Podcasts about regulatory transparency project

The Regulatory Transparency Project and the Federalism & Separation of Powers practice group hosted a virtual debate over the recent Supreme Court decision in SEC v. Jarkesy. The panel featured Matthew Wiener, from Penn Carey Law, and Josh Robbins, of the Pacific Legal Foundation. Michael Buschbacher, from Boyden & Gray PLLC, moderated the debate.

The Regulatory Transparency Project’s Fourth Branch Podcast presents Explainer Episode 68. In this Fourth Branch Explainer podcast, Rachel N. Morrison from the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) discusses the implications of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act Regulations recently released. Listen in as Morrison discusses the pros and cons of new rules.

The Regulatory Transparency Project’s Fourth Branch Podcast presents Explainer Episode 67. In this Fourth Branch Explainer podcast, health policy experts Michael Cannon and Christina Sandefur discuss the regulatory landscape of veterans’ benefits, and how veterans’ healthcare impacts American foreign policy. The experts discuss Michael Cannon’s new book “Recovery”.

The Regulatory Transparency Project presents a panel of legal experts, including Bob Eitel, Christian Corrigan, Will Trachman, and Kim Richey. Watch as these experts discuss the Biden Administration’s newly released Title IX Regulations and their implications for educational institutions, school districts, students, faculty, and parents. Join us for this webinar at 1 pm EST on May 8th.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve, or SPR, held approximately 358 million barrels, its lowest level in forty years. Is that a problem? What is the SPR and how is it supposed to operate? How much petroleum is it supposed to hold? Listen in on the Regulatory Transparency Project's Explainer Episode 66, as expert J. Kennerly Davis discusses SPR.

GUEST 1 OVERVIEW: Jeremy R. Hammond is an independent journalist and author who exposes dangerous propaganda serving to manufacture consent for criminal government policies, particularly in US foreign policy, economic freedom, and health freedom. His books include OBSTACLE TO PEACE: The US Role in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict; THE WAR ON INFORMED CONSENT: The Persecution of Dr. Paul Thomas by the Oregon Medical Board, and THE NY TIMES VERSUS ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR: How the Mainstream Media Spread Vaccine Misinformation. https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/ GUEST 2 OVERVIEW: Will Hild is the Executive Director of Consumers' Research. Will has a decade of non-profit, legal and public policy experience. Prior to joining CR, Will served as the Deputy Director of the Regulatory Transparency Project. Before that, he worked at the Philanthropy Roundtable as the Director of External Affairs for the Culture of Freedom Initiative, and as the Chief Operating Officer of that Initiative when it grew to become a separate organization. He helped co-found the public interest law firm, Cause of Action, and served as the firm's acting communications director for nearly a year. Will received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center, and a B.A. in Political Science from the University of Florida. He is licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Will resides in Bethesda, MD, with his wife Cheryl, a practicing OB/GYN, and their son Liam.

This is a podcast version of a live webinar held on December 13, 2023. The webinar was co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project & the Religious Liberties Practice Group. *** In Bella Health and Wellness v. Weiser, a Colorado faith-based healthcare provider is challenging a recent Colorado law banning a treatment commonly known as abortion pill reversal on the grounds it forced them to violate their religious beliefs. The law, passed in April 2023, makes it illegal for healthcare professionals to offer progesterone (a naturally occurring hormone crucial to a healthy pregnancy) to women who have taken mifepristone as part one in a two-step abortion pill regimen but who subsequently want to maintain their pregnancy. The law imposes significant fines and jeopardizes the medical licenses of those who provide or advertise using progesterone to reverse the effects of an abortion pill. Bella Health, founded by Catholic mother and daughter nurse practitioners Dede Chism and Abby Sinnett, which has traditionally offered this route of care for women as a part of its life-affirming OB-GYN practice, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado for an injunction to stop the law from going into effect. A limited injunction was issued in late April, pending reports by the state's Medical, Nursing, and Pharmacy licensing boards. The last of those regulations were issued in September. The next day, Bella again asked the Court for injunctive relief. In an order issued on October 21, 2023, the district court preliminarily enjoined Colorado from enforcing the law, and the case remains live.

Max Schrems is the lawyer and activist behind two (and, probably soon, a third) legal challenge to the adequacy of U.S. law to protect European personal data. Thanks to the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, Max and I were able to spend an hour debating the law and policy behind Europe's generation-long fight with the United States over transatlantic data flows.  It's civil, pointed, occasionally raucous, and wide-ranging – a fun, detailed introduction to the issues that will almost certainly feature in the next round of litigation over the latest agreement between Europe and the U.S. Don't miss it! Download 465th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Max Schrems is the lawyer and activist behind two (and, probably soon, a third) legal challenge to the adequacy of U.S. law to protect European personal data. Thanks to the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, Max and I were able to spend an hour debating the law and policy behind Europe's generation-long fight with the United States over transatlantic data flows.  It's civil, pointed, occasionally raucous, and wide-ranging – a fun, detailed introduction to the issues that will almost certainly feature in the next round of litigation over the latest agreement between Europe and the U.S. Don't miss it! Download 465th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Our Nation's environmental laws and regulations are designed to foster the responsible use of natural resources while ensuring air, water, and land that is clean and safe for the citizenry as well as fish and wildlife. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and states are tasked with working cooperatively to ensure that these laws are faithfully enforced in a fair, consistent, and unbiased manner. Across industries, compliance with environmental laws is strongly influenced by corporate culture, or a collection of values, expectations, and practices established by a company's leaders and implemented through daily compliance-related activities performed by employees. But just as culture influences corporate behavior, it also influences government decisions regarding civil and criminal enforcement, including the targets of enforcement and the penalties and injunctive relief sought for violations. While general enforcement policies and priorities shift from administration to administration, the perception that individual enforcement actions are subject to partisan politics and outside influences risks erosion of the public trust and confidence in these same institutions.Co-hosted by The Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and ConservAmerica, this panel, comprised of leading voices on environmental enforcement, will discuss past and current environmental enforcement priorities, policies and actions at EPA and DOJ, the value of transparency and impartiality in environmental enforcement, and share varying perspectives on the future of environmental enforcement in the United States. The panel will also explore ways to increase environmental compliance and integrity in enforcement decision-making. Featuring:Susan Bodine, Partner, Earth & Water Law, Former Assistant Administrator, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, United States Environmental Protection AgencyEric Schaeffer, Executive Director, Environmental Integrity Project Former Director, Office of Civil Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, United States Environmental Protection AgencyDavid M. Uhlmann, Assistant Administrator (Nominee), Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, United States Environmental Protection AgencyJeffrey Wood, Partner, Baker Botts LLP, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of JusticeMichael Buschbacher, Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC

Our Nation’s environmental laws and regulations are designed to foster the responsible use of natural resources while ensuring air, water, and land that is clean and safe for the citizenry as well as fish and wildlife. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and states are tasked with working cooperatively to ensure that these laws are faithfully enforced in a fair, consistent, and unbiased manner.Across industries, compliance with environmental laws is strongly influenced by corporate culture, or a collection of values, expectations, and practices established by a company’s leaders and implemented through daily compliance-related activities performed by employees. But just as culture influences corporate behavior, it also influences government decisions regarding civil and criminal enforcement, including the targets of enforcement and the penalties and injunctive relief sought for violations. While general enforcement policies and priorities shift from administration to administration, the perception that individual enforcement actions are subject to partisan politics and outside influences risks erosion of the public trust and confidence in these same institutions.At a luncheon and panel event hosted by The Federalist Society’s Regulatory Transparency Project and ConservAmerica, Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan delivered a keynote address on the value of transparency and impartiality in environmental enforcement.

0:00 - THE GREAT DISINTEGRATION: Chicago mayoral poll   14:17 - Dr. Arthur Turovets, the president and founder of NJDiet, specializing in natural health and wellness, discusses safe ways to lose weight as we head towards spring and warmer weather. Discover your new healthy life plan with an extensive, on-going weight management membership today! Visit njdiet.com   23:00 - Dan & Amy return the mayor's race as Paul Vallas and Brandon Johnson gather endorsements   30:53 - Tucker Carlson on J6, Day 2   01:13:00 - Roger D Klein, MD, JD, expert with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group. Former Director of Molecular Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, former advisor to the FDA, CDC, CMS, and HHS, discusses the origins of COVID and the communication issues that continue to befall our health agencies. You can follow Dr. Klein on twitter @RogerDKlein   01:30:46 - Noted economist Stephen Moore on the Fed's aggressive plan for interest rate hikes. Get more from Steve @StephenMoore   01:44:03 - Senior Contributor for American Greatness, Julie Kelly, joins in on the dismantling of the Jan 6 narrative    Get Julie's book for more Jan 6 coverage  January 6: How Democrats Used the Capitol Protest to Launch a War on Terror Against the Political Right 02:05:33 - SPORTS & POLITICS: Reddick vs. PerkinsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The first in a lecture series on how the administrative state functions in modern American government, presented by the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter.This first luncheon featured former “regulations czar” Paul J. Ray, who served as President Trump's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Administrator (OIRA). As OIRA Administrator, Ray oversaw the review of hundreds of regulations, and led efforts on regulatory reform.The luncheon also featured Boris Bershteyn, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom, LLP. Mr. Bershteyn served as acting Administrator of ORIA in 2012 and 2013. He was also General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget starting in 2011.Our moderator was Hon. Stephen Alexander Vaden from the United States Court of International Trade. Before joining the bench, Judge Vaden served as General Counsel of the United States Department of Agriculture. During his nearly four-year tenure as head of the Office of General Counsel, the Department won two cases before the United States Supreme Court, relocated and reorganized the agencies that comprise the Department to better serve rural America, engaged in substantial regulatory reform, developed new regulations to allow for the legal sale of hemp and the labeling of bioengineered products, and implemented the 2018 Farm Bill.Featuring:Paul J. Ray, Director, Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies, The Heritage Foundation, former OIRA AdministratorBoris Bershteyn, Partner, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher, and Flom, former acting OIRA AdministratorModerator: Hon. Stephen Alexander Vaden, United States Court of International TradeVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter hosted the second in a lecture series on the administrative state's role in policymaking in modern American government.This second event of our co-sponsored series on the Administrative State focused on the role of the administrative state in policymaking. Through its various roles and capacities, the Administrative state can have great leeway to create policy that has similar effects to rules and laws created through the legislative process but comes to be via different means. Agencies can make rules, issue guidance documents that often carry significant weight, interpret statutes, and enforce their rules. All these can contribute to agencies making policies that have the force of law.Some argue that this policy-making by non-elected individuals serving in the administrative state is improper and usurps elected officials' authority. Others contend this is a valuable and necessary part of the Administrative State's ability to operate as authorized, and that the policy-making capacity of the Administrative State is a net benefit.Panelists David Fotouhi, a current partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP who spent four years serving with the EPA, and Richard Peirce, a professor of Law at George Washington University who focuses on the Administrative State, discussed the policy-making power of the Administrative State, and the practical ways in which that power can often be applied. Judge Lisa Branch moderated the discussion.Featuring: David Fotouhi, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPRichard Pierce, Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law, George Washington University Law SchoolModerator: Hon. Lisa Branch, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh CircuitVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

The Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter hosted the third in a lecture series on the administrative state. The subject of this discussion was the major questions doctrine and how Congress may respond to the Supreme Court's decision in West Virginia v. EPA.Arguably unenforced for some time, recent federal court cases have once again raised the specter of nondelegation doctrine. In so doing, cases such as West Virginia v. EPA at the Supreme Court, and the 5th Circuit's decision in Jarkesy v. SEC, arguably throws into question the status quo under which administrative agencies have heretofore operated.In this final event in our co-sponsored luncheon series on the administrative state, experts investigated the impact such cases may have on Congress in terms of lawmaking delegation, and looked to forecast what Congress can expect if SCOTUS continues to enforce the nondelegation doctrine while moving away from former deference doctrines.Featuring:Sarah Binder, Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, Brookings InstitutionDaniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, House of RepresentativesModerator: Hon. Trevor McFadden, Judge, United States District Court, District of ColumbiaVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.*******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 October 17, 2022, the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Capitol Hill Chapter hosted part III in a lecture series on the administrative state. This discussion covered the major questions doctrine and how Congress may respond to the Supreme Court's decision in West Virginia v. EPA.Arguably unenforced for some time, recent federal court cases have once again raised the specter of nondelegation doctrine. In so doing, cases such as West Virginia v. EPA at the Supreme Court, and the 5th Circuit's decision in Jarkesy v. SEC, arguably throws into question the status quo under which administrative agencies have heretofore operated.This final event in the co-sponsored luncheon series on the administrative state investigated the impact such cases may have on Congress in terms of lawmaking delegation, and forecasted what Congress can expect if SCOTUS continues to enforce the nondelegation doctrine while moving away from former deference doctrines.Featuring:- Sarah Binder, Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, Brookings Institution- Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Reform, House of Representatives- Moderator: Hon. Trevor McFadden, Judge, United States District Court, District of Columbia

In the last few years, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has emerged from relative obscurity to find itself squarely in the middle of many of today's most contentious public policy fights. As the agency that regulates wholesale electricity and transmission rates, the Commission faces the tension between the rapid adoption of renewable generation sources and the reliability of the bulk power system. And as the agency that reviews applications to build natural gas pipelines and liquified natural gas export facilities, how should the Commission consider the European energy crisis? Given the “economic and political significance” of these tasks, how should the Commission carry out its mission in light of West Virginia v. EPA?At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, FERC Commissioner James Danly addressed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation. An expert panel including Michael Buschbacher, Jennifer Chen, Jim Wedeking, and moderator Marc Spitzer then followed the Commissioner's remarks with a lively discussion.Featuring:James Danly, Commissioner, Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionVisit our website - https://www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In the last few years, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has emerged from relative obscurity to find itself squarely in the middle of many of today's most contentious public policy fights. As the agency that regulates wholesale electricity and transmission rates, the Commission faces the tension between the rapid adoption of renewable generation sources and the reliability of the bulk power system. And as the agency that reviews applications to build natural gas pipelines and liquified natural gas export facilities, how should the Commission consider the European energy crisis? Given the “economic and political significance” of these tasks, how should the Commission carry out its mission in light of West Virginia v. EPA?At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from FERC Commissioner James Danly, an expert panel discussed the present and future challenges facing energy reliability and regulation.Featuring:Michael Buschbacher, Counsel, Boyden Gray & AssociatesJennifer Chen, Senior Manager, Clean EnergyJim Wedeking, Counsel, Sidley Austin LLP[Moderator] Marc L. Spitzer, Steptoe & JohnsonVisit our website – https://www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Cryptocurrency. Decentralized finance. Nonfungible tokens. Once only experts on the cutting edge of financial services were familiar with these terms. Now, with the emergence of digital assets within the global financial system, crypto, DeFi, and NFTs are becoming part of the mainstream financial services lexicon. The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, “Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets,” which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation. At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce addressed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection. Featuring:Hon. Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, United States Securities and Exchange CommissionIntroduction: Moderator: Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Cryptocurrency. Decentralized finance. Nonfungible tokens. Once only experts on the cutting edge of financial services were familiar with these terms. Now, with the emergence of digital assets within the global financial system, crypto, DeFi, and NFTs are becoming part of the mainstream financial services lexicon.The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, following remarks from SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce, an expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator J.W. Verret discussed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection.Featuring:- Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin Center- Todd Phillips, Director, Financial Regulation and Corporate Governance, Center for American Progress- Ryan Selkis, Co-Founder and CEO, Messari- [Moderator] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Cryptocurrency. Decentralized finance. Nonfungible tokens. Once only experts on the cutting edge of financial services were familiar with these terms. Now, with the emergence of digital assets within the global financial system, crypto, DeFi, and NFTs are becoming part of the mainstream financial services lexicon.The rapidly emerging crypto ecosystem faces uncertainty within a regulatory regime designed for very different institutions and securities. In response, on March 9, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order, "Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets," which ordered agencies to submit policy recommendations based upon multiple principles such as: providing consumer protection, ensuring U.S. financial system stability, mitigating systemic financial risk, responsibly developing digital assets, and examining the creation of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Supporters of increased financial regulation over cryptocurrency see this as a necessity to provide security essential to ensuring financial stability and consumer protection within the digital asset space. Others view these federal regulatory efforts as a threat to future opportunities for economic innovation.At a live Regulatory Transparency Project event, SEC Commissioner Hester M. Peirce addressed current and future efforts at regulation of cryptocurrency and its implications for innovation, financial stability, and consumer protection. An expert panel including Jerry Brito, Ryan Selkis, Todd Phillips, and moderator by J.W. Verret then followed the Commissioner's remarks with a lively panel discussion.Featuring:- Hon. Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner, United States Securities and Exchange Commission- [Introduction] Prof. J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On June 7, 2022, the Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a live discussion on occupational licensing via Twitter Spaces.Utah Governor Spencer J. Cox opened the program with remarks on licensing reforms his state has recently pursued, and an expert panel featuring Jon Gabriel, Scott Lincicome, Colin Mortimer, and moderator Shoshana Weissmann then broke down the Governor’s remarks and discussed the issue more broadly.Featuring:- Spencer J. Cox, Governor, State of Utah- Jon Gabriel, Editor-in-Chief, Ricochet- Scott Lincicome, Director, General Economics and the Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute- Colin Mortimer, Director, Center for New Liberalism- [Moderator] Shoshana Weissmann, Senior Manager of Digital Media and Fellow, R Street InstituteVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Though its goal—to help bridge the digital divide—is laudible, the Universal Service Fund is a badly structured, badly run, wasteful, much abused, unsustainable program. Jim Dunstan, general counsel at TechFreedom, joins the show to discuss the many problems with the USF, and some of the proposals to fix it. For more, see Jim's piece for the Regulatory Transparency Project, “The Arrival of the Federal Computer Commission?”; Corbin's piece at Law & Liberty, “No Legislation Without Representation”; TechFreedom's recent comments to the FCC on the future of the USF; and TechFreedom's recent amicus brief on the unconstitutionality of the private entity that oversees the USF, the Universal Service Administrative Company.

Are state governors subject to the same separation of powers restrictions as the federal president?Expanding on a Regulatory Transparency Project panel discussion on emergency executive power during the pandemic, this event featured experts engaging in a broader separation of powers discussion about the distinctions between the federal and state separation of powers doctrines, using California as an example.In a conversation moderated by Braden Boucek, David. A. Carrillo, Luke A. Wake, and John C. Yoo explored those distinctions, examined how they affect the latitude and options state and federal executives have, and debated the extent to which federal separation of powers doctrines can or should be applied to the states through judicial interpretation.Featuring:- David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law- Luke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation- John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Roger D. Klein, MD,JD (@RogerDKlein) is an expert in Health and Law with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health working group. He is a former Medical Director of Molecular Pathology at the Cleveland Clinic and former adviser to the FDA, CDC, HHS and CMS. Federal Mask Mandate for Travel

Are state governors subject to the same separation of powers restrictions as the federal president?Expanding on the recent Regulatory Transparency Project panel discussion on emergency executive power during the pandemic, this event will feature experts engaging in a broader separation of powers discussion about the distinctions between the federal and state separation of powers doctrines, using California as an example.In a conversation moderated by Braden Boucek, David. A. Carrillo, Luke A. Wake, and John C. Yoo will explore those distinctions, examine how they affect the latitude and options state and federal executives have, and debate the extent to which federal separation of powers doctrines can or should be applied to the states through judicial interpretation.Featuring:David A. Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of LawLuke A. Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal FoundationJohn C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law; Co-Faculty Director, Korea Law Center; and Director, Public Law & Policy Program, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law[Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Donald Kochan, Professor of Law and Deputy Executive Director of the Law & Economics Center at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School.  He is also a member of the Energy & Environment Committee at the Regulatory Transparency Project. Biden's SEC to propose Environmental Reporting rules

In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic was sweeping the country and governors throughout the nation were issuing declarations of emergency. What followed was a perhaps unprecedented period of emergency governance, wherein governors in many states asserted power to manage not only their state's economy, but significant portions of civil society, in response to the pandemic. The state of emergency continues in some states, with renewed restrictions still possible.The Regulatory Transparency Project hosted a virtual discussion on Wednesday, March 16 featuring an expert panel debating whether states should be updating and reforming their emergency management statutes in light of our collective experience with emergency governance over the past 24 months. Braden Boucek of the Southeastern Legal Foundation moderated the discussion between David A. Carrillo of the U.C. Berkeley California Constitution Center and Luke A. Wake of the Pacific Legal Foundation.Featuring:- David Carrillo, Lecturer in Residence and Executive Director, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation- [Moderator] Braden Boucek, Director of Litigation, Southeastern Legal FoundationVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Dr. Oonagh McDonald's latest book, “Cryptocurrencies: Money, Trust and Regulation,” discusses the nature of money, the introduction of the first cryptocurrency – Bitcoin – and the maturation of the space, how regulators have approached the burgeoning industry, and whether cryptocurrencies might ultimately be viable alternatives to “money” as we know it today. The Regulatory Transparency Project was pleased to welcome Dr. McDonald and Coin Center Executive Director Jerry Brito to discuss these important issues.Featuring:- Oonagh McDonald, Senior Adviser, Crito Capital- [Moderator] Jerry Brito, Executive Director, Coin CenterVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The hero rabbi held hostage in his Texas synagogue has credited active-shooter training for helping him save his congregants — revealing Monday that he threw a chair at the terrorist so they could finally escape. Student receives praise for bogus paper on how milk is a ‘colonizer' of coffee Stephen Colbert and Senator Elizabeth Warren want to abolish the Senate Roger D Klein, MD, JD is an expert with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group. Former Director of Molecular Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, former advisor to the FDA, CDC, CMS, and HHS Stephen Moore is a Noted Economist, Wall Street Journal columnist and author of Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive Our Economy. He joined Dan and Amy with reaction to Jerome Powell's comments on the national debt. Backlash as US billionaire dismisses Uyghur abuse Jon Gabriel is an Editor-in-Chief at Ricochet and contributor to AZCentral. He joined Dan and Amy with a retrospective on President Biden's first year in office. Jon says Most voters agree that they don't like him See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

0:00 - Dan & Amy review another crime filled weekend in Chicago 12:26 - Dan & Amy address the “hopelessly conflicted, sentimental barbarism affecting Chicago” 29:56 -Neocon Norm on the war against cultural Marxism 52:44 - Dan & Amy decipher the correct use of “latinx” 01:03:51 - Vice President of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation and author of Brutal War: Jungle Fighting in Papua New Guinea, 1942, Lt Col James Carafano, says he's worried the next 9/11 will come from illegal border crossers. Follow Jim on twitter - @JJCarafano 01:19:54 - Legal Fellow, Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, Amy Swearer, previews her upcoming testimony at this morning's Senate Judiciary Committee Field Hearing entitled “Combating Gun Trafficking and Reducing Violence in Chicago” Follow Amy on twitter - @AmySwearer 01:34:49 - Roger D Klein, MD, JD, expert with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group looks for the path to coexisting with COVID 01:51:57 - Owner of Perillo Dealer Group, Joe Perillo: Enough is Enough! More on Joe Perillo here  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1:01 -Vice President of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation, Lt Col James Carafano, reviews Joe Biden's CNN Townhall performance Check out Jim Carafano's new book Brutal War: Jungle Fighting in Papua New Guinea, 1942here 1:21 -Roger D Klein, MD, JD,  expert with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group. Former Director of Molecular Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, former advisor to the FDA, CDC, CMS, and HHS, says fear is driving the push to vaccinate healthy children For more on Dr. Klein – rogerdklein.com 1:38 -George Richter is a Bristol Kendall Fire Protection District firefighter who was fired for insubordination More on George's story here 1:55 -Thomas DeVore, attorney with Silver Lake Law, Ltd, is representing 145 school districts against Illinois' COVID restrictions  More on the lawsuit here See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this special episode of Fault Lines, host Jamil N. Jaffer discusses the national security implications of the fall of Afghanistan and the rise of the Taliban with Jennifer Cafarella, NSI Visiting Fellow and Research Director at the Institute for the Study of War; Matthew Heiman, NSI Senior Fellow and Director of Strategy and Chairman, Cyber & Privacy Working Group at the Regulatory Transparency Project; and Mike Nelson, NSI Visiting Fellow and Professor of Military Science at George Mason University, and former Deputy Director of the Commander's Action Group at United States Central Command for General Joseph Votel.Our episode begins with a brief summary of the situation in Afghanistan, followed by analysis of the Biden administration's actions thus far, the counterterrorism perspective, and what Taliban rule may mean for U.S. national security. If you like what we're doing, be sure to like, rate, and subscribe to Fault Lines. If you have ideas for future episodes, be sure to email us at nsi@gmu.edu or tweet us at @MasonNatSec.Note: This episode was recorded at 3:30pm ET on August 17th, 2021. The National Security Institute acknowledges that the situation is rapidly changing and that some of the conversation held may no longer be accurate. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On April 22, 2021, the Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter, the Regulatory Transparency Project, and the Global Antitrust Institute cosponsored an event featuring professors Joshua D. Wright and John Yun discussing the future of the conservative approach to antitrust law.Featuring:- Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University- John Yun, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University- [Introduction] Sydney Dominguez, President, The Federalist Society's George Mason Student ChapterVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On April 22, 2021, the Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter, the Regulatory Transparency Project, and the Global Antitrust Institute cosponsored an event regarding "(Un)Civil War: The Future of Conservative Antitrust."Featuring:Prof. Joshua D. Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason UniversityProf: John Yun, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason UniversityIntroduction: Sydney Dominguez, President, The Federalist Society's George Mason Student Chapter* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

In June of 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo prohibiting the Department of Justice from directing settlement payments to non-governmental third parties that are "neither victims nor parties to the lawsuits" when the Department is engaged in litigation. The memo halted a practice that was utilized by the Bush and Obama administrations and now may make a return under the Biden administration.Some view these third-party payments in government litigation settlements as an unconstitutional encroachment on Congress's spending power that should remain proscribed, but some see them as a legitimate measure to advance policy goals, particularly when it comes to environmental enforcement.On April 14, the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Practice Groups hosted a webinar featuring experts on both sides of the issue discussing the practice and whether it will – and should – be utilized once again by the new administration.Featuring:- Ryan Dean Newman, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Policy, United States Department of Justice- Justin A. Savage, Global Co-Lead, Environmental Team, Sidley Austin LLP- John Shu, Attorney and Legal Commentator- [Moderator] Annie Donaldson Talley, Partner, Luther Strange and AssociatesVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On March 30, 2021, the Federalist Society's DC Young Lawyers Chapter and the Regulatory Transparency Project cosponsored a panel event discussing "Section 230."The average American can't cite specific provisions of the US Code, but Section 230 is a notable exception. Few statutes have generated as much controversy and debate, and arguably have had as much impact on American political discourse. Has Section 230 become a tool of abuse for tech monopolies, or is it an essential mechanism for defending internet freedom?Featuring: Josh Hammer, Counsel, The Internet Accountability ProjectJennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action ForumModerator: Thomas Johnson, Former General Counsel, Federal Communications CommissionIntroduction: Ben Field, DC Young Lawyers Chapter* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

I had the chance to sit down and speak with Ashley Baker, an expert in antitrust. We discussed antitrust and big tech, and how conservatives should fight back against tech. Ashley is the Policy Director for the Committee for Justice, Expert at the Regulatory Transparency Project, and works with the Alliance on Antitrust. So, she knows what she's talking about, and it shows. Dive into the conversation below to learn more about these issues and what Ashley recommends. What is Antitrust? Antitrust is basically a set of legal principles, laws, and precedents that inform us on how to handle anti-competition behaviors of companies. Big businesses may work with other organizations to undermine competition in the economic landscape, which is what antitrust seeks to prevent. Since businesses are built to beat their competition, they can hinder their competition's ability to succeed. However, they cannot work to destroy competition itself. And, that is where antitrust comes into play. There are many examples of antitrust violations we can point to, but the basics of antitrust is that we want to promote a competitive environment. Antitrust Laws and How They Relate to Big Tech You may be familiar with antitrust laws like the Federal Trade Commission Act, which gave us the FTC, or the Sherman Act. But, antitrust law is much more than a couple acts passed by Congress. In fact, much of what governs antitrust policy is precedent, and that's where conservatives have to be careful. If we are to regulate big tech companies through antitrust policy, we need to beware of how it'll effect other aspects of law. That's why I am so grateful to Ashley for coming on to discuss the antitrust efforts and big tech. She shows how antitrust cases inform our laws, and how we might apply that to Google, Facebook, Twitter, and Amazon. Antitrust and Big Tech We must do something about big tech need, but what? First we must understand a few things. Are big tech companies monopolies? Does big tech violate antitrust law in the United States? What can we do to regulate big tech? We'll find the answers to each of these questions in the particulars. There's no simple answer. Rather, the devil is in the details. How Conservatives Should Fight Back Against Big Tech Our politics leans towards slogans and partisanship, rather than real solutions. The answer to this problem won't fit neatly in a 10-point plan or some ideology. Instead, we have to grapple with the principles at play and the particulars of the situation. Through prudence, we can find a solution. Check out this episode: Antitrust and Big Tech | Why Conservatives Should Tread Carefully Subscribe to the Conversation of Our Generationersation of Our Generation Podcast here Check out the YouTube video here --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/conofourgen/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/conofourgen/support

Dr. Roger Klein, a clinical pathologist and former advisor to the CDC and the US Department of Health and Human Services, comments on the updated CDC guidelines for those who have received COVID vaccinations or have recovered from the virus. Klein, now with the Regulatory Transparency Project, argues that many of the precautions still being promoted (and, in some cases, mandated) may not be necessary still and also says there could be unintended consequences of continuing the current policies.

The Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Group were pleased to host this fireside discussion between Mr. Bilal Sayyed, most-recently Director of the Federal Trade Commission's Office of Policy Planning, and Svetlana Gans, Vice President and Associate General Counsel at NCTA and former Chief of Staff at the FTC. Their conversation covered the current state of the FTC, the challenges facing the agency, and the path ahead in the new administration.Featuring:- Bilal Sayyed, Senior Adjunct Fellow, TechFreedom; formerly Director, Federal Trade Commission Office of Policy Planning- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTAVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Federalist Society's Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Group and Regulatory Transparency Project are pleased to host this fireside discussion between Mr. Bilal Sayyed, most-recently Director of the Federal Trade Commission's Office of Policy Planning, and Svetlana Gans, Vice President and Associate General Counsel at NCTA and former chief of staff at the FTC. They will discuss the current state of the FTC, challenges facing the agency, and the path ahead in the new administration. This discussion is open to the public and press, and Zoom registration is required at the link above.Featuring:-- Bilal Sayyed, Senior Adjunct Fellow, TechFreedom; formerly Director, Federal Trade Commission Office of Policy Planning-- Moderator: Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA

There are nearly 500,000 commercial drones registered in the United States, far exceeding recent FAA projections. Fields like photography, agriculture, and public safety have adopted drone services and there are a few programs for long-distance services – like utility line inspection, surveying, and home delivery – popping up around the country.Despite the rapid maturation of the technology, mass-market services are still years away in the United States in part because of difficult legal and policy questions raised in a recent GAO report to Congress: Should state or federal aviation officials regulate low-altitude drone services and operations? How do regulators encourage a healthy drone services industry while protecting residents' property rights and privacy? Who will build and operate unmanned traffic management systems? This expert panel discussed these topics and more in a Lincoln Network Reboot Conversation co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project.Featuring:- Reggie Govan, Former Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration- Alexiaa Jordan, Innovation, Cyber, and National Security Analyst; Lincoln Network- Brent Skorup, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center, George Mason UniversityVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

COVID-19 has presented unique challenges for state lawmakers as they attempt to address public health and economic concerns. The crisis has also raised significant questions about whether states should reform existing regulatory regimes, and about the propriety of adding further regulatory burdens during an ongoing pandemic.In this live podcast, Brian Kabateck, Luke Wake, and Clark Neily address vital questions raised by the virus, including how states should balance public health and economic concerns, whether states should change their enforcement priorities during the crisis, and whether this is the right time for states to liberalize economic regulations more generally. The discussion is centered around several proposals from the Regulatory Transparency Project's State & Local Working Group, which recently published a white paper entitled "Ten Reforms to Spur Coronavirus Recovery."Featuring:- Brian Kabateck, Founding and Managing Partner, Kabateck LLP- Luke Wake, Attorney, Pacific Legal Foundation- [Moderator] Clark Neily, Vice President for Criminal Justice, Cato InstituteVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Dr. Roger Klein from the Regulatory Transparency Project critiques the COVID-19 game plan that's been announced by Joe Biden and the team he is assembling. Klein, a pathologist, is a former director at the Cleveland Clinic and a former adviser to the FDA, CDC, and US Department of Health and Human Services.

On November 30, 2020, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai joined the Federalist Society's Columbia Law Student Chapter for a wide-ranging discussion on net neutrality, Section 230, and more, in an online Q&A co-sponsored by the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project.Featuring: Chairman Ajit Pai, Federal Communications CommissionModerator: Brad Larson, Regulatory Transparency Project Series Chair, the Federalist Society's Columbia Student Chapter*******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 November 30, 2020, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai joined the Federalist Society's Columbia Student Chapter for a wide-ranging discussion on net neutrality, Section 230, and more, in an online Q&A co-sponsored by the Regulatory Transparency Project.Featuring:- Ajit Pai, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission- [Moderator] Brad Larson, Regulatory Transparency Project Series Chair, the Federalist Society's Columbia Student ChapterVisit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Voice of Reason in a city of chaos. Weekday afternoons on 1310 WIBA Madison. 2PM – Vicki opens the show talking about the tides changing in how people feel about the shutdown in Wisconsin. Then, Vicki is joined by Meg Ellefson and Cory Tomczyk to discuss a protest they are planning in Marathon County 2:30 – Dr. Roger Klein, Regulatory Transparency Project, joins the program to let Vicki pick his brain on COVID questions 3PM – Adam Andrzejewski, Open the Books.com, joins the program to discuss Trump holding back funding from the World Health Organization 3:30 – David Johnson, Strategic Vision, joins the program to go over what would happen if the presidential election has held today 4PM – Professor Rob Nadelson joins the program to discuss the constitutionality of much of what has happened in the wake of COVID-19

The Voice of Reason in a city of chaos. Weekday afternoons on 1310 WIBA Madison. 2PM – Vicki opens the show with Ricki Bass, communication director for the Republican Party of Milwaukee, and they discuss the events of yesterday's election. 2:30 – Dr. Roger Klein, Regulatory Transparency Project, joins Vicki to discuss the changing models and their effect on policy decisions 3PM – Rick Manning, Americans for Limited Government, joins the program to discuss the election madness from yesterday 3:30 – Bill Osmulski, MacIver Institute, joins Vicki to talk about his report on Andrea Palm and her misleading statements based on phony models 4PM – Dr. Lee Vliet joins the program to talk about the efficacy of different medical treatments for COVID-19

The Voice of Reason in a city of chaos. Weekday afternoons on 1310 WIBA Madison. 2PM – Vicki opens the show with Senator Ron Johnson, and they discuss the new economic plan to stimulate business during the COVID-19 Pandemic 2:30 – Jed Babbin, American Spectator, joins Vicki to talk about other countries being affected by the pandemic 3PM – Sherriff David Clarke joins the program to talk about overreactions to COVID-19 3:30 – Duke Pesta, UW-Oshkosh, joins Vicki to go over why this pandemic means we need to fight racism 4PM – Dr. Roger Klein, Regulatory Transparency Project, joins the program to discuss the question “How can our hospitals handle a bad flu season, but not COVID-19?” 4:30 – Vicki talks about the news of the day

Peter welcomes Dr. Roger Klein to the show.  They discuss how dangerous is the Corona virus and are you in any danger? Roger D. Klein, MD, JD (@RogerDKlein) is an expert with the Regulatory Transparency Project's FDA and Health Working Group. He is the former Medical Director of Molecular Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic, a former adviser to the FDA, CDC, CMS and HHS. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.