FedSoc Events

Follow FedSoc Events
Share on
Copy link to clipboard

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constituti…

The Federalist Society


    • Jan 6, 2022 LATEST EPISODE
    • weekdays NEW EPISODES
    • 1h 14m AVG DURATION
    • 1,072 EPISODES


    Search for episodes from FedSoc Events with a specific topic:

    Latest episodes from FedSoc Events

    Panel Four: School Choice in Action [Archive Collection]

    Play Episode Listen Later Jan 6, 2022 90:32

    On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the University of Toledo College of Law. The title of the conference was "Education Reform at the Crossroads: Politics, the Constitution, and the Battle over School Choice." The final panel explored "School Choice in Action."In recent years, school choice has to moved beyond an abstract topic for free-market theorists and constitutional scholars. Today, school-choice programs — public and private — and similar education-reform policies aimed at increasing choice and competition are up and running the country. Speakers at this panel — leading students, critics, and evaluators of school-coice programs — will discuss candidly the available data and empirical evidence relating to the choice programs, and will also survey and evaluate the different and local programs. Featuring:Roberta Holt, Director, Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring ProgramAnn Payne, Founder, Aurora AcademyProf. John Witte, University of WisconsinBrother Bob Smith, President, Messemer High SchoolDr. Myron Lieberman, Education Policy InstituteAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

    Panel Three: School Choice: The Next Civil Rights Crusade? [Archive Collection]

    Play Episode Listen Later Jan 6, 2022 91:54

    On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the University of Toledo College of Law. The title of the conference was "Education Reform at the Crossroads: Politics, the Constitution, and the Battle over School Choice." The penultimate panel covered "School Choice: The Next Civil Rights Crusade?"School choice is more than an education-reform porposal. To many supporters of vouchers and charter schools, these policy innovations are crucial elements in the effort to vindicate the civil and political ights of low-income parents and members of racial minorities. At the same time, many school choice critics suggest that vouchers will constitute a set-back for public-school integration. Speakers at this panel— civil-rights leaders, school-choice activists, and academics— will discuss these problems, and also explore the connection between school choice and parents' First Amendment freedoms, as well as the historical and consitutional tradition of viewing a well-educated citizenry as the key to democratic and republican government and education as the key to meaningful exercise of civil rights. Featuring:Introduction Ted Cruz, Attorney, Cooper, Carvin & RosenthalProf. Joseph Vitteritti, New York UniversityJennifer Grossman, Director of Education, CatoMichael Meyers, President, New York Civil Rights CoalitionClint Bolick, Cofounder, Institute for JusticeAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

    Feddie Night Festivus: Blackman vs. Everybody!

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 29, 2021 57:01

    The Federalist Society's Student Division &Columbus School of Law Student Chapter presentFeddie Night Festivus:Blackman vs. Everybody!FeaturingUnprecedented Feats of Jurisprudential StrengthThis event will be livestreamed via YouTubeThursday, December 23, 20218:00 PM ETFeaturing:Prof. Josh Blackman, Professor of Law, South Texas College of LawFeddie Night Fights is a series of online events hosted by the Student Division and a rotating Student Chapter each month.

    Luncheon: Address by Linda Chavez, Center for Equal Opportunity [Archive Collection]

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 16, 2021 52:56

    On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the University of Toledo College of Law. The title of the conference was "Education Reform at the Crossroads: Politics, the Constitution, and the Battle over School Choice," and featured a keynote address by Linda Chavez.Featuring:Introductory Remarks: Ted Cruz, Attorney, Cooper, Carvin & RosenthalAward: Corey Swanson, Cofounder, Stranahan National Issues ForumIntroduction: Dean Albert Quick, The University of Toledo College of LawLinda Chavez, President, Center for Equal Opportunity

    Hon. Robert H. Bork Memorial Lecture

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 60:00

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The conference concluded with the annual Hon. Robert H. Bork Memorial Lecture, featuring remarks by Judge Laurence H. Silberman on "The Job of Attorney General—A Historical Perspective."Judge Laurence H. Silberman will be delivering remarks on "The Job of Attorney General—A Historical Perspective."Featuring:Hon. Laurence H. Silberman, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

    Showcase Panel IV: Law, Science, and Public Policy

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 63:59

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The final showcase panel explored "Law, Science, and Public Policy.""Science" as a concept enjoys the trust of the public. Indeed, some make "I trust the Science" a centerpiece for their appeal to the voting public, and this evidently has had some success. By contrast, others in the scientific community stress that scientific methods explicitly exclude "trust". The noted physicist Richard Feynman remarked that "science begins with the distrust of experts". Instead, process in science relies on an "ethic" of impersonal objectivity, respect for data, self-questioning, a willingness to stand corrected, and open discourse. Its methods involve constructing models for reality that best fit objective assessments of available data, followed by a search for data that might contradict those models. Scientists are therefore (supposed to be) anti-advocates, willing to concede when their models were wrong; the most successful scientists even enjoy conceding, as it means that knowledge has advanced.However, scientists, being human, are inherently imperfect practitioners of scientific methods. Historians document many examples where scientists have advocated their own (wrong) ideas over others simply because they were their own, obstructed opposing points of view, and otherwise behaved as 'politically' as in any other field of human endeavor. However, the process and its "ethic" has historically allowed models for reality to improve, and those improvements are known by the technology that has emerged based on them. As one example without science, improvements in civilized transport advanced haltingly over millennia. With science, citizens may now buy tickets to suborbital space flight.Consequently, public policy decision-makers often rely on science (or at least they say they do) when making laws and regulations in many areas, including economics, criminal law, environmental regulations technology and bioethics. However, the law is in many ways anti-science. Scientists, practicing their methods, commit to seeking out and weighting more heavily data that oppose their theory; they are (supposed to be) anti-advocates. In contrast, clients hire lawyers expressly to be their advocates.This creates a natural tension when scientists are called upon to advise public policy. Many who call themselves "scientists" are willing to participate as advocates in public policy. This has been shown clearly in fields like anthropogenic climate change, economic stimulus packages and, most recently, in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. How should we as lawyers assure that science is used properly in the public space, to make policy conform to reality, and not for political goals?The panel will address two areas with this as background: The FDA, CDC, and public health regulation. The COVID pandemic uncovered many problems in the way medical science is used to manage public health crises. with public policy.Should scientific presentations be paternalistic? Is it ever justified to withhold, distort, or misrepresent science for fear that the truth will do damage by being misunderstood or misused? Featuring:Dr. Steven Benner, Distinguished Fellow, The Westheimer Institute at the Foundation for Applied State Room Molecular EvolutionProf. I. Glenn Cohen, James A. Attwood and Leslie Williams Professor of Law, Deputy Dean, and Faculty Director, Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology & Bioethics, Harvard Law SchoolMs. Christina Sandefur, Executive Vice President, Goldwater InstituteModerator: Hon. Kenneth Lee, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

    13th Annual Rosenkranz Debate & Luncheon

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 78:07

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The final day of the conference featured the thirteenth annual Rosenkranz Debate.RESOLVED: Concentrated corporate power is a greater threat to individual freedom than government powerFeaturing:Mr. John Allison, Executive in Residence, Wake Forest University School of Business; Former President and CEO, Cato Institute; Former President and CEO, BB&TMr. Ashley Keller, Partner, Keller Lenkner LLCModerator: Hon. Douglas H. Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

    Second Amendment: Next Steps in the Unfolding Litigation Battle

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 85:35

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Second Amendment: Next Steps in the Unfolding Litigation Battle."The U.S. Supreme Court famously decided many Second Amendment cases in its Heller and McDonald cases. Yet much remains uncertain. In its first significant Second Amendment case in ten years, the Court is poised to decide the extent of citizen rights to carry firearms outside the home. Our panel will discuss the oral argument (scheduled for November 3), the merits, the procedure, as well as possible outcomes.Featuring:Mr. Jonathan Lowy, Vice President, Legal & Chief Counsel, Legal, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun ViolenceProf. Mark W. Smith, Senior Fellow of Law and Public Policy and Presidential Scholar, The King’s CollegeMr. David H. Thompson, Managing Partner, Cooper & Kirk PLLCModerator: Hon. Thomas M. Hardiman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

    Private Power and Eminent Domain

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 86:37

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Private Power and Eminent Domain."Since the Founding, the extent to which the public power of eminent domain may be used by, or for the benefit of, private parties, has been a subject of intense debate. Time and time again, the U.S. Supreme Court has considered cases testing the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." U.S. Const., amend. V. Over 15 years ago, in the landmark case of Kelo v. New London, the Court upheld the exercise of eminent domain to transfer private property from private individuals to other private entities. The decision – controversial from the outset – prompted deeper questions about the extent to which the Constitution allows for eminent domain for "public purposes" even where the action advances the economic interests of private parties over others. But how lasting is this precedent? In a recent dissent from the denial of certiorari in Eychaner v. Chicago, three justices voted to revisit Kelo, two of them expressly calling to overrule it. Since Kelo, the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to review eminent domain and other cases, raising significant property rights concerns – often involving complex questions at the intersection of private and public power.Most recently, in the 2020-2021 term, the U.S. Supreme Court heard three cases dealing with the intersection of private and public power in the eminent domain context: Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, where the Court held that a state regulation allowing union organizers to enter private property constituted a taking requiring just compensation;PennEast Pipeline v. New Jersey, where the Court dealt with the legality of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) delegation of eminent domain powers to a private pipeline company; andPakdel v. San Francisco, where the Court continued to reduce procedural hurdles for inverse condemnation claims (expanding upon a prior decision just two years ago in Knick v. Township of Scott). For this panel, a distinguished lineup of speakers will discuss the intersection between public and private power in the eminent domain context. The panel will focus on eminent domain’s history, the implications of originalism for understanding the extent and use of that power, recent Supreme Court rulings on these topics, and the likely subjects and issues for review in future cases, among other things. As part of this discussion, the panel will illuminate the constitutional, legal, economic, and philosophic principles and considerations that help to inform perspectives on this important topic of public versus private power in the realm of property rights.Featuring:Hon. Paul D. Clement, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP; Former Solicitor General, U.S. Department of JusticeProf. Roderick Hills, William T. Comfort, III Professor of Law, New York University School of LawMr. Robert J. McNamara, Senior Attorney, Institute for JusticeMr. Joshua Thompson, Director of Legal Operations, Pacific Legal FoundationModerator: Hon. Jennifer Walker Elrod, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

    ABA Law School Accreditation Standards

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 85:01

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel discussed "ABA Law School Accreditation Standards."For many years, the U.S. Department of Education has recognized the Council of the American Bar Association Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar as the accrediting organization for law schools. The importance of that function cannot be overstated. For nearly every state, a J.D. degree from an ABA-accredited law school is required to practice law. To become accredited, a law school must comply with the standards contained in the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools. In May 2021, the Council of the ABA Section proposed a set of accreditation standards that, among other things, would require law schools to "take effective actions that, in their totality, demonstrate progress in (1) Diversifying the students, faculty, and staff; and (2) Creating an inclusive and equitable environment for students, faculty, and staff." An interpretation of that provision stated, "The requirement of a constitutional provision that purports to prohibit consideration of race, color, ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, disability, or military status in admissions or employment decisions is not a justification for a school’s non-compliance." The school would have to show "effective actions and progress . . . by means other than those prohibited by the applicable constitutional or statutory provisions." In addition, law schools must "provide training and education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism: (1) at the start of the program of legal education, and (2) at least once again before graduation." The Council has since withdrawn the proposal for further study, but it may reappear.Our panel of experts will discuss the degree to which the ABA’s proposed new policy represented a change from its prior practice; if it was a change, how it came about, including any arguments for or against it; whether it is justified and consistent with the accrediting role; and, if it is not, what steps, if any, might be appropriate to take.Featuring:Hon. Scott Bales, Former Chief Justice, Arizona Supreme CourtProf. John McGinnis, George C. Dix Professor in Constitutional Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of LawProf. Thomas D. Morgan, Oppenheim Professor Emeritus of Antitrust and Trade Regulation Law, George Washington University Law SchoolMr. Daniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber & Thies, P.C.Moderator: Hon. Gregory Katsas, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

    Showcase Panel III: Corporate and Academic Management Today

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 92:13

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The final day of the conference commenced with showcase panel on "Corporate and Academic Management Today."The life of law school Deans and university administrators have always included responding to various demands from students and faculty. In recent years those demands include attacks on the school for failing to address racist behavior and patterns, sexual harassment and the mistreatment of gays and other minorities. Over the last couple of years those demands have significantly increased in quantity, volume and force. At the same time corporate management, especially across Fortune 500 companies, but by no means limited to them, have experienced similar pressures. Most recently, we're beginning to see pushback on behalf of outspoken students on free speech grounds, accused predators with due process claims, and others on equal protection grounds. How has management handled these pressures both in academia and in the corporate world? How should they? This roundtable includes those who have dealt with these issues—is some cases very recently and in others from a few years ago.Featuring:Mr. Richard Bagger, Partner and Executive Director, Christie 55 Solutions LLCDean David Schizer, Dean Emeritus & Harvey R. Miller Professor of Law, Columbia Law SchoolDr. Lee Burdette Williams, Executive Director, College Autism Network; Former Vice President of Student Affairs and Dean of Students, Wheaton College; Former Dean of Students, University of ConnecticutProf. Robin Fretwell Wilson, Mildred Van Voorhis Jones Chair in Law, Director, Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois College of LawModerator: Hon. Michael Brennan, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

    20th Annual Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 36:50

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?".On September 11, 2001, at the age of 45 and at the height of her professional and personal life, Barbara K. Olson was murdered in the terrorist attacks against the United States as a passenger on the hijacked American Airlines flight that was flown into the Pentagon. The Federalist Society believes that it is most fitting to dedicate an annual lecture on limited government and the spirit of freedom to the memory of Barbara Olson. She had a deep commitment to the rule of law and understood well the relationship between respecting limits on government power and the preservation of freedom. And, significantly, Barbara Olson was an individual who never took freedom for granted in her own life, even in her final terrifying moments-her inspiring and energetic human spirit is a testament to what one can achieve in a world that places a premium on human freedom. Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson delivered the first lecture in November 2001. The lecture series continued in following years with other notable individuals.Featuring:Hon. Theodore B. Olson, Partner, Gibson Dunn

    Originalism: Perspectives from the Bench

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 98:13

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Originalism: Perspectives from the Bench."Many would agree that originalism is now a standard when it comes to judicial philosophy. On this panel, a variety of judges will discuss how they 'do' originalism while sitting on a case. Furthermore, they will provide their views on whether and how advocates can best brief and argue cases along originalist lines.Featuring:Hon. Edith Jones, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth CircuitHon. Kevin Newsom, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitHon. Andrew Oldham, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth CircuitHon. Neomi Rao, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. CircuitModerator: Hon. John Nalbandian, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

    China, Global Companies, and Human Rights

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 96:18

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel covered "China, Global Companies, and Human Rights."This panel will explore a suite of issues related to global companies that do business in China and the implications for national security, human rights, and the rule of law. Panelists will explore how companies that have supply chains or otherwise are active in China weigh human rights concerns (e.g., in Xinjiang or Hong Kong) against market access, as well as consider the dilemma companies face when they find themselves caught in the crossfire between U.S. and allies' human rights sanctions (e.g., Global Magnitsky) and Chinese retaliatory sanctions. Do American companies feel an obligation, apart from any legal mandates, to act in ways that advance U.S. national security or foreign policy objectives? With senior policymakers intently focused on these and related issues, is the private sector giving them sufficient attention?Featuring:Amb. Craig Allen, President, US-China Business Council; Former U.S. Ambassador to Brunei DarussalamAmb. Kelley Currie, Former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s IssuesMr. John S. Jenkins, Jr., Executive Vice President and General Counsel, TE ConnectivityDr. Kori Schake, Senior Fellow and Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, American Enterprise InstituteModerator: Hon. Carlos T. Bea, Senior Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

    Is Anyone Still Committed to Free Speech?

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 100:07

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel asked "Is Anyone Still Committed to Free Speech?".The Supreme Court in 1964 spoke of "a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open." That commitment has seemingly waned of late. Conservatives bemoan a new institutional "cancel culture" that chills heterodox views, with many now questioning limits on government’s ability to regulate the speech and associations of private parties like social-media platforms, corporations, and employers. Meanwhile, progressives complain that speech rights are, as one ACLU attorney put it, "more often a tool of the powerful than the oppressed" and should be subordinated to other values like equity, safety from harmful speech, and "anti-racism." Has something truly changed in recent years, and, if so, does it matter? Is the traditional view of free speech—freedom from government regulation—worth defending?Featuring:Mr. Mike Davis, President and Founder, Internet Accountability Project; Former Chief Counsel for Nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley; Founder, The Article III ProjectProf. Stanley Fish, Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law; Floersheimer Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law, Cardozo LawProf. Joel Gora, Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law SchoolMs. Nicole Neily, President and Founder, Parents Defending EducationModerator: Hon. David R. Stras, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eight Circuit

    Federalism and Broadband Spending: Finding the Right Approach

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 97:48

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel covered "Federalism and Broadband Spending: Finding the Right Approach."The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated the desire for increased—indeed, universal—broadband access. This panel will focus on the infusion of federal and state funding into broadband networks. The panel will explore the ways in which states and private actors can play a role in ubiquitous deployment, the appropriate role of the FCC and other government agencies, including the USDA, NTIA, and DOE, how the FCC’s Universal Service programs can continue to facilitate deployment and adoption, and the terms that should accompany government funding distributed through states and federal agencies.Featuring:Hon. Brendan Carr, Commissioner, Federal Communications CommissionHon. Eric Allan Koch, Senator and Chairman, Indiana Senate Utilities Committee, Indiana State SenateDr. Roslyn Layton, Senior Vice President, Strand ConsultModerator: Hon. Steven Menashi, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

    "Cancel Culture" Comes to Financial Services

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 120:43

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Cancel Culture Comes to Financial Services."Under the Obama Administration’s Operation Choke Point initiative bank regulators sought to de-bank various legal industries such as payday lenders, firearms dealers, and home-based charities. Today, banks have increasingly acted on their own initiative to effectively operate a new voluntary form of Operation Choke Point. In January 2021, Florida’s Bank United closed Donald Trump’s personal bank account. Other banks have cut off others seemingly because of political views and have been pressured by activists to cut off funding to politically-disfavored industries, religious organizations, and others, effectively a new voluntary form of Operation Choke Point.Is this voluntary activity the free exercise of business judgment, or is it inappropriate response to external pressure? What kind of unintended consequences might occur where banks use their business to punish based on viewpoint? Could this behavior make banks into utilities subject to more financial regulation or even government actors carrying out government directives? What are the appropriate responses to "cancel culture" or "choke point" tactics in banking? What steps are appropriate either through governmental or private actions?Featuring:Prof. Christopher Peterson, John J. Flynn Endowed Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of LawMr. Paul Watkins, Managing Director, Patomak Global PartnersProf. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University; Senior Fellow, Cato InstituteModerator: Hon. Eric Murphy, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

    Classrooms, Curricula, and the Law

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 125:58

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Classrooms, Curricula, and the Law."Competing legal and cultural interests are at play in the push to implement critical race theory and diversity, equity, and inclusion-based curricula at all levels from elementary school through higher education. Some argue that state bans are necessary to combat a divisive, stigmatizing, and arguably unlawful set of educational practices. Others take a libertarian approach, casting classrooms as marketplaces of ideas and criticizing proponents of CRT-bans as opponents of free speech. Still others praise these educational practices for raising greater awareness of American’s historical injustices, arguing that this is a necessary step towards a more equitable and inclusive society. In the tradition of the First Amendment, this convergence of issues leaves much room for a lively debate.Featuring:Prof. Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law, Yale Law SchoolMr. Josh Hammer, Opinion Editor, Newsweek; Research Fellow, Edmund Burke FoundationMs. Kimberly Hermann, General Counsel, Southeastern Legal FoundationMs. Letitia Todd Kim, Managing Director, Foundation Against Intolerance & RacismMr. Greg Lukianoff, President and CEO, Foundation for Individual Rights in EducationModerator: Hon. Kyle Duncan, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

    Showcase Panel II: Private Control Over Public Discussion

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 114:14

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" The second day of the conference commenced with a showcase panel on "Private Control Over Public Discussion."Online platforms host a growing share of public discussion and debate. As private businesses, they have been free to develop and implement their own content moderation policies, free of First Amendment constraints. But as the amount of speech hosted on a few platforms has grown, the resulting concentration of control over that speech has sparked questions about the power of private companies to stifle lawful expression.As Justice Clarence Thomas recently noted, the Court soon will need to consider how existing legal doctrines apply to these highly concentrated, privately owned, digital platforms. Part of the solution, he suggests, might lie with common law doctrines like common carrier or public accommodation – doctrines that might permit regulation that limits the right of private platforms to exclude.But what of the First Amendment interests of the platforms themselves? Do these corporations have a protected expressive interest in declining to carry speech which is lawful but which they find objectionable? How should we think about the digital platform model – are they more like a communications network distributing information, more like publishers that actively curate content and associate themselves with hosted expression, or do they toggle back and forth?Finally, should the concentration of private power over speech change how we think about public and private threats to free expression? Private businesses are presumptively free to set terms and conditions for the use of their own property. Have digital platforms assumed a degree of control over public discourse, sufficient to alter that presumption? Is some form of regulation appropriate to protect against private threats to liberty? Or is government intrusion into private decision-making still the greater threat?Featuring:Prof. Jane Bambauer, Professor of Law, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of LawProf. Randy E. Barnett, Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law, Georgetown University Law CenterProf. Adam Candeub, Professor of Law & Director, Intellectual Property, Information and Communications Law Program, Michigan State University College of LawProf. Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of LawModerator: Hon. Barbara Lagoa, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

    2021 Antonin Scalia Memorial Dinner

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 38:03

    On November 11, 2021, The Federalist Society hosted its annual Antonin Scalia Memorial Dinner. This year featured an address by Senator Tom Cotton. Featuring: Hon. Tom Cotton, U.S. Senate, Arkansas Jennifer C. Braceras, Director, Independent Women's Law Center, Independent Women's Forum; Member, Federalist Society Board of Visitors; Former Member, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights * * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Religious Liberty after Fulton v. City of Philadelphia

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 81:58

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Religious Liberty after Fulton v. City of Philadelphia."Fulton v. City of Philadelphia was a victory for religious liberty, but it is unclear how broad its implications will be for other cases and what the opinions in Fulton portend for the future of Employment Division v. Smith. The Court’s majority opinion relied on provisions of Philadelphia’s foster care agency contracting process, but the majority also potentially reworked Smith’s understanding of when government regulation is "generally applicable." Meanwhile, several justices indicated a willingness to revisit Smith altogether, though what a post-Smith free exercise jurisprudence would look like remains unclear. This panel will explore these and other questions raised by Fulton and the future of religious free exercise.Featuring:Prof. Akhil Reed Amar, Sterling Professor of Law, Yale Law SchoolProf. Thomas C. Berg, James L. Oberstar Professor of Law and Public Policy, University of St. Thomas School of LawProf. William Marshall, William Rand Kenan, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Law, University of North Carolina School of LawMs. Lori Windham, Senior Counsel, The Becket Fund for Religious LibertyModerator: Hon. Lawrence VanDyke, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

    Criminal Justice 2021 and The Rule of Law

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 86:59

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Criminal Justice 2021 and The Rule of Law."For many who align themselves with fundamental principles of our constitutional system, the progressive agenda seems to be driven not only by an unreasonable cry to defund police, but a broader assault on the fundamental American precept "ordered liberty" through the rule of law. Meanwhile, those who align themselves with another agenda see these principles as a shield for abuses of police authority, particularly abuses aimed at certain communities, driven by perceived lack of accountability on the part of beat cops and administrators alike. This panel will review the Constitutional underpinnings of "ordered liberty" at the state and federal level. It will discuss and consider the criminal justice system's role in both securing liberty and protecting civil rights, including as carried out by police, prosecutors, defense counsel and judges.Featuring:Mr. Lawrence S. Krasner, District Attorney, City of PhiladelphiaProf. Tracey L. Meares, Walton Hale Hamilton Professor of Law; Founding Director, The Justice Collaboratory, Yale Law School Mr. McGregor W. Scott, Partner, King & Spalding LLP; Former U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of CaliforniaMr. Richard Stanek, Sheriff, Hennepin County, RetiredModerator: Hon. Stephanos Bibas, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

    Administrative Inquisitions? How Agencies Initiate, Conduct, and Conclude Investigations

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 85:51

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel covered "Administrative Inquisitions? How Agencies Initiate, Conduct, and Conclude Investigations."In addition to formal rulemaking and case-by-case adjudication and enforcement, federal agencies have long employed a myriad of mechanisms to influence and punish private behavior. Their civil administrative investigations are unbounded by the procedural constraints of the Administrative Procedure Act, traditional transparency protections, or the redress afforded by timely judicial review. Civil administrative investigations can be not only onerous but also financially catastrophic, especially when the targets are small businesses and individuals. The abuse of agency investigative authority raises significant constitutional and statutory questions. Agencies have compelled information from investigative targets without the warrant the Fourth Amendment would require, and then converted the investigation from civil to criminal. Federal agencies have been imposing draconian conditions to end administrative investigations, like imposing "gag" orders that prohibit the target from disclosing the terms of the settlement, and requiring the target to make payments to agency-designated third parties in lieu of paying the statutorily prescribed fine into the Federal Treasury. These conditions are imposed without affording the investigative target the opportunity to meaningfully challenge the agency’s underlying authority to act or the tactics by which it acts.This panel will explore the under-researched civil investigative and related activities of federal agencies and engage on their underlying legal authority to so act.Featuring:Mr. Tyler S. Clarkson, Associate General Counsel, Synthetic Biology Company; Former Acting General Counsel, U.S. Department of Agriculture Prof. Aram Gavoor, Professorial Lecturer in Law, George Washington University Law SchoolProf. Richard J. Pierce, Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law SchoolMs. Susan C. Rodriguez, Partner, McGuireWoods LLPModerator: Hon. James C. Ho, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

    "Progressive" HR in 2021: The Solution or the Problem?

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 91:56

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel explored "Progressive HR in 2021: The Solution of the Problem?"The average United States workplace has changed in many ways over the past twenty years. The development of modern internet, computers, and smartphones shifted corporate America fully into the 21st century. The changes, however, have not been only technological in nature. New HR practices can now be found in more and more companies, both large and small. In the same way the iPhone modernized how U.S. workers communicate, new progressive HR policies seek to modify several aspects of workplace interaction. Our panel of experts will discuss the school of thought and fundamental reasoning behind these policies, as well whether these changes are helpful or harmful, or something in between.Featuring:Hon. Sharon Fast Gustafson, Former General Counsel, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMr. Larry H. James, Managing Partner, Crabbe Brown & James LLP; Life Member, Sixth Circuit Judicial ConferenceHon. Peter Kirsanow, Partner, Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP; Former Member, National Labor Relations BoardMr. Daniel Villao, Chief Executive Officer, Intelligent PartnershipsModerator: Hon. Paul B. Matey, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

    The Antitrust Revolution?

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 86:35

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel discussed "The Antitrust Revolution?"The past year has seen an unprecedented number of political and legislative suggestions for altering nearly every aspect of U.S. antitrust law. If adopted, these proposals may redefine the American economy and consumer marketplace. Hear from leading legislators, antitrust luminaries and policy makers about the potential upcoming antitrust revolution.Featuring:Hon. William Baer, Visiting Fellow in Governance Studies, Brookings Institution; Former Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust DivisionMr. François-Henri Briard, Supreme Court Attorney, Cabinet Briard LLPHon. Makan Delrahim, Adjunct Lecturer in Law, University of Pennsylvania; Former Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust DivisionHon. Douglas Ginsburg, Senior Circuit Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit; Former Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division Ms. Diana Moss, President, American Antitrust InstituteModerator: Hon. Chad Readler, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

    IP Law and Culture

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 87:02

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" The panel covered "IP Law and Culture."A perennial debate about intellectual property and culture is how intellectual property laws enhance or restrict the ability of people to contribute to and build a culture. The Supreme Court has described copyright as "the engine of free expression," but criticisms frequently arise when intellectual property law prevents people from using the work of others to express themselves. In the trademark context, recent Supreme Court decisions struck down the prohibition of federal trademark registration for immoral, scandalous, and disparaging marks as a violation of First Amendment speech rights. Some argue that the Court’s reasoning should further be applied to strike down most federal Trademark Dilution claims, which allow brand owners to sue those who use their trademarks in ways that blur or tarnish the trademark. The debate regarding copyright fair use also continues to rage on, pitting the rights of original creators against the ability of appropriation artists and others to use those original works.This panel will consider these longstanding controversies in light of recent developments.Featuring:Prof. Lisa Ramsey, Professor of Law & Founding Member, Center for Intellectual Property Law and Markets, University of San Diego School of LawProf. Robert Spoo, Associate Dean for Faculty Development & Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Tulsa College of LawHon. Karyn Temple, Senior Executive Vice President and Global General Counsel, Motion Picture Association; Former Register of Copyrights and Director, U.S. Copyright Office.Prof. Sandra Aistars, Senior Fellow for Copyright Research and Policy, Senior Scholar at the Center for Intellectual Property x Innovation Policy, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityModerator: Hon. Ryan T. Holte, U.S. Court of Federal Claims

    A View From In-House

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 74:44

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" The panel explored "A View From In-House."The Federalist Society’s In-House Counsel Working Group presents a panel discussion featuring top in-house attorneys at publicly-traded and privately-owned companies, who will shed light on the current state of corporate law and governance, reflect on challenges they face in day-to-day practice, and present an overview of the in-house legal world to newcomers and experienced lawyers alike.Featuring:Ms. Katie Biber, Chief Legal Officer, BrexHon. Mary Beth Buchanan, President, Americas and Global Chief Legal Officer, Merkle ScienceMs. Jenny Kim, Vice President of Operations and General Counsel, Philanthropy RoundtableMs. Carrie Ryerson, General Counsel, Shamrock FoodsModerator: Hon. Britt C. Grant, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

    The Separation of Powers and Political Polarization

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 88:48

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" The panel discussed "The Separation of Powers and Political Polarization."Political polarization is a great problem of our time. This panel would consider the separation of powers deformation that is a factor in polarization. Executive branch administrative decisions tend to be more extreme than legislative solutions, particularly when, as is usually the case, the houses of Congress and the President are divided among the parties. Thus, Congress’s delegation of policy decisions to the executive branch results in extreme regulations that can shift radically between administrations, creating government by whiplash. The panel would consider whether institutional restorations, like the curbing of delegation and Chevron, might help in restoring a constitution of compromise.Featuring:Prof. Neal E. Devins, Sandra Day O’Connor Professor of Law & Professor of Government, William & Mary Law SchoolProf. Victoria Nourse, Ralph V. Whitworth Professor in Law, Georgetown University Law CenterHon. Ajit Pai, Nonresident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute; Former Chairman, Federal Communications CommissionProf. Michael Rappaport, Hugh and Hazel Darling Foundation Professor of Law & Director for the Center for the Study of Constitutional Originalism, University of San Diego School of LawModerator: Hon. William H. Pryor Jr., Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

    Federal Consent Decrees: Good Governance, an Expansion of Federal Power, or Both?

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 96:58

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Federal Consent Decrees: Good Governance, an Expansion of Federal Power, or Both?"In a 1987 article entitled Why Hold Elections?, Professor Michael McConnell noted a trend that had been emerging since the 1970s: the use of consent decrees to settle federal lawsuits against state and local governments. These decrees are entered as judgements enforceable by contempt, but without full litigation. Nonetheless, these decrees often contain hundreds of requirements that dictate the policies, budgets, and personnel of local government agencies for years or even decades. Professor McConnell thus warned: "To the extent that consent decrees insulate today's policy decisions from review and modification by tomorrow's political processes, they violate the democratic structure of government. They should be repudiated before they become a common part of the legal landscape." In 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo noting that consent decrees "raise sensitive federalism concerns" and announcing a new set of policies governing (and limiting) DOJ’s use of consent decrees. In April 2021, Attorney General Garland repudiated the Sessions memo, stating that the "Department will return to the traditional process that allows the heads of litigating components to approve most settlement agreements, consent decrees, and the use of monitors in cases involving state and local governmental entities."This panel will explore the important topic of federal court consent decrees to settle claims against state and local governments. Panelists will explore the history of such decrees and the arguments for and against their use. Panelists will also discuss the dueling approaches to DOJ’s use of such decrees, as outlined in the Sessions and Garland memos.Featuring:Mr. Andrew McCarthy, Senior Fellow, National Review Institute; Contributing Editor, National ReviewMr. Jesse Panuccio, Partner, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP; Former Acting Associate Attorney General, U.S. Department of JusticeProf. Robert Percival, Robert F. Stanton Professor of Law; Director of the Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of LawMr. Benjamin S. Wolf, Former Legal Director and Institutional Reform Project Director, ACLU of IllinoisModerator: Hon. Elizabeth “Lisa” Branch, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

    Showcase Panel I: Social Activism and Corporate Leadership

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 94:22

    What role should publicly traded corporations play in democratic politics?The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" The first showcase panel discussed "Social Activism and Corporate Leadership."Corporate resources are increasingly being used to advance social justice policy goals. This corporate engagement includes advocacy for what’s presented as the “corporate perspective” on divisive social questions. It also includes the use of economic leverage to influence public opinion, affect government policy, and induce private agreements to policy choices that have not been adopted through the political process.To some, this is a positive development: it is all to the good for corporations to advance a just cause. Their public leadership and their market power can help bring the country and the world along. To others, this is an abuse and confusion of power. The goals of the “social justice” and “woke” movements are among the most hotly contested questions of American politics and culture, and they should be resolved through democratic processes without corporations putting a thumb on the scale.We will explore these questions both as matters of principle and matters of law.As a matter of principle, should corporations have unfettered discretion to influence any sphere of American life? Is such discretion good for the democratic process, and is it good for individual liberty? Is the libertarian perspective -- that private actors should be largely able to do what they want, and if they overstep, market competition will fill the gap – adequate to this dynamic? Is there any limiting principle to corporations using economic power to influence politics? As a matter of law, are corporations permitted to use whatever levers are available to them to influence matters of politics? Is corporate leadership permitted to do so in publicly traded companies? Should corporate endorsement or support of a policy position or candidate be considered a reportable lobbying expense or campaign contribution and, if so, how should it be valued? What existing legal frameworks might apply to these questions? How does Citizens United fit into this picture?Featuring:Prof. Margaret Blair, Professor of Law Emerita & Milton R. Underwood Chair in Free Enterprise Emerita, Vanderbilt University Law School; Senior Fellow, Brookings InstitutionProf. Jonathan Macey, Sam Harris Professor of Corporate Law, Corporate Finance, and Securities Law, Yale Law SchoolProf. Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of LawProf. Luigi Zingales, Robert C. McCormack Distinguished Service Professor of Entrepreneurship and Finance and George G. Rinder Faculty Fellow, University of Chicago Booth School of BusinessModerator: Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

    Opening Address by Amul Thapar

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 13, 2021 32:22

    The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The opening address was given by Judge Amul Thapar.Featuring:Hon. Amul R. Thapar, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

    Panel Two: School Choice in the Courts [Archive Collection]

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 9, 2021 78:27

    On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the University of Toledo College of Law. The title of the conference was "Education Reform at the Crossroads: Politics, the Constitution, and the Battle over School Choice." The second panel covered "School Choice in the Courts."The United States Supreme Court recently declined to review the Wisconsin Supreme Court's holding that Milwaukee's school-voucher program does not violate the First Amendment's Religion Clause, and the Arizona Supreme Court upheld tax credits. Other recent federal-court decisions have embraced many of the constitutional arguments advanced by school choice proponents. In the months to come, other courts in Ohio, Maine, and Vermont, are likely to address this same issue. However, given the twists and turns of the Supreme Courts's Religion Clause jurisprudence, only the Supreme Court will be able to resolve the constitutional questions surrounding vouchers. At this panel, leading constitutional scholars and litigators will discuss various aspects of the problem of school choice programs' constitutionality. Featuring:Leonard Leo, The Federalist SocietyRichard W. Garnett, Attorney, Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & LewinJeffrey Sutton, Of Counsel, Jones, Day, Reavis & PogueSteven R. Shapiro, National Legal DIrector, American Civil Liberties UnionAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

    Panel One: The History and Politics of School Choice [Archive Collection]

    Play Episode Listen Later Dec 3, 2021 83:07

    On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the University of Toledo College of Law. The title of the conference was "Education Reform at the Crossroads: Politics, the Constitution, and the Battle over School Choice." The first panel discussed "The History and Politics of School Choice."School choice is a "hot" political topic, one that cuts across current party lines and ideological boundaries. School choice efforts have succeeded in some States, yet failed in others. What are the "politics of school choice?" How can and do voucher proponents and opponents frame their case to appeal to the public? What arguments "work?" Is there room for consensus and compromise? Speakers at this panel will be experienced observers of the political scene and students of public opinion who will place the rhetorical and political struggles over school choice in perspective. As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.Featuring:Mr. Andrew Coulson, Senior Research Associate, Social Philosophy Policy CenterMr. Dal Lawrence, Former President, Toledo Federation of TeachersMr. Richard Leonardi, President, Buckeye InstituteCouncilwoman Fannie Lewis, Cleveland City CouncilModerator Mr. Douglas Haynes, Vice President of Education Policy, John Locke Foundation

    Federalism in the Age of Pandemic Health Measures

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 62:20

    Featuring:Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director, Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law, Case Western Reserve University School of Law

    Panel III: Speech-Policing the Virtual Town Square

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 80:15

    Featuring:Brian Barnes, Partner, Cooper & Kirk PLLCAntonio García-Martínez, Author, Chaos Monkeys, and ex-Advisor, TwitterMichael McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor, Stanford Law School, and Co-Chair, Oversight BoardChris Pavlovski, Founder and CEO, Rumble.comModerator: Olivia Jackson, General Counsel, Oversight BoardIntroduction: Jonathan Breit, Stanford Law School ’22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel II: Antitrust in the the Age of the Trillion-Dollar Company

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 100:25

    Featuring:A. Douglas Melamed, Professor, Stanford Law School, and ex-General Counsel, IntelAaron Schur, Deputy General Counsel, YelpHal Singer, Managing Director, Econ OneDina Srinivasan, Author, The Antitrust Case Against FacebookAlan Sykes, Professor, Stanford Law SchoolModerator: Ted Ullyot, Former General Counsel, FacebookIntroduction: Austin Peters, Stanford Law School '22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Fireside Chat with Paul Grewal, Chief Legal Officer of Coinbase

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 50:43

    Featuring:Paul Grewal, Chief Legal Officer, CoinbaseInterviewer: Katie Biber, Chief Legal Officer, BrexIntroduction: Theodore Furchtgott, Stanford Law School '22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel I: Privacy for and from the Digital Person

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 82:15

    Featuring:Melissa Holyoak, Solicitor General, State of UtahClayton Kozinski, Counsel, Lehotsky Keller LLPAaron Royston, Managing Partner, venBio PartnersHoan Ton-That, Co-Founder and CEO, Clearview AIModerator: Gabe Ledeen, Managing Counsel, Privacy and Product, CruiseIntroduction: Daniel Bojorquez, Stanford Law School '23* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Opening and a Conversation on Regulation as Opportunity

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 55:50

    ConvocationEugene B. Meyer, President and CEO, The Federalist SocietyA Conversation on Regulation as OpportunitySalen Churi, General Partner, Trust VenturesMiles Jennings, General Counsel, a16z CryptoModerator: Ann McDonald, Stanford Law School '23* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Making Sense of Significant Potential Tax Reforms: From Global Minimums to Personal Estates

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 18, 2021 84:10

    A sharply divided Congress is facing significant challenges in order to raise revenue and meet President Biden’s priorities. While no one pretends to have a crystal ball, some changes are likely coming this fall and winter. Depending upon what compromises can be reached, ideas for reform range from changing step-up-in-basis rules and pass through regulations to significant changes in corporate taxation. Meanwhile in Brussels, a movement is growing among national leaders to establish global minimum corporate taxes and other significant changes to the global tax system. What is a practitioner to make of all this? What do we need to prepare for?Listen to our our panel of experts dissect and explain some of the most impactful potential tax reforms of 2021.

    How to Fix the Budget Mess

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 17, 2021 40:03

    The Evansville Lawyers Chapter is honored to host Dave Hoppe, President, Hoppe Strategies, for a discussion entitled "How to Fix the Budget Mess."Featuring: David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesIntroduction: Seth Zirkle, Evansville Lawyers Chapter President

    Government-Mandated Vaccine Requirements: OSHA, Jacobson, and the Legacy of Buck v. Bell

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 9, 2021 59:34

    Featuring:Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityModerator: Chad Davis, President, Polk County Lawyers Chapters* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Closing Remarks by Hon. Daniel Cameron

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2021 17:47

    Featuring:Hon. Daniel Cameron, Attorney General, Commonwealth of Kentucky* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel 3: Supreme Court Preview

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2021 73:11

    This panel discussed the upcoming Supreme Court term, which began on October 4, 2021. The Court's docket already includes major cases involving abortion, civil rights, criminal law, free expression and religious liberty, copyright, immigration, national security, the Second Amendment, and matters of constitutional structure. The full list of cases granted thus far for the upcoming term can be viewed on SCOTUSblog. The panel discussed broader questions about the direction of the Court.Featuring:Sarah Keeton Campbell, Associate Solicitor General and Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Tennessee Attorney General's OfficeJohn P. Elwood, Partner, Arnold & PorterMatthew Kuhn, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Office of the Kentucky Attorney GeneralModerator: Hon. John K. Bush, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel 2: Separation of Powers During Emergencies

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2021 54:14

    Featuring:Hon. Allison Joy Ball, State Treasurer, Commonwealth of KentuckyKevin Gallagher, Counsel, Wilmer HaleHon. Robin L. Webb, Kentucky State Senator Moderator: Hon. John B. Nalbandian, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel 1: Criminal Justice Reform

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2021 70:51

    Featuring:Jesse Barrett, Partner, SouthBank Legal: LaDue | Curran | KuehnRussell Coleman, Partner, Frost Brown Todd and Former United States Attorney for the Western District of KentuckyElaine Leonhard, Supervisory Assistant United States Attorney, Eastern District of KentuckyHon. Danny Reeves, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of KentuckyModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Opening Remarks and Keynote Address by Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 8, 2021 42:46

    Featuring:Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel IV: The Anti-Federalists after 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 4, 2021 111:50

    On February 28-29, 1992, the Federalist Society held its eleventh annual National Student Symposium at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, Texas. The subject of the conference was "The Legacy of the Federalist Papers." The last panel covered "The Anti-Federalists After 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?".3:45 p.m.Panel IV: The Anti-Federalists after 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?Prof. Akhil R. Amar, Yale Law SchoolHon. Charles J. Cooper, Partner, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge; and former Assistant U.S. Attorney GeneralProf. Lino A. Graglia, University of Texas School of LawModerator: Hon. Edwin Meese III, 75th Attorney General; and Distinguished Fellow, The Heritage Foundation*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

    Panel Three: Critical Race Theory in Schools

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 1, 2021 75:26

    Schools across the country have introduced elements of critical race theory into their curriculums. The Biden Administration has produced a federal rule that would prioritize funding for history and civics programs shaped by CRT. Meanwhile, lawmakers in 16 states have introduced or passed legislation this year seeking to limit the teaching of critical race theory within public institutions. And parents across the country have pushed back against school boards adopting CRT and filed litigation to that effect. What is critical race theory? Is the Biden Administration able to encourage its teaching through funding? Are states and localities within their rights in designing and limiting curricula and what can and cannot be taught in public schools or do laws that do so potentially violate First Amendment rights or other applicable law?Featuring:Prof. Christopher Brooks, Professor of History, East Stroudsburg UniversityJoe Cohn, Legislative and Policy Director, FIRETaylor Meehan, Counsel, Consovoy McCarthy PLLCModerator: Alison Somin, Legal Fellow, Center for the Separation of Powers at the Pacific Legal Foundation* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Panel Two: School Choice and Education Reforms During COVID-19

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 1, 2021 61:39

    The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in over a year of virtual public schooling in some parts of the country, which caused a surge of interest in school choice options as parents sought in-person instruction for their children. About 500,000 students nationally left traditional public schools during the pandemic to move into private schools, charters, and full-time home-schooling. State legislatures across the country thus responded by considering legislation to increase the number of charter schools, offer additional scholarship and tax credit programs, and create education savings account options to increase choice in education.This panel surveyed proposed education reforms to expand school choice and discussed the responses of unions, school boards, and parents to these proposals. Panelists considered changes the Biden Administration may make in education special emphasis on any proposed reforms in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey.Featuring:Robert S. Eitel, President, Defense of Freedom InstituteBenjamin A. Field, Attorney, Institute for JusticeModerator: Judge Joshua Wolson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Lunch and Keynote Address: What Causes, and What Might Cure, Campus Illiberalism?

    Play Episode Listen Later Nov 1, 2021 61:22

    Featuring: Prof. Robert P. George, Princeton UniversityIntroduction: Lisa Ezell, Vice President & Director, Lawyers Chapters, The Federalist Society* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

    Claim FedSoc Events

    In order to claim this podcast we'll send an email to with a verification link. Simply click the link and you will be able to edit tags, request a refresh, and other features to take control of your podcast page!

    Claim Cancel