Podcast appearances and mentions of Jeffrey S Sutton

While many Americans take broadband access for granted, in certain predominantly rural areas broadband access remains limited. In addition to private funding, federal and state efforts have spent billions of dollars to address this problem over the years with varying degrees of effectiveness, and there are billions in funding currently flowing out for more broadband projects as a result of pandemic-era funding bills. Most recently, the Infrastructure bill has provided another $42 billion in funding on top of the existing efforts—but will this close the gap once and for all or will we look back at this as a case of opportunity (and funds) lost? Should the country prioritize speed and low cost or taking the time to get every American connected to fiber? With a range of important viewpoints represented, this panel will discuss the largest federal effort to promote broadband connectivity.Featuring:Ms. Shirley Bloomfield, Chief Executive Officer, NTCA–The Rural Broadband AssociationMr. Veneeth Iyengar, Louisiana State Executive Director for Broadband Development and Connectivity, ConnectLA; Chairman of the Board, Innovation CatalystHon. Michael O’Rielly, President, MPORielly Consulting Inc.; Former Commissioner, Federal Communications CommissionModerator: Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Everything in law and politics, including individual rights, comes back to divisions of power and the evergreen question: Who decides? Who wins the disputes of the day often turns on who decides them. And our acceptance of the resolution of those disputes often turns on who the decision maker is-because it reveals who governs us. In Who Decides?: States As Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford UP, 2021), the influential US Appellate Court Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton focuses on the constitutional structure of the American states to answer the question of who should decide the key questions of public policy today. By concentrating on the role of governmental structure in shaping power across the 50 American states, Sutton develops a powerful explanation of American constitutional law, in all of its variety, as opposed to just federal constitutional law. As in his earlier book, 51 Imperfect Solutions, which looked at how American federalism allowed the states to serve as laboratories of innovation for protecting individual liberty and property rights, Sutton compares state-level governments with the federal government and draws numerous insights from the comparisons. Instead of focusing on individual rights, however, he focuses on structure, while continuing to develop some of the core themes of his previous book. An illuminating and essential sequel to his earlier work on the nature of American federalism, Who Decides makes the case that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of government. Taken together, both books reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has the answers to our vexing constitutional questions. William Domnarski is a longtime lawyer who before and during has been a literary guy, with a Ph.D. in English. He's written five books on judges, lawyers, and courts, two with Oxford, one with Illinois, one with Michigan, and one with the American Bar Association.

As federalism becomes an increasingly important principle of our constitutional structure, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has published a timely book titled, Who Decides? States as Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Oxford, 2021). Judge Sutton, a former law clerk to Justices Lewis Powell and Antonin Scalia, argues that constitutional law in America--encompassing the systems of all 51 governments--should have a role in assessing the right balance of power among all branches of our state and federal governments.A distinguished group of legal thinkers and practitioners joins us to discuss this book.Featuring: -- Hon. William H. Pryor, Jr., Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit-- Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit-- Moderator: Prof. Jennifer L. Mascott, Assistant Professor of Law and Co-Executive Director, The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State, Antonin Scalia Law School

In September of 2021, Senate Bill 8 passed in the state of Texas. With it, some of the most restrictive abortion regulations in the country were enacted into law, going against the constitutional rights established in the landmark Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade. Such a critical legal interpretation can prompt review of the perennial question: who should get to decide on major questions of public policy today — the federal government, or state courts and state constitutions? The Honorable Jeffrey S. Sutton responded to the question in his book, Who Decides? States as Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation. While it is the states' responsibility to uphold the federal constitution, interpretations vary from state to state; is there danger in the disparities? Judge Sutton argued that for all its variety, American Constitutional Law should account for both the roles of state and federal courts and constitutions together when it comes to assessing the right balance of power. Sutton reminded us that our nuanced and ever-evolving systems must be deeply considered by those who interpret the law, and they must resist the assumption that the Supreme Court holds all the answers to our most complex constitutional questions. After all, the answer to the evergreen question of “who decides” ultimately reveals who governs us. The Honorable Jeffrey S. Sutton serves on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Judge Sutton was a partner with the law firm of Jones Day and served as State Solicitor of the State of Ohio. He also served as a law clerk to the Honorable Lewis F. Powell, Jr. (Ret.), the Honorable Antonin Scalia, and the Honorable Thomas J. Meskill. In addition to Who Decides: States as Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation, he is the author of 51 Imperfect Solutions. Sen. Joe Nguyen was born in White Center, raised in Burien, and currently lives in West Seattle. His experiences growing up in an immigrant community, as the son of Vietnamese refugees and raised by a single mother, inform much of his service today. Sen. Nguyen is the vice-chair of the Senate Human Services, Reentry & Rehabilitation Committee, and a member of the Transportation Committee, the Rules Committee, and the Environment, Energy & Technology Committee. Buy the Book: Who Decides?: States as Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation (Hardcover) from Third Place Books Presented by Town Hall Seattle and Henry M. Jackson Foundation.

Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, discusses his new book, "Who Decides?: States as Laboratories of Constitutional Experimentation." June Grasso hosts. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Author and federal judge Jeffrey S. Sutton argues the legislative branch of states should take a larger role in constitutional experimentation, and we should ask less of the judicial branch.

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.

On April 5, 2019, the Federalist Society's Ohio lawyers chapters hosted the 2019 Ohio Chapters Conference in Columbus, OH. The first panel of the conference discussed "The Law and Policy of Redistricting Reform".The Supreme Court will hear argument this term in cases presenting the question whether courts may strike down “partisan gerrymanders.” This presents a number of questions. Some are legal: Do state legislatures act unconstitutionally if they draw districts that favor one party or the other? If so, what are courts to do about it? Others relate to policy: Are so-called “partisan gerrymanders” even troubling? Is there a chance of meaningful reform at the state level? And what does Ohio’s experience with redistricting reform teach us about this? The panel will address these questions and more.Featuring:Kathleen Clyde, Portage County CommissionerHon. Larry Obhof, Ohio Senate President, 22nd DistrictMisha Tseytlin, Troutman Sanders & Former Solicitor General, State of WisconsinModerator: Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, 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 speakers.

On April 5, 2019, the Federalist Society's Ohio lawyers chapters hosted the 2019 Ohio Chapters Conference in Columbus, OH. The first panel of the conference discussed "The Law and Policy of Redistricting Reform".The Supreme Court will hear argument this term in cases presenting the question whether courts may strike down “partisan gerrymanders.” This presents a number of questions. Some are legal: Do state legislatures act unconstitutionally if they draw districts that favor one party or the other? If so, what are courts to do about it? Others relate to policy: Are so-called “partisan gerrymanders” even troubling? Is there a chance of meaningful reform at the state level? And what does Ohio’s experience with redistricting reform teach us about this? The panel will address these questions and more.Featuring:Kathleen Clyde, Portage County CommissionerHon. Larry Obhof, Ohio Senate President, 22nd DistrictMisha Tseytlin, Troutman Sanders & Former Solicitor General, State of WisconsinModerator: Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, 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 speakers.

In this episode, we hear from Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Judge Sutton recently released a terrific book, 51 Imperfect Solutions: States and the Making of American Constitutional Law. There is much to learn for criminal defense lawyers and others from Judge Sutton's book and from this podcast. I spoke with Judge Sutton by phone last month while he was teaching state constitutional law in the January term at Harvard Law School. Learn more about NACDL. Ivan J. Dominguez, host. Ian Nawalinski, production assistant. Music West Bank (Lezet) / CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 and Walkabout (Digital Primitives) / CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. Running time: 22m31s.

Honorable Jeffrey S. Sutton is a judge for the United States Court of Appeals in the Sixth Circuit. His book 51 Imperfect Solutions is framed around four stories which he uses to illustrate the interplay between state and federal constitutions. The four stories are; school funding, the exclusionary rule, eugenics, and mandatory flag salutes. Sutton believes that many of the state constitutions are actually closer to codes than constitutions. Many states have constitutions that are so long that most residents of that state have not read them in their entirety. The original states have much smaller constitutions that are rather similar in tone and language to the federal Constitution.What is the interplay between the federal Constitution and the state constitution? What is the exclusionary rule? What role should the state play in comparison to the federal government? Do states know best when it comes to funding education? Is the Supreme Court always “right” when it comes to interpreting the Constitution?Further Reading:The United States Once Sterilized Tens of Thousands — Here’s How the Supreme Court Allowed It, written by Trevor Burrus51 Imperfect Solutions, written by Hon. Jeffrey S. SuttonRelated Content:Constitutional Controversies, written George H. SmithThe Constitution in Practice: From Liberty to Leviathan, Free Thoughts PodcastThe Conscience of the Constitution, Free Thoughts Podcast See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On October 19, 2018, the Federalist Society's Pennsylvania chapters hosted the 2018 Pennsylvania Chapters Conference in Philadelphia. The luncheon address by Hon. Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals covered the role of state constitutions and state courts in formulating American constitutional law.Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton - U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth CircuitIntroduction: Matthew Hank, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson PC and President, Philadelphia Lawyers Chapter51 Imperfect Solutions: States and the Making of American Constitutional Law

On October 19, 2018, the Federalist Society's Pennsylvania chapters hosted the 2018 Pennsylvania Chapters Conference in Philadelphia. The luncheon address by Hon. Jeffrey Sutton of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals covered the role of state constitutions and state courts in formulating American constitutional law.Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton - U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth CircuitIntroduction: Matthew Hank, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson PC and President, Philadelphia Lawyers Chapter51 Imperfect Solutions: States and the Making of American Constitutional Law

Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and author of the new book, 51 Imperfect Solutions: States and the Making of American Constitutional Law, explores four constitutional debates — school funding, the exclusionary rule, eugenics, and mandatory flag salutes — to shed light on the importance of state courts and state constitutions in protecting liberty. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates.

When we think of constitutional law, we invariably focus on the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal court system. Yet much of our constitutional law is not made at the federal level. In 51 Imperfect Solutions, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton argues that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in protecting individual liberties.51 Imperfect Solutions addresses four different areas of constitutional law: equal protection, criminal procedure, privacy, and free speech and free exercise of religion. Traditional accounts of these bedrock debates about the relationship of the individual to the state focus on decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. But these are only part of the story. Judge Sutton corrects this omission by looking at each issue – and some others as well – through the lens of many constitutions, not one constitution; of many courts, not one court; and of all American judges, not federal or state judges. A central conviction of his work is that an under-appreciation of state constitutional law has hurt state and federal law and has undermined the appropriate balance between state and federal courts in protecting individual liberty. Several ideas for reform are also offered to correct this imbalance. Join us for an interesting and lively discussion with Judge Sutton on his new book, followed by comments by Ed Whelan. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

When we think of constitutional law, we invariably think of the United States Supreme Court and the federal court system. Yet much of our constitutional law is not made at the federal level. In 51 Imperfect Solutions, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton argues that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in protecting individual liberties. The book tells four stories that arise in four different areas of constitutional law: equal protection; criminal procedure; privacy; and free speech and free exercise of religion. Traditional accounts of these bedrock debates about the relationship of the individual to the state focus on decisions of the United States Supreme Court. But these explanations tell just part of the story. The book corrects this omission by looking at each issue--and some others as well--through the lens of many constitutions, not one constitution; of many courts, not one court; and of all American judges, not federal or state judges. Taken together, the stories reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has all of the answers to the most vexing constitutional questions. If there is a central conviction of the book, it's that an underappreciation of state constitutional law has hurt state and federal law and has undermined the appropriate balance between state and federal courts in protecting individual liberty. In trying to correct this imbalance, the book also offers several ideas for reform. Author Judge Sutton of the Sixth Circuit will join Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett and Judge Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit to discuss his new book. Featuring:Randy E. Barnett, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Legal Theory, Georgetown University Law CenterHon. William H. Pryor, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitHon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

When we think of constitutional law, we invariably think of the United States Supreme Court and the federal court system. Yet much of our constitutional law is not made at the federal level. In 51 Imperfect Solutions, U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton argues that American Constitutional Law should account for the role of the state courts and state constitutions, together with the federal courts and the federal constitution, in protecting individual liberties. The book tells four stories that arise in four different areas of constitutional law: equal protection; criminal procedure; privacy; and free speech and free exercise of religion. Traditional accounts of these bedrock debates about the relationship of the individual to the state focus on decisions of the United States Supreme Court. But these explanations tell just part of the story. The book corrects this omission by looking at each issue--and some others as well--through the lens of many constitutions, not one constitution; of many courts, not one court; and of all American judges, not federal or state judges. Taken together, the stories reveal a remarkably complex, nuanced, ever-changing federalist system, one that ought to make lawyers and litigants pause before reflexively assuming that the United States Supreme Court alone has all of the answers to the most vexing constitutional questions. If there is a central conviction of the book, it's that an underappreciation of state constitutional law has hurt state and federal law and has undermined the appropriate balance between state and federal courts in protecting individual liberty. In trying to correct this imbalance, the book also offers several ideas for reform. Author Judge Sutton of the Sixth Circuit will join Georgetown Law Professor Randy Barnett and Judge Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit to discuss his new book. Featuring:Randy E. Barnett, Carmack Waterhouse Professor of Legal Theory, Georgetown University Law CenterHon. William H. Pryor, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitHon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.

State courts are often faced with cases raising arguments under state and federal law. If there are similar provisions in both the United States Constitution and the Ohio Constitution, how should judges interpret these provisions? Must they be interpreted in the same way? If not, then what is needed to justify a court's decision to interpret text in the Ohio Constitution differently than similar (or even identical) text in the United States Constitution? -- This panel was held during the Inaugural Ohio Chapters Conference at the Athletic Club of Columbus on Friday, March 31, 2017. -- Featuring: Hon. Judith French, Ohio Supreme Court and Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th Circuit. Moderator: Hon. Steve Yarbrough, Ohio Sixth District Court of Appeals. Introduction: Matt Kemp, President, Toledo Lawyers Chapter.