Founding and Managing Counsel at Schroeder Law PLLC

00:57:45

Subscribe and listen on…

Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts

Watch Full Interview | View Show Notes | View Transcript

The highly respected Franceska Schroeder, Founding and Managing Counsel at Schroeder Law PLLC, discusses her niche and growing area of space law, the power of mentoring and paying it forward, and founding her own firm.

Relevant episode links:

Schroeder Law, Michelle Hanlon - Past Episode, Fish

About Franceska Schroeder:

Franceska Schroeder is the Managing Member of Schroeder Law PLLC, a Washington, D.C. firm that focuses on space and national security law. Clients turn to Ms. Schroeder for help with complex issues involving licensing and regulation of spacecraft and launch projects, compliance with U.S. export controls and economic sanctions, drafting and negotiating commercial and government contracts, liability and risk management, and legislative and policy matters.

Ms. Schroeder’s clients include aerospace and defense contractors, satellite manufacturers and operators, launch services providers, systems engineering firms, software companies, insurance brokers and underwriters, and investors in high-technology projects. She is Legal Counsel to the American Astronautical Society and has served as a Private Sector Advisor to the U.S. Delegation to the Legal Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. In 2012, Ms. Schroeder was appointed to the NASA Advisory Council’s Commercial Space Committee and in 2014 was elected a Fellow of the American Astronautical Society. Ms. Schroeder also is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Nebraska School of Law, where she co-teaches a course on Space and Satellite Business Law.

I’m very pleased to have to join us, Franceska Schroeder, the Founding and Managing Council at Schroeder Law and previously Principal at Fish and Richardson, with an interesting transactional practice related to space, satellites and everything else in between. Welcome.

Thank you so much. I'm so happy to be with you.

I was pleased to be introduced to you and learn about your practice. I hope that folks will find that interesting on the show. For some of your journey in the law, you have some interesting stories in terms of mentoring and your journey to finding what it was that you wanted to do and focus on in the law. I want to start first with the founding question of what drew you to the law and what inspired you to go to law school, to begin with.

I have perhaps an unusual answer to that. I wasn't attracted to the law. I love being a lawyer. Now I'm attracted to the law. Years ago, when I started this journey, I was interested in doing something interesting that would allow me to engage in international transactions. I studied Russian, German, Foreign Policy, politics of Europe and the United States, political history and foreign policy history at Tufts University.

I knew I wanted to do something international. I didn't think I wanted to be a lawyer. I thought that would be boring and trite. Everybody is a lawyer. I didn't want to do that, even though that was what my mother wanted me to do. In the end, she knew me better than I knew myself. I had a great interest in all things international and I was good at foreign languages.

I got a job working for the Federal government in the intelligence community. I was able to work on issues that allowed me to practice my Russian and German professionally. I thought that was amazing. In the course of that activity, I was introduced to the space community, which I thought was fascinating. I have always had a love of space from a child. I'm a child of the Apollo era. I thought, “This is fascinating. I can put together my love of space and things international and make a career out of it. This is great.” Through that work, I learned about this discipline called space law. I said, “I am going to law school because I want to be a space lawyer.” It wasn't the law.

When I went to law school, I originally thought I wanted to do international law. I concluded the opposite of that. I went, “No way, am I doing international law.” It didn't seem like what I thought it would be. I was like, “This is way too much transactional.” We are not talking about litigation and storytelling in that context. I said, “No, I'm going to change direction.”

What is interesting from that is you said, “I can put together all of these things that I have an interest in.” Space law is only has entered the lexicon that people are talking outside of academia about. Maybe it is with the new space and all of the renewed interest in space exploration but that is not something that I even was conscious of. It is unique that you found both of these things and said, “I can put those together.”

Being in the national security community, which has relied on space assets since the ‘50s, it is true. I had a unique insight into what would be available and what was going on that might not be immediately obvious in a purely private sector context but it existed. I knew it existed because private sector companies were serving national security. The major aerospace and defense companies were working commercially as private sector actors were serving the national security community, the Armed Forces and all elements of US Defense and National Security.

There was this thing called NASA that was advancing human space exploration and deep space exploration. It was going on but you are right. As a legal discipline, when I told people, including my family, that I wanted to be a space lawyer, they were like, “Let's say what she does with this one.” Miraculously, it worked out but I was tenacious. I relied heavily on the benevolence of my mentors and my tenacity and the tremendous support of my family.

There are stories like that throughout the show of people putting together things that are unique interests or skills they have and combining them into a practice area or an area on the bench or in academia that is the perfect fit for all of their backgrounds and interests. I haven't heard such a story of cutting-edge being in a situation where you are able to discover a newly developing area of the law that would only develop more in the future and pursue that into law school. That is a unique story and unique in how you had to carve a path. You are not only carving a unique path in practice. What does that look like?

I had great mentors who were critical in helping me fulfill my dreams. Among my most critical mentors, because you look back and they were all critical and played an incredibly critical role at that moment, the first one was the general counsel of the agency for which I worked. It was amazing that I had the guts. It is purely out of ignorance and naivete of a young woman in her early twenties. I figured, “The general counsel of this huge agency will talk to me.

It is good not to know, Franceska. That is what I found when I did stuff like that, especially early on, people look horrified and you're like, “I didn't know any different.” That comes across. You are authentic and genuine. Nobody thinks you are trying to overstep or anything. You are out there.

That is how she received it, which was wonderful for me and we hit it off. This was when I was not in law school. This was when I was still working on space issues but not as a lawyer. She said, “Yes, you should go to law school and focus on these areas of law.” She recommended administrative law, regulatory law, international trade and export control. She knew because she was one of the most senior people in the legal field in the national security realm. She helped me choose my classes and my law journal note and comment.

When I went back, I was a summer associate at the agency and that was great. At the same time, I met my space law professor at American University, Washington College of Law, where I went to school. She and I hit it off. She became another incredible mentor for me. I said, “I want to practice in this area and I like to do transactional work as opposed to the work of a government lawyer.” It would have been equally fantastic but I'm a New Yorker. I love big business. My family didn't understand why I didn't want to grow up and work on Wall Street. That would have been the normal path for me.

I still had that interest. I'm like, “How can I marry my love of business and national security and space? How can I put all of that together?” I work for a big New York law firm. That will do it. Luckily, my space law professor, who at that moment became an incredibly critical mentor, said, “One of my friends, who is a partner at a big New York law firm, is looking for an associate. I'm going to recommend you.” That is how I got my first job, which was right out of law school. I clerked for that firm in the DC office in the spring semester of my third year of law school. I became an associate that fall. My friends in the government understood and they supported me. It was a happy outcome.

I'm glad you mentioned the mentoring aspect because that is something we talk about too. The role that mentors can play and how you come upon them. Sometimes, especially newer lawyers, say, “We heard about mentors. It is good to have them but how does that work?” One of the most successful ways is to have it be organic, which it was in both circumstances you mentioned. You did outreach. It just didn't happen but there were people that you were in your orbit or you were otherwise working with.

I am such a believer in mentorship. Everyone I have ever hired has been the result of coming to me personally through contact and outreach of sorts. I was a judge in a space law mood court competition. One of the students I thought had the best oral argument even though his team didn't win. Afterward, he reached out and said, “I would like to work in this field.” Long story short, we hired him. I have half a dozen stories like that, where the person who comes to me is someone I met in that context. They were in some event where I was playing a role like a court competition.

I co-teach Space and Satellite Business Law at the University of Nebraska College of Law. I encourage my students to reach out to me and my co-teacher, Dennis Burnett. He was one of my mentors. He was my first boss at Haight Gardner. We are still together several years later. We are co-teaching this class. I encourage the students to reach out to me and they do, which is rewarding.

Through my friends at NASA and the FAA, the lawyers at those agencies where I work represent my clients. If a student comes to them and says, “I like to work in private practice in this field. Do you have anyone with whom I could speak?” They always recommend me. I meet with these students.

I have had that experience in my law teaching. People who are in my clinics, I recommend them for other things if they don't want to do appellate law but are talented to suggest them for clerkships, externships or jobs in other places. I continue to keep up with them. In some cases, I have hired people directly, seeing their work and seeing they have a certain talent and thing that, if developed, they could be good at this and to be part of that with someone is rewarding.

By virtue of being a partner in a big law firm, I have been on recruiting committees. Naturally, I have interviewed applicants who came to us through on-campus recruiting, headhunters or whatever the situation might be. Some of those people turned out to be great lawyers but not necessarily space lawyers. My field is a niche so you need somebody who wants to work in this field.

The same thing for me with the appellate. You need to have that.

It is not generic commercial transactions, which are great and provide a whole other different set of fun things to do but it is not like that. It is so niche that you have to like what it is, unlike appellate. On the niche factor, you have to like the industry and want to understand how a rocket flies, how satellites work, how life support systems are critical to space exploration and how power sources are critical. One day you might be representing the spacesuit manufacturer, the satellite manufacturer, the launch service provider or the launch facility operator.

It is important litigation. Sometimes as an appellate lawyer, I have found you have to understand the business or the industry in some cases because you have to explain to the court why a certain rule of law and why the law should work this way and not that way because of the way the industry works. It might be a different animal.

I have had some cases involving franchise law. How the court understands how the business works, what the relationships are there, what the incentives are and how it operates. If the court understands that, the ruling goes one way. If, for some reason, you haven't managed to explain that in a fulsome way, the ruling goes the other way. It is still important to present the case and have people and the court understand the real-world implications of a ruling.

You want people on your team who appreciate all the things you said because, in our case, not winning or losing because we are not litigators but it will make the difference between the client feeling confident in your work and your representation of their interests and not.

This is a good time to talk about, more tangibly, what are some of the things you do and how they work. The confidence level is important because people are making decisions for their companies for major things like where they are going to put their money, all of that stuff, based on how confident they feel about what you are working on. Can you give a couple of examples of what you are talking about?

One big area which is a good illustration of our practice is the space industry and defense industry or space and national security. The two are, not always but often, inextricably linked. Space assets, whether they are launch vehicles, satellites, components thereof, elements of the facilities, factories, launch facilities or other elements of those tangible assets, the satellite and rocket, are critical to not only US economic security but US national security.

The satellite and the rocket are critical to the US economic security and the US national security.

The United States is a leader in space science and exploration. We want to maintain that leadership. That doesn't mean we don't want to partner with our friends and create amazing things like the International Space Station, which is a phenomenal multinational engineering marvel and an example of the triumph of the human spirit. We have astronauts living in space constantly for years.

All of these elements are controlled for export because the United States wants to maintain an understanding and a level of control of where these things are going. We don't want this sensitive technology to end up in the wrong hands, our enemies or terrorists. We don't want them to be reverse-engineered and used against us. We don't want them to be confiscated or intercepted in terms of a shipment and used against us, ending up in an arms market and they are used against our troops.

The United States, by law and by regulation, maintains strict controls on the international trade of these commodities and technology. We help clients understand and navigate all of those laws and rules. Sometimes, that requires applying for and obtaining a license to perform the export or exchange of information with foreign nationals.

We help assess whether or not a license is required. If so, we help them obtain the license. We also spend a considerable amount of time helping them comply because the obligation to comply is an ongoing responsibility. It is layered and complex. It is not necessarily intuitive. It will vary from one commodity to another. Some satellites are controlled at the highest levels, while others are not. We have to help clients understand that difference. We need input from them because nobody knows a technical capability better than the inventor or the company that is creating the asset.

We take all the technical input from our client and those are the facts that we apply those technical facts to the law. We come up with answers. We work hand in hand on that analysis. That is what gives them comfort because we understand the technical. We can't build it. We can't do the math entirely. We need them to do that but they don't understand how to parse the regulation. They might not understand the spirit behind the law. It is important to follow not only the black letter law but also the spirit of the law.

Different agencies could be involved in licensing and regulation.

Depending on the level of sensitivity and control, the most sensitive technology is controlled by the State Department under the International Traffic and Arms Regulations and dual-use commodities, which may have a military application but for the most part, have civil or commercial applications. That is why they are called dual use. Those are controlled by the Department of Commerce.

The Department of the Treasury maintains a series of trade embargoes and economic sanctions programs, which you will hear about in the news a lot because they have been levied against Russia, Putin and the oligarchs. That is an entirely different regime administered by the Treasury, specifically the Office of Foreign Assets Control. We also advise clients on how to comply with sanctions regulations and those trade embargoes. Those are the three main agencies with respect to international trade.

One thing I'm aware of is that there has been a change in recent years, an expansion of those who might be involved in space issues. I was in a class with Chaneta Sullivan. She taught a class about the business of space law from a business perspective, with a little bit of law in it but mainly the business of space. Many people were both in that class and talking about a lot of newer space companies with the privatization of a lot of the work in that area.

A lot of countries have space agencies that you would never imagine would have space agencies, someone from the Rwanda Space Agency and all of these different places in Africa. The democratization of space at the government level is interesting. I was wondering if any of those trends have impacted the issues you look at or how you advise clients.

We represent both the large legacy aerospace and defense contractors but we also represent startup companies. It is exciting to see both ends of that spectrum and how they interact with each other. That is wonderful. A lot of our practice is transactional. We advise clients on commercial contracts and government contracts that regard these technologies.

The role of these new players is critical because they might have a new way of wanting to do something. They might want to cause a paradigm shift. We help work through those issues and negotiate maybe a successful new approach. Maybe it won't be successful but let's talk about it as opposed to when the industry was a little more insular. There wasn't a whole lot of discussion about how to frame a particular issue in a contract. Now there will be a greater conversation around that, which is exciting.

It is always neat to be on the cutting edge of things where you are figuring out how do we accommodate and work with all of these different actors.

There is a UN office. It is called the United States Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. There is a scientific and technical committee and also a legal subcommittee. For many years, I served as a private sector advisor to the US delegation to the legal subcommittee. That was an amazing experience because every country that is a member state of the outer space treaty has a seat in this legal subcommittee.

For years, I have been hearing about what other countries are doing and countries that you wouldn't immediately think of. We all know that France and Europe do a lot in space. Russia, China and India are huge. There are a lot of countries that are known players in space. There are all of these new entrants. It is exciting to see that they want a seat at this table. They need the commitment of their government to make it happen. It is a capital-intensive enterprise. Historically, it has been only the purview of governments.

It is exciting to see countries shift from an activity being exclusively the purview of that government to being the responsibility or given an opportunity to a private sector actor within that country. The UK is coming on strong in this area. For years, Australia has been developing a robust space industry. All over Southeast Asia are huge. I don't mean to exclude any country. I mean the whole globe.

What struck me was the people who were active in this area that I hadn't been paying attention to it and I hadn't seen. I thought the traditional large government actors with a lot of money who are able to do that. Many countries = want to become involved. It is an interesting time to be working on these issues and propelling them forward

It is a testament to the criticality of space in everybody's everyday life all over the world. If all the satellites, God forbid, were turned off one day, the whole world would be a wreck. We rely on space assets for communication, video, telemedicine, education and geolocation positioning. The list is endless. Why shouldn't everybody in the world have that asset and have the opportunities that those assets provide? It reinforces what we space geeks have known all along. They can't live without satellites. We can't live without launch vehicles.

Traditionally, in space exploration, there is the question of, “What technology can be brought back to earth to use in new ways? How many advances does that provide to society?” There's also the other part, which we actively use the satellites and space activity for our day-to-day connection and a lot of things wouldn't be possible without those, in addition to the other technological advances so it is becoming more important.

I'm glad you are able to talk about some of those examples and what it means to you to be involved in space law because sometimes it could be vague and amorphous. It might be hard for someone to figure out if it would be something they would enjoy doing. Michelle Hanlon was on in the early days of the show talking about, from her standpoint, what is involved in the academic approach, which is much more a treaty-based approach to it. That is one facet but you are working with another facet. It is not uniform. Those involved in space law have many different aspects to it.

It varies considerably, not only between academia and the private sector but working in government. If my career had taken that path, I'm sure it would have been incredibly rewarding because the issues are also cutting edge. The government has to be responsive to how the industry is advancing and in other cases, the government wants to be a step ahead. They have to think creatively about being a government lawyer in this field.

There are many opportunities, FAA, commerce, state and NOAA, which is part of commerce. NOAA is very active in commercial space. All of the remote sensing satellites are US commercial remote sensing satellites. The sensors on board are licensed and regulated by NOAA. FAA is incredibly important with launch facilities and payload reviews. The opportunities are significant. The intelligence community, DOD and all that whole realm are fascinating and incredibly cutting-edge.

You have the business end of it, which is like what I do. I do some of the government elements of it because we advise on regulatory issues. Part of our bread and butter is the regulatory element. It is business-heavy. We do a lot of risk management, transactional work and contracts. It is a wonderful mix of regulatory and transactional.

Thank you so much for doing this. It is interesting for you to talk about all of the different aspects of the practice and your practice, in particular, that combination of the regulatory and transactional. It is not something that people think of or put together. What advice would you give to someone who might be interested in doing what you do or becoming involved in some other way with space law?

I strongly recommend choosing a law school that offers a course in space law and a lot of schools do, which is wonderful. It is not just DC or New York area schools. You can find schools all over the country. There is a big program in Nebraska. We have an LLM program, which is exciting. The program is part of the space, cyber and telecom programs. It is terrific. Maybe I'm biased but it is great. There are in Mississippi and Denver. The schools are all over.

Choose a law school that offers at least one class in space law and take all the classes that will teach you the basics of the legal disciplines you will be focusing on for your clients. Take international trade. There might even be a course specifically in export control. Nebraska offers that. We have a dedicated class on export control, which deals not with space assets but with the concepts that are applicable to space assets.

Administrative law is critical. Different kinds of classes and government contracts. The issues you will need to know to serve your clients, get that foundation in law school. Be a good writer because everything we do is writing something that explains to the client what needs to happen or writing for the client to protect them and advance their interests. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is. When we grade exams, we always assign a space for our final exam questions. It is an open book. What we are looking for is coherent thinking because that is what a client is going to demand. As an appellate lawyer, you sure know that.

Get that foundation in law school, and then be a good writer because everything we do is writing something that explains to the client what needs to happen or writing for the client to protect them, to advance their interests.

I hadn't thought about that but like my work, a lot of it is written advocacy.

Look for internships that are in the field, federal agencies and companies in the industry. Networking is incredibly important. Reach out to people like me. I will take your call and answer your email. I might not be able to help you depending on what it is you are asking but I'm certainly willing to listen. My colleagues are willing too. It is not just me. We tend to be a tightly-knit community. It is because we are all passionate about the field. We want people in the field who are going to participate in the joy of it. We have fun. If somebody says to me and I just met this student or this young lawyer who wants to shift or whoever it is, I'm happy to listen, share and maybe come up with a good opportunity.

The joy of what you are doing and how you are contributing leads you to generosity in large part. We want others to share the joy of what we are doing. I don't think you hear the word joy too much in connection with the practice of law. I'm spending a lot of my time doing this. It should be something that brings me joy, that I feel that I'm doing something meaningful and contributing by doing this. Sometimes people forget that part of the equation in choosing what they do. It is a good reminder.

I was reluctant to say it because I thought it might sound silly but I mean it. If you speak to my colleagues, I'm confident you will hear the same thing.

I hadn't heard it expressed that way. I have certainly seen the intellectual curiosity and generosity in the space. I hadn't attributed to what you said until I'm thinking, “That is the common thread.”

I always tell Kelsey, my associate, this and she agrees. Not that I'm telling her something she doesn't already know but I would never want to do this alone. I would never want to be a solo practitioner. I don't think these issues lend themselves to being analyzed in a vacuum. We brainstorm continually because maybe I have looked at this issue too long. I need a fresh pair of eyes.

Maybe I'm not thinking creatively enough. I need to bounce it off with somebody. I am thinking creatively and I want somebody to either validate my thought or say to me, “It is a little bit too far out.” The other side will never go for that but let’s give it a shot. I don't want to have that conversation internally. I want to have it with somebody else who is invested in a good outcome.

I relate to that. I have the same feeling. In my space, in appellate law, some sole practitioners are perfectly happy operating that way and that is how they roll. I feel the same thing. I feel like I like the bouncing ideas back and forth. That is how you come to some new approaches to things. Were you missing something? Were you blind to something? How do we analogize other areas? How do we push the envelope? That only comes from informed brainstorming. That is funny that you said that. I was like, “No, I can't do that either.” Some people can and I'm sure they can in your space too. I always build a better product.

I have good friends who are successful in their solo practice doing other kinds of law. Some are litigators. They get that back and forth from being in a courtroom, deposing somebody or talking about scheduling. They get that interaction but I wouldn't. Appellate is more like me.

We are not generally out there engaging in the same way that people on the grounds, the trial lawyers and litigators are. That is good advice to think about the subject matters and the areas that might be impacted. You might want to know about having a good foundation for space law. That is good. There are a lot of strong space law LLMs at different institutions within the US. You don't need to go. I know Michelle Hanlon. I try to go to Miguel to get hers.

Everybody comes to Nebraska.

It is neat to know that those are available and discreet classes are being taught in space law in different schools, which was not the case when I was in law school. It is neat to see that.

A friend of mine from NASA teaches at Yale. There are all over the country.

There can be some exposure to that. You can see if you like it and are interested in it, which is nice.

You have to choose an elective. Give space law a shot.

It does intersect so many different things and industries, even if you aren't directly in the space industry that is good to know about.

Our practice does not include finance but space project finance is a big field. For many years, I worked at a firm where that was a big deal. I liked it but it was more on the finance side than it was playing with the space stuff. If you are interested in finance, space is another avenue for exploring a career in finance.

There are many different aspects to it and that is partly why people scratch their heads about space law. What is that exactly? What is neat about it is it is law generally. There are so many different things you can do within the law. You can do different things throughout your legal career and learn new things. It adapts to a lot of different skills and wherever your strengths are.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention intellectual property because I was a partner at Fish forever.

You have to mention the IP part.

I had a fantastic career at Fish and loved it. We co-counsel regularly because Schroder Law doesn't do IP but Fish does. They know what I do. We have a great relationship. As we have discussed previously, I felt like I knew how to do it now. I wanted to do space and national security on my own with Kelsey. That is what we are doing. However, I'm very happy to have friends still in big law firms that do the things that we don't do, like finance, litigation, corporate formation and IP. Those fields are available to space lawyers. That would be your specialty. You would come to me for a regulatory issue, transactional issue or issue regarding risk management.

I was wondering about that too because sometimes I know, in transactional realms and corporate realms, the premise or idea usually is to do bigger deals. You should be at a larger platform firm because there are so many different disciplines you need to participate in the transaction. It is hard to have your practice do that. What you are talking about is saying, “We have our targeted practice. We can build it out by these collaborating and partnerships with other firms.”

Space is capital intensive. Deals tend to be huge because of the amount of money involved. What happens is we are brought in by the deal council to advise on the specific space industry issues. It is terrific.

It is good to have those relationships.

Few firms would have this level of knowledge and experience. I have been doing this for decades. I don't know how to write a loan document. It works out well.

I wonder if that is part of a niche specialty situation. That is true for appellate law. A lot of times, the trial lawyers will call us, as well as the client, saying, “We are going to raise our hand and say this is a good time.” We know when a good time to call this specialty in. It is now. This is when it is good to collaborate. There are many parallels between the appellate practice and a litigation setting but yours is transactional.

I have had this conversation with other appellate lawyers in the past. One of my neighbors is an appellate lawyer. We have talked about the similarities that you and I are talking about.

I also took a class with Brian Israel and I kept saying, “There are parallels.” He kept thinking, “Maybe you are only seeing them because that is what you know.” It was funny. I was like, “I see a lot of this.” It is always interesting to keep your mind open about where there are similarities where you can understand different aspects of practices. It is nice to expand your mind a little bit to see you continue forward in your legal career. I have a question. You were developing a field in a cutting-edge role. There weren't many people doing that, to begin with. Were there many women doing it? That is my next question.

I was very fortunate to have female mentors who truly were pioneers. As I was coming into the field, more women were coming into the field but we were still few. It is growing, which is fantastic. It is one of those evolutions you could probably predict. There were few women several years ago. With every passing decade, there are more women.

I did feel a little alone early in my career but I didn't pay attention to it. Not that I ignored it. I knew it was there. I wouldn't be naive about it. We can have a whole other episode on that anecdote good and bad. I tried to put it in a box and shelf and never forget that it was there because I didn't want to fool myself but plow through. The good news is that women coming up now, young lawyers who are in the early part of their careers, still need to recognize that discrimination is out there. They are forging a new path that this generation is demanding to be treated differently, which is fantastic. I love watching it.

Women coming up now, young lawyers in the early part of their careers, still need to recognize that the discrimination is out there. But they are forging a new path that this generation demands to treat them differently, which is absolutely fantastic.

It is different from our experience. I had the same perspective on it, which was to put your head down, move forward and try not to think about that too much. The newer generation does not proceed in that manner. It is like, “That is good to see that you are a little more assertive about that.” It is a good evolution. You are doing your part with your colleague in your firm to nurture the next generation of women lawyers in the space.

I have mentored several women lawyers who are in the field working in all different areas and government industries. I'm very proud of that.

There is a certain point in your career where you are thinking, “I'm not going to be doing this forever. What about the next group and the next generation? How do I make sure it is a strong bar and practice into the future?”

I do think about that. I have no desire to retire. What would I do? I play with space things.

There is a mindset. There is a switch that goes on at a certain point in your career when you are paying attention to that. You are willing to put some time towards that in a way that you might not have earlier.

One of the young woman lawyers is fantastic. She will be a leader in the field in the not-too-distant future. She and some other young lawyers were speaking on a panel. She said to me, “I can't believe they are letting the children speak.” I said, “You are not children.” She was joking. I said, “We are lucky to have you. You are the next generation. You better get up on that panel and say what you have. I want to hear it.”

It goes in the same category as what you were talking about in terms of brainstorming and having ideas. It benefits the profession now to have that dialogue back and forth and to hear different perspectives because they can have an impact in starting to develop where things go now instead of waiting for that.

That is unique to practicing in an area that remains cut in many ways because there are a lot more people who want to hear and things aren't set. People want to hear different perspectives, where we should go and what views you have about where the law might go here as opposed to, “We have had this law for many years and it is set.” Your teaching does that too. In teaching, you are contributing in that way.

Whenever the conversation in class becomes esoteric and theoretical, I'm like, “We are training practitioners. That is a fascinating issue to think about but that won't be on the exam.”

Those of us in practice play an important role in the academic realm for law students because there can be a lot of that theory like, “Here is how it goes down. Here is the context in which you are going to encounter this or have to work through this problem.” In my case, they are litigating appeals and working through them in real time. That is invaluable as opposed to purely theoretical. The students appreciate that too.

They want to be trained about how to respond in a real-life scenario and spot issues where they will be required to think creatively because the law doesn't exist yet. Technology is advancing but the law hasn't caught up yet. As a lawyer and private practice, how do you advance that narrative? How do you shape that law or regulation of the future? It is a combination of thinking ahead without being too theoretical.

Technology is advancing, but the law hasn't caught up yet. As a lawyer and private practice, how do you advance that narrative? How do you shape that law or regulation of the future? It’s a combination of thinking ahead without being too theoretical.

That is something that I talked with Caryn Schenewerk about in her work in that area. She had to do that to represent the companies that she works with. It is an interesting intersection to be at.

Caryn and I are friends. We work together on certain issues and with other colleagues too. We had to put our heads together and think, “There is no law for what we want to do. How do we figure that out?” It is exciting and fun to do it.

Some of that where you were saying there is a joy in the work that brings people together but I also think there is a clear benefit, almost a necessity, to do that. Nobody knows. What should the rules be? We need to all talk about this. What would make things work better? What would be the most appropriate thing? That requires more collaboration or encourages it also.

You can't work in a vacuum. I might think this is the solution but I didn't think of what that other company might need.

All of these people have to work together. You are putting them together in their agreements and contracts. What works for each of those parties? Getting different perspectives on what they need.

In our field, there is also the question of what is technically possible. We might have an idea and say, “If XYZ happens, the engineers say to us XYZ will never happen. Physics doesn't allow it.” I'm like, “That solution is happening.”

We are thinking about risks and minimizing risks. From a reality standpoint or technical standpoint, that is not going to happen like, “I don't need to minimize that risk. There is no risk.”

The flip side is true like, “I didn't think that it could go that badly.” Better be extra careful. I always say, “We are paid to be paranoid.” Even if the engineers say, “That is never going to happen,” I'm like, “What do you mean by never? Let's talk about never.”

I was going to ask about the follow-up question to that.

Is it 0 or less than 5%?

All these unusual things would have to happen but could still happen. That is a different risk. That funny. That is another reason why you would need to know. We need to understand how things work and the different relationships involved because we get to know about those when we are negotiating things.

We don't have to know how to do it but we have to understand how it is done. Another great thing about the industry is that scientists and engineers love to talk about what they are doing. The lawyers are a great audience. We want to know. When a client invites us to tour the high bay where the satellite is being built or any factory setting, we jump at that chance because we want to see it. If they invite us to sit in on a briefing about how some new idea that their engineers are developing and they want to get ahead of the legal issues, we get to hear the briefing about this new technology that hasn't even been developed yet. It is so exciting.

Some of the most fun parts of being an appellate lawyer are when we can be part of the strategy early on with things where we are working. There is some institutional issue coming up and a bunch of different ways across the country. What is a good approach overall to this? How we develop the law and being on the emerging part of that is fun. That is where it all clicks because you are bringing all of your different experiences to that role, assessing the risk, thinking about all the different ways that it could be put together and integrating all of the different inputs.

On the risk management side, we do a lot of risk management work. We are not insurance brokers and underwriters. We are the lawyers. We need to understand what the brokers and the underwriters are facilitating in terms of insurance coverage. They need to understand where the legal exposures are. Some exposures can be covered through contractual limitations of liability or contractual waiver.

What if there is no limit? What if the limit isn't sufficiently limiting? What if there is no contractual solution? We need insurance. They need to understand where that exposure is. We need to understand how they are going to cover it through insurance and what the policy wording looks like. We work a lot with brokers and underwriters. That is another fun part of the field, although nerve-wracking. When something doesn't go quite right, you need to file a claim or think about a claim and it gets nerve-wracking. Intellectually, it is stimulating.

There are also pins and needles point.

We are fortunate that our clients often invite us to launches. It is a combination of thrill and high anxiety.

What is the most recent launch that you have been to?

Before COVID, there was a launch. One of our clients was taking cargo to the space station. It was successful, thank goodness. We had a great time. Usually, overwhelmingly celebratory but you always plan for the worst, not only legally but physically. There is instruction on what to do if something goes wrong, get back to the bus, do this, do that and look for this person. Don't go that way. Go this way. In my experience, I have never had to do that.

Thank you so much for sharing all of this insight and how you have carved out for yourself and navigated a unique and fun career in law. I thought it would be interesting for people to read about the work that you do, what is involved in this and those who might be interested in venturing out to new areas. I also think it has been important in terms of your passion and joy for the practice to see that and feel that.

With the amount of experience you have, I don't know many people would say, “People are still passionate with so many years in.” It is neat to see that. Hopefully, that is inspiring for everyone to have that attitude about how they are contributing to the world and still have that sense of impact, meaning and being part of a developing industry. It is a neat thing that you have created for yourself with mentors, persistence and your deep interest. That is the magic formula to get where you are and the place of joy that you are at in your practice.

Thank you for saying that. I'm glad I came across it.

Usually, I end with a few lightning-round questions. I'm going to ask you first. Which talent would you most like to have but don't have?

Is it legal-oriented or general?

Any talent, it could be singing or dancing.

I'm a good athlete but I wish I were better. I wish I’m a more well-rounded athlete.

What athletics do you enjoy?

I play a lot of tennis. I swim and row but I used to be a competitive figure skater when I was a little kid and teenager. I was not good, which is why I became a lawyer. I wish I had been a better skater.

I like rowing too. I came to rowing late in life. I wish I had done it when I was younger because I could have been good. It is fun. It is such an interesting combination of meditative but also competitive. How I discovered I was competitive was when I did rowing and everyone was like, “You didn't know you were competitive.” I'm like, “Not in the same way as I knew when I wanted to get out ahead of everyone.” I have motivation. I had a coach who would lie to me and tell me that people were ahead of me. I would go faster. Who are some of your favorite writers?

I'm all over the map here because I'm thinking classically and contemporarily. I don’t know how to answer that from Dante to Shelly and Byron to McCullough and Morrison.

You are eclectic.

I love Malcolm Gladwell.

His work is interesting too. I'm eclectic too. I'm in the category of any good writing, like a great turn of phrase. It is the appellate lawyer in me. I appreciate good writing, whatever its form.

I love to read something I don't feel I have to edit because if I'm reading something that I don't like the way it is written in my mind, I'm editing it, which destroys the enjoyment of reading it.

I will try something where I say, “That phrase is interesting. That was perfectly done.” It is something about the craft that I appreciate it. I love your editing part. That is funny. Who is your hero in real life?

At the risk of being trite, my parents. If it weren't for them, I wouldn't be here. I don't mean because I was born but the way they raised me. It has to be my parents. My husband too in case he reads this someday.

I think about our parents' attitude toward what we can do and what we are capable of, particularly in my case. My father's view of that, I realize was important and different for that point in time for him to not make any difference in gender about what you could do. Anything you want to do is supported. You are capable of that. You bring that out into the world with you.

My mom was a role model. She was a pioneer. She did things that women didn't do. My mom was born in 1932. She is no longer with us but she did things that people didn't do. My dad never said, “I couldn't do something because only boys did that.” He was adamant about just because I was a girl. It is a phrase I had never heard. “You can do that. Gender was not even an issue.” That is saying something for somebody who was born in the ‘30s.

My dad worked on the Apollo programs and for defense contractors. I was like, “He is a little forward-thinking.” For what in life do you feel most grateful?

This is where the husband part comes in. To have found a husband who loves that his wife does crazy things as I do. Shortly after we got engaged, I said, “I want to be a space lawyer.” He was like, “It sounds fascinating.” He is supportive. No matter how crazy I was saying at that moment might have sounded, he never flinched. That is why I'm grateful.

That is a gift because it gives you space to grow in ways that you are passionate about.

I can yell at him about other things but not that.

Good choice in a partner in that regard. Good work.

We met on the job. Another plug for space and national security.

It had impacts across your life.

We met before I went to law school.

If you were to have a dinner party, whom would you invite as a guest? It could be anyone that could be alive, not alive or a combination. It doesn't have to be one person. It could be more than one person.

These questions are difficult because my mind spans centuries. I would like Susan B. Anthony or another suffragette because I want to understand how they suffered. I have studied women of that time and the indignities to which they were subject tantamount to torture. To be treated like a human being is astonishing. I would love to speak to her or somebody like her, one of her contemporaries, to ask about what it was like. I like to talk to Galileo because he figured it out and nobody believed him. It is horrible. Mozart because I want some good music.

I like that eclectic combination because that is all of your different interests too.

I like Mel Brooks because I want to laugh.

There is a Netflix series that is loosely based on the life of the first woman lawyer in Italy. It started dramatic and entertaining but it is exactly that experience and the indignities. She was admitted to the bar. The court overturned it and said, “No women can be lawyers.” It is an interesting story and it is very entertaining. I would recommend it based on my view of the first episode. It is interesting that there is such a Netflix feature at this point. Last question. What is your motto, if you have one?

Find what you want to be. You have to the joy in everyday life. Otherwise, it is overwhelming.

You have to find the joy in everyday life. Otherwise it’s just overwhelming.

That is a great way to end, given the joy that you see in your practice but also such a great reminder of living in the present and experiencing the joy in every day, which people can forget.

It is easy to forget. Turn on the tv and you will forget. I try to limit my news consumption.

I find things are much better when I do that.

I need enough to be an informed member of society. Plus, I'm intellectually curious. I want to know what is going on but I need it in small doses. Let me know what is going on. I don't want to be mired in it.

There are some things you can do things about it and there are other things you can't. Franceska, thank you so much for being on the show and having this conversation. It has been a lot of fun.

My pleasure. Thanks for inviting me.