' (Latin for 'by live voice') or oral examination. The thesis defence can be a daunting prospect, but many people really enjoy this experience of discussing their PhD research with genuinely interested experts. It can also be a useful networking ...
PhD at the Faculty of Law
Doing a PHD. at the Faculty of Law and Criminology. If you are interested in scholarly research, you may consider starting a PhD after your initial studies. Doing a PhD offers you the possibility of focussing intensively on one specific scholarly topic during a number of years while you develop your skills and talents in a number of areas.
PhD programmes
Defence Studies Research MPhil/PhD. The Defence Studies Department's unique position as an academic department based at the Defence Academy heavily influences its research. Sitting at the heart of security and defence education in the United Kingdom, it is able to draw on the experiences and knowledge of not only UK military officers, but ...
PhD in Law and Security
This course will be discontinued at the end of the 2023/24 academic year. The Law and Security specialisation is available in the PhD in Law. Law and Security represent an emerging scientific area in Portugal, reflecting the multidisciplinary and diverse nature of knowledge most relevant to the current context, both national and international ...
PhD Programme in Law
For example read more about the PhD Programme in Law programme director and the doctoral counsellor. Read about our staff members. Vacancies. Take a look at the list of doctoral positions at the Amsterdam Law School. View doctoral vacancies. Contact. If you are thinking of applying for a PhD programma and have any further questions, go to the ...
What to watch for in Trump trial's closing arguments, from a law school
For the defense, its closing argument should include an equally direct statement, much like what Trump defense attorney Todd Blanche has said: "President Trump is innocent. President Trump did ...
Kansas Public Defense has fewer than one-third of needed attorneys
Also, public defense is competing with a relatively small number of law school graduates. The two law schools in Kansas, the University of Kansas and Washburn University, had a combine 228 ...
Protesters: Arizona Diamondbacks owner wants tougher immigration law
Barrio Defense Committees, led by Phoenix-based advocate Salvador Reza, and a group of about 10 protesters were adjacent to Chase Field's west side to accuse Ken Kendrick's wife of helping to fund ...
Judge in Trump's hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert
The defense rested its case on Tuesday after calling two witnesses to testify — Daniel Sitko, a paralegal who works in the law office of Trump attorney Todd Blanche, and Robert Costello, a former federal prosecutor in New York.
Trump trial updates: Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge ...
May 23, 12:41 PM Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge's recusal. New York's Appellate Division has upheld Judge Juan Merchan's decision not to recuse himself from former President Trump's ...
Karen Read trial: Defense grills Brian Higgins on the fate of his
On the stand Friday: Brian Higgins, Sandwich, MA; 4:45 p.m. update: Defense grills Brian Higgins on the fate of his cellphone, SIM card Brian Higgins's testimony came to an explosive finish ...
Trump's defense rests in hush money trial; closing arguments begin next
8 min. NEW YORK — Donald Trump 's defense team rested its case Tuesday without calling him to the stand, wrapping up testimony and setting the stage for closing arguments next week in a ...