Podcast appearances and mentions of Jonathan H Adler

Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, the FDA must approve new tobacco products. Wages and White Lion Investments (dba Trion Distribution) and Vapetasia manufacture and sell flavored nicotine-containing liquids for use in refillable e-cigarette systems. They applied for FDA approval in 2020; about ten months later, the FDA announced new requirements for approval and, based on those requirements, denied the applications citing the deficiency. The manufacturers challenged the denial and the Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, found the FDA's actions were arbitrary and capricious. SCOTUS heard oral argument on Monday, December 2, 2024. On April 2, 2025, the Court issued a decision vacating the Fifth Circuit in a 9-0 opinion written by Justice Alito. Justice Sotomayor wrote a concurring opinion. Join us for a Courthouse Steps Decision panel discussion, where a group of experts will discuss this important case and its potential effects not just for regulated parties but in the broader administrative law space. Featuring: Prof. 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 Prof. Kristin E. Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School Prof. Richard J. Pierce, Jr., Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School (Moderator) Eli Nachmany, Associate, Covington & Burling LLP

This week, the Supreme Court wrapped up its term after issuing opinions that dramatically alter Americans' abilities to confront climate change, our constitutional rights, and faith in the high court itself. Guest host Kimberly Atkins Stohr talks rolling back the EPA's power with Christine Emba, columnist and editor at the Washington Post, on the left; Sarah Isgur, staff writer and host for The Dispatch, on the right; and special guest Jonathan H. Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, where he directs the Coleman P. Burke Center for Environmental Law. Plus, how does the end of Roe V. Wade affect the legal landscape, the public opinion of the court, and the message Democrats are sending to voters? And the January 6 Select Committee's surprise witness gave jaw-dropping testimony about Trump's actions and state of mind on the day of the insurrection. Is it enough to change minds?

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

In June, President Biden signed into law a bill that repealed changes to Environmental Protection Agency methane emissions regulations made by the Trump administration. In this episode, Professor Jonathan Adler joins the podcast to provide context to this development and to discuss the underlying legal and environmental issues at play.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 LawVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Adam J. White and Jonathan Adler join host Paul Rosenzweig to discuss the Supreme Court vacancy, how the pandemic might impact confirmation, and how the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation might impact the court, the Senate, the election, and beyond. Special Guests: Adam J. White and Jonathan H. Adler.

The Cuyahoga River on fire. But not when you think. This Saturday, June 22, marks the 50th anniversary of one of the iconic moments of the modern environmental history—the infamous Cuyahoga River fire in Cleveland. Things were so bad, the legend goes, that rivers were catching fire! But most of what you think you know about that story is incomplete or inaccurate, argues Jonathan H. Adler... Source

The seventh annual Executive Branch Review Conference took place on May 8, 2019, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington DC. The seventh and final panel covered "The Trump Administration's Proposed Redefinition of 'Navigable Waters': Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right?"In December 2018 the Trump Administration released a long awaited proposal to revise the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers regulations that define “navigable waters" under the Clean Water Act. Versions of these regulations have engendered controversy for decades, over whether the Act itself authorizes the agencies to regulate non-navigable wetlands and tributaries. The Obama Administration adopted regulations in 2015 that remain the subject of a number of lawsuits. Upon taking office, President Trump ordered the agencies to reconsider the 2015 regulations. The December 2018 proposal would narrow the coverage of the Act in significant ways, but would continue to regulate categories of non-navigable waters, including some wetlands potentially far afield of flowing streams, and some drainages that carry very little flow over brief periods of time. This panel will provide a high level review of the legal issues and policy trade-offs reflected in the new proposal.* * * * * 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:Hon. Jeffrey Clark, Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources DivisionMr. Jon Devine, Director, Federal Water Policy, Water Division, Nature Program, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Mr. Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationModerator: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director, Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of LawIntroduction: Andrew Varcoe, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates

The seventh annual Executive Branch Review Conference took place on May 8, 2019, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington DC. The seventh and final panel covered "The Trump Administration's Proposed Redefinition of 'Navigable Waters': Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right?"In December 2018 the Trump Administration released a long awaited proposal to revise the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers regulations that define “navigable waters" under the Clean Water Act. Versions of these regulations have engendered controversy for decades, over whether the Act itself authorizes the agencies to regulate non-navigable wetlands and tributaries. The Obama Administration adopted regulations in 2015 that remain the subject of a number of lawsuits. Upon taking office, President Trump ordered the agencies to reconsider the 2015 regulations. The December 2018 proposal would narrow the coverage of the Act in significant ways, but would continue to regulate categories of non-navigable waters, including some wetlands potentially far afield of flowing streams, and some drainages that carry very little flow over brief periods of time. This panel will provide a high level review of the legal issues and policy trade-offs reflected in the new proposal.* * * * * 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:Hon. Jeffrey Clark, Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources DivisionMr. Jon Devine, Director, Federal Water Policy, Water Division, Nature Program, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Mr. Tony Francois, Senior Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationModerator: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Director, Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of LawIntroduction: Andrew Varcoe, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The roundtable discussion covered "Federalism's Contribution to Economic Liberty: Catalyzing Technological Advancement and Economic Growth".Does the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee economic liberty? If not, what role might states play in advancing economic liberty? Frustrated with the federal government’s inability or unwillingness to solve regulatory or competition-based problems, some states have taken matters into their own hands. This panel will address how states have been, and still can be, laboratories of democracy when it comes to regulation and catalyzing economic growth. It will also address how federal regulators can work with, not against, states to accomplish these goals.Using case studies ranging from emerging technologies to marijuana deregulation, the panel will explore the state’s role in our modern federal system, with special attention paid to modern interpretations of both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause.Discussion will focus on demonstrating the ways in which states can remain flexible in fostering innovation—both technological and regarding social policy—while ensuring that consumers are adequately protected from dangerous product or service testing or other offerings. This flexibility enables states to attract, test, and encourage competition in emerging and innovative technologies, as well as long-existing technologies with lowered barriers to entry.Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of LawMs. Dana Berliner, Senior Vice President and Litigation Director, Institute for JusticeHon. Clint Bolick, Arizona Supreme CourtHon. Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney GeneralProf. Allan Ides, Professor of Law and Christopher N. May Chair, Loyola Law School, Los AngelesModerator: Hon. Chad Readler, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth CircuitAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The roundtable discussion covered "Federalism's Contribution to Economic Liberty: Catalyzing Technological Advancement and Economic Growth".Does the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee economic liberty? If not, what role might states play in advancing economic liberty? Frustrated with the federal government’s inability or unwillingness to solve regulatory or competition-based problems, some states have taken matters into their own hands. This panel will address how states have been, and still can be, laboratories of democracy when it comes to regulation and catalyzing economic growth. It will also address how federal regulators can work with, not against, states to accomplish these goals.Using case studies ranging from emerging technologies to marijuana deregulation, the panel will explore the state’s role in our modern federal system, with special attention paid to modern interpretations of both the Fourteenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause.Discussion will focus on demonstrating the ways in which states can remain flexible in fostering innovation—both technological and regarding social policy—while ensuring that consumers are adequately protected from dangerous product or service testing or other offerings. This flexibility enables states to attract, test, and encourage competition in emerging and innovative technologies, as well as long-existing technologies with lowered barriers to entry.Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Business Law & Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of LawMs. Dana Berliner, Senior Vice President and Litigation Director, Institute for JusticeHon. Clint Bolick, Arizona Supreme CourtHon. Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney GeneralProf. Allan Ides, Professor of Law and Christopher N. May Chair, Loyola Law School, Los AngelesModerator: Hon. Chad Readler, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth CircuitAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

It has long been understood that broad congressional delegations of rulemaking authority have empowered administrative agencies to play a robust role in setting policy priorities for many subjects, including the environment. This phenomenon is even more evident when realizing that most of the major environmental laws were passed several decades ago and have seen little updating since. Has Congress purposefully, or because of its inattention to passing or amending environmental laws, been ceding its policy-setting authority to others? This panel will consider that question by looking at the role of not just administrative agencies handling environmental issues but also other non-congressional mechanisms for controlling the environmental law and policy agenda.Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of LawProf. Donald J. Kochan, Professor and Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, Chapman University School of LawProf. Robert V. Percival, Professor of Law and Director, Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland School of LawProf. Michael P. Vandenbergh, David Daniels Allen Distinguished Chair of Law and Director, Climate Change Research Network Co-director, Energy, Environment and Land Use Program, Vanderbilt Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

It has long been understood that broad congressional delegations of rulemaking authority have empowered administrative agencies to play a robust role in setting policy priorities for many subjects, including the environment. This phenomenon is even more evident when realizing that most of the major environmental laws were passed several decades ago and have seen little updating since. Has Congress purposefully, or because of its inattention to passing or amending environmental laws, been ceding its policy-setting authority to others? This panel will consider that question by looking at the role of not just administrative agencies handling environmental issues but also other non-congressional mechanisms for controlling the environmental law and policy agenda.Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law, Case Western Reserve University School of LawProf. Donald J. Kochan, Professor and Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Development, Chapman University School of LawProf. Robert V. Percival, Professor of Law and Director, Environmental Law Program, University of Maryland School of LawProf. Michael P. Vandenbergh, David Daniels Allen Distinguished Chair of Law and Director, Climate Change Research Network Co-director, Energy, Environment and Land Use Program, Vanderbilt Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

In recent years, the Supreme Court appears to have taken a greater interest in "business" issues. Does this reflect a change in the Court's orientation, or is it the natural outcome of the appellate process? Is the Court "pro-business"? If so, in what ways do the Court's decisions support business interests and what does that mean for the law and the American public? Business and the Roberts Court provides the first critical analysis of the Court's business-related jurisprudence. Author and Editor Jonathan Adler joined us along with two chapter authors, Brian Fitzpatrick and Richard Lazarus, to discuss their contributions to this important volume. -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law; Prof. Brian T. Fitzpatrick , Professor of Law, Vanderbilt University Law School; and Prof. Richard J. Lazarus, Howard and Katherine Aibel Professor of Law, Harvard Law School.

The possession and use of marijuana have been illegal at the federal level since the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. Many states initially followed suit with similar legislation. But over the past twenty years there has been an increasing number of challenges to marijuana prohibition. Since 1996, when California legalized medical use of marijuana through Proposition 215, 23 other states have done the same despite federal law. Four of those states have legalized its recreational use as well. Opinion polls suggest a growing majority of Americans support legalizing marijuana for both medical and recreational use. Jonathan H. Adler, J.D. is the author or editor of seven books, including Business and the Roberts Court (Oxford University Press, 2016) and Rebuilding the Ark: New Perspectives on Endangered Species Act Reform (AEI Press, 2011). His numerous articles have appeared in the Harvard Environmental Law Review, the Supreme Court Economic Review, The Wall Street Journal, and USA Today. He has testified before Congress a dozen times, and his work has been cited by The U.S. Supreme Court. A 2016 study identified Professor Adler as the most-cited legal academic in administrative and environmental law under age 50. Brannon P. Denning, J.D. has written on the commerce clause and the dormant commerce clause, judicial and executive branch appointments, the constitutional amendment process, foreign affairs and the U.S. Constitution, and on the Second Amendment. He collaborated with Boris I. Bittker, Sterling Professor Emeritus at Yale, on The Regulation of Interstate Commerce and Foreign Commerce (Aspen Law and Business 1999) and is sole author of the second edition. He also edited Gun Control and Gun Rights: A Reader and Guide (NYU Press, 2002), which addresses aspects of firearms regulation and is the only book of its kind designed for undergraduate use. The Constitution Day Committee welcomes Brannon Denning and Jonathan Adler to discuss significant questions regarding marijuana legalization and pertinent federalism issues. In discussing the current controversy over marijuana legalization, the forum will address a long-standing debate in American history: states’ vs. federal rights.

The Memory Palace is a proud member of Radiotopia, from PRX, a curated network of extraordinary, story-driven shows. Learn more at radiotopia.fm SPOILERS BELOW Notes *Great stuff in the Cleveland Plain Dealer from waaaaaay back to fire #1, if you want to dive in. * Found Jonathan Joseph Wlasiuk’s dissertation, Refining Nature (etc.) quite helpful in sorting out the early days of the Rockefeller refineries. * If you want to know more about the complicated relationship of Cleveland and the ’69 fire and the passage of the Clean Water Act, seek out Jonathan H. Adler’s article (and R.E.M. nod), Fables of the Cuyahoga: Reconstructing a History of Environmental Protection. * I also want to shout out The Killer in the Attic, and More True Tales of Crime and Disaster from Cleveland’s Past, by John Stark Bellamy II, which does a great job with the river fires. Music * Start off with Lacrymae, from Melodium. * Go to a chopped up Fables, by Girls in Airports. * Finish off with the eternal Sunflower River Blues by John Fahey.

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

Independent investigative journalism, broadcasting, trouble-making and muckraking with Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com

This panel will consider to what extent the disproportionate increase in income among the very wealthy is due not to market forces but to rent seeking and government policies that are the product of rent seeking. It will also discuss possible solutions. -- This panel took place during the 18th Annual Faculty Conference at the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel in New York, NY on January 8, 2016. -- Featuring: Prof. David Snyder, American University Washington College of Law; Prof. Ilya Somin, George Mason School of Law; and Prof. James Stern, William & Mary Law School. Moderator: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

After delegating significant power to the administrative state, is Congress properly discharging its oversight role? Are there tools available to Congress that are underutilized? Would a proper annual budget process help? Are Congress’ oversight hearings meaningful, well-run, and properly focused? Should Congress be requesting more information from agencies through other avenues? -- This panel was presented on June 18, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC during the Third Annual Executive Branch Review Conference. -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Case Western Reserve University School of Law; Mr. Michael D. Bopp, Gibson Dunn and Crutcher; Prof. Sally Katzen, New York University School of Law; and Mr. Adam J. White, Boyden Gray & Associates. Moderator: Hon. Todd F. Gaziano, Pacific Legal Foundation.

Jonathan H. Adler from Case Western Reserve University and Nicholas Bagley from the University of Michigan join National Constitution Center president Jeffrey Rosen to analyze the core constitutional arguments in the latest Obamacare challenge at the Supreme Court.

Jonathan H. Adler from Case Western Reserve University and Nicholas Bagley from the University of Michigan join National Constitution Center president Jeffrey Rosen to analyze the core constitutional arguments in the latest Obamacare challenge at the Supreme Court.

November 16, 2012 The Law and Policy of Hydraulic Fracturing: Addressing the Issues of the Natural Gas Boom - Panel 3 Case Western Reserve University School of Law - Law Review Moderator: Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Professor of Law and Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University Speakers: Joel Zipp, Senior Counsel, Holland & Knight LLP Elizabeth Burleson, Associate Professor of Law, Pace University John Nolon, Professor of Law, Pace University Chris Kulander, Assistant Professor of Law, Texas Tech University

Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt has filed a lawsuit alleging the Obama administration is violating the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and imposing illegal taxes in states such as Oklahoma. As Jonathan H. Adler and Michael F. Cannon detail in their forthcoming Health Matrix article, "Taxation Without Representation: The Illegal IRS Rule to Expand Tax Credits under the PPACA," the PPACA cannot function without state buy-in. The Obama administration's response to state push-back has been to rewrite the statute by imposing, on both employers and individuals, taxes that Congress never authorized. Pruitt is challenging the IRS rule that imposes those illegal taxes. Supporters and opponents agree the PPACA's "entire structure" depends on the IRS's interpretation of the statute, and that this dispute "could be a fatal blow to Obamacare." See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.