Podcast appearances and mentions of James L Buckley

January 30, 2026 marks the 50th anniversary of Buckley v. Valeo, a landmark First Amendment speech clause case. While the podcast normally airs current oral arguments, we thought that it would be interesting to spotlight the oral arguments in this landmark case during month of its anniversary.Episode 44: Buckley v. ValeoJames L. Buckley, et al. v. Francis R. Valeo, Secretary of the United States Senate, et al. argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 10, 1975 and decided on January 30, 1976. Argued by Ralph K. Winter, Joel M. Gora, Brice M. Claggett, and  (on behalf of James L. Buckley) and Daniel M. Friedman, Archibald Cox, Lloyd N. Cutler, and Ralph S. Spritzer (on behalf of Francis R. Valeo).   Case Background [from the Federal Election Commission]:On January 2, 1975, the suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Senator James L. Buckley of New York, Eugene McCarthy, Presidential candidate and former Senator from Minnesota, and several others. The defendants included Francis R. Valeo, Secretary of the Senate and Ex officio member of the newly formed Federal Election Commission, and the Commission itself. The plaintiffs charged that the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), under which the Commission was formed, and the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act were unconstitutional on a number of grounds.On January 24, 1975, pursuant to Section 437h(a) of the FECA, the district court certified the constitutional questions in the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. On August 15, 1975, the appeals court rendered a decision upholding almost all of the substantive provisions of the FECA with respect to contributions, expenditures and disclosure. The court also sustained the constitutionality of the method of appointing the Commission.On September 19, 1975, the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which reached its decision on January 30, 1976. Questions Presented, from the Appellants' Brief: 1. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitations imposed by FECA on expenditures by political candidates and organizations are constitutional?2. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitation imposed by FECA on expenditures by any person relative to a clearly identified candidate are constitutional?3. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the limitations imposed by FECA on contributions to political candidates and organizations are constitutional?4. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the disclosure requirements imposed on political candidates, organizations and individuals by FECA are constitutional?5. Did the courts below correctly conclude that the public financing provisions of FECA and Subtitle H of the Internal Revenue Code are constitutional?6. Did the Court of Appeals correctly conclude that the method provided by FECA for appointing members of the Federal Election Commission is constitutional?7. Did the Court of Appeals properly decline to decide whether certain powers conferred upon the Federal Election Commission by FECA are constitutional?8. Are the powers conferred upon the Federal Election Commission by FECA constitutional?Resources:   Supreme Court OpinionInstitute for Free Speech AnalysisC-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 1C-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 2C-SPAN Buckley v. Valeo Panel 3The Institute for Free Speech promotes and defends the political speech rights to freely speak, assemble, publish, and petition the government guaranteed by the First Amendment. If you're enjoying the Free Speech Arguments podcast, please subscribe and leave a review on your preferred podcast platform. To support the Institute's mission or inquire about legal assistance, please visit our website: www.ifs.org

#GOP:Farewell to the Gentleman Senator James L. Buckley. Victor Davis Hanson, Hoover Institution https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/18/nyregion/james-buckley-dead.html Photo:  1838 Abdication of Sulla No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow

Photo:  1910 No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow #GOP: Remembering Senator James L. Buckley, 1925-2023. John Bolton, National Review https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2023/09/11/jim-buckley-civic-leader/

On September 9-10, 1988, The Federalist Society hosted its second annual National Lawyers Convention at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. on "The Constitution and Federal Criminal Law." The third panel of the convention discussed "Federalism and the Scope of Federal Criminal Law."Many federal laws, such as the mail fraud statute and the RICO statute, criminalize activity traditionally the subject of state police power. To what extent should this traditional division between federal and state criminal law be maintained, and to what extent should it be adjusted to promote greater efficiency in law enforcement under changing conditions and criminal activity of national impact? What are the enumerated powers that authorize various national criminal statutes, and what subjects might be inherently off limits to federal power?Featuring:Prof. G. Robert Blakey, Notre Dame Law SchoolJoseph diGenova, Bishop, Cook, Purcell & ReynoldsJudge David Sentelle, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. CircuitProf. William Van Alstyne, Duke University School of LawModerator: Judge James L. Buckley, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

On September 9-10, 1988, The Federalist Society hosted its second annual National Lawyers Convention at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. on "The Constitution and Federal Criminal Law." The third panel of the convention discussed "Federalism and the Scope of Federal Criminal Law."Many federal laws, such as the mail fraud statute and the RICO statute, criminalize activity traditionally the subject of state police power. To what extent should this traditional division between federal and state criminal law be maintained, and to what extent should it be adjusted to promote greater efficiency in law enforcement under changing conditions and criminal activity of national impact? What are the enumerated powers that authorize various national criminal statutes, and what subjects might be inherently off limits to federal power?Featuring:Prof. G. Robert Blakey, Notre Dame Law SchoolJoseph diGenova, Bishop, Cook, Purcell & ReynoldsJudge David Sentelle, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. CircuitProf. William Van Alstyne, Duke University School of LawModerator: Judge James L. Buckley, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

David Keene has been active in national politics since 1968, and has worked for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole and Senator James L. Buckley. Keene served as Chairman of the American Conservative Union (ACU) from 1984 until 2011. The ACU organizes the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC. Keene was NRA President in 2011-2013. Lee Murphy, U.S. Congressional Candidate Delaware, began teaching at Immaculate Heart of Mary, and coached at St. Elizabeth’s and St. Mark’s High Schools. He worked in the railroad industry for 35 years, starting as a conductor and ending in management. Since Lee has pursued an acting career, appearing in commercials, film and TV. Lee is a grandfather who is helping to raise two wonderful grandkids. Ben Brubeck with Associated Builders and Contractors a national construction industry trade association representing more than 21,000 members. Founded on the merit shop philosophy, ABC and its 69 chapters help members develop people, win work and deliver that work safely, ethically and profitably for the betterment of the communities in which ABC and its members work. ABC's membership represents all specialties within the U.S. construction industry and is comprised primarily of firms that perform work in the industrial and commercial sectors. Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues – including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform -- as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. His analysis and commentary have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, Politico, Human Events, National Review Online and Townhall. Along with John Fund, he is the co-author of Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk and Obama’s Enforcer: Eric Holder’s Justice Department Brooke McGowan is a longtime conservative from Oklahoma. She works diligently to keep constitutional and conservative Christian values the focus for those who endeavor to save the republic. She founded MAGA Make America Great Always to support Conservative candidates. Cowboys for Trump has developed a great relationship with a great President. C4T founder Couy Griffin is a County Commissioner in Otero County New Mexico. Cowboys for Trump is an organization founded upon like-minded Americans who are concerned about the direction of our country. We believe that the liberal progressive agenda is drastically moving us away from the identifying principles that make us proud to be American. Tim Viens is a driver in the NASCAR Gander Truck Series and NASCAR Xfinity Series. Mike Affarano Motorsports has announced that the No. 03 Chevy Silverado driven by Timothy Viens will be carrying the colors of TRUMP / PENCE 2020 in the season opener NextEra Energy Resources 250 at the famed Daytona International Speedway. Viens No. 03 will be proudly sponsored by The Patriots PAC of America in conjunction with Race Fans for Trump 2020. Viens has spent time in both the NASCAR Gander RV & Outdoors Truck Series, as well as the second-tier NASCAR Xfinity Series in his career.

The Hon. James L. Buckley and Robert Gasaway recently joined us to discuss the current state of the legislative branch and reflect on a host of Article I and federal government reform proposals ranging from term limits to eliminating grants-in-aid to state and local governments. We hope you enjoy the conversation!

The Hon. James L. Buckley and Robert Gasaway recently joined us to discuss the current state of the legislative branch and reflect on a host of Article I and federal government reform proposals ranging from term limits to eliminating grants-in-aid to state and local governments. We hope you enjoy the conversation!

Former U.S. Senator James L. Buckley makes the case for ending subsidies to state and local governments. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

James L. Buckley’s new book, Saving Congress from Itself, describes the damage caused by federal aid-to-state programs and proposes a full repeal. Buckley’s analysis is grounded in his distinguished career as a U.S. senator from New York, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and a high-level Reagan administration official. He argues that repealing aid-to-state programs would free the federal government to focus on truly national matters, put the government on sounder financial footing, and improve the ability of states to manage their programs for education, welfare, transportation, and other activities. Cato’s Roger Pilon and Chris Edwards will comment on Buckley’s proposal and describe the legal and practical aspects of reviving federalism and ending aid. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.