758 episodes

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. This podcast feed contains audio files of Federalist Society panel discussions, debates, addresses, and other events related to law and public policy. Additional audio and video can be found at https://fedsoc.org/commentary.

FedSoc Events The Federalist Society

    • News
    • 4.5 • 80 Ratings

The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. This podcast feed contains audio files of Federalist Society panel discussions, debates, addresses, and other events related to law and public policy. Additional audio and video can be found at https://fedsoc.org/commentary.

    Courthouse Steps Decision: Vega v. Tekoh

    Courthouse Steps Decision: Vega v. Tekoh

    On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court decided Vega v. Tekoh. In a 6-3 decision, the Court reversed and remanded the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The Court held that a violation of the prophylactic rules described in Miranda v. Arizona does not provide a basis for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
    Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Kagan filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Breyer and Sotomayor joined.
    Please join our legal expert to discuss the case, the legal issues involved, and the implications going forward.
    Featuring:

    John Elwood, Partner, Arnold & Porter; head of the firm's Appellate and Supreme Court practice

    • 36 min
    Courthouse Steps Decisions: Denezpi and Ysleta

    Courthouse Steps Decisions: Denezpi and Ysleta

    On June 13 and 15, 2022, the Supreme Court decided Denezpi v. United States and Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas respectively.
    Both cases dealt with issues of Native American law. In Denezpi, a 6-3 Court ruled that the double jeopardy clause does not bar successive prosecutions of distinct offenses arising from a single act, in a case where a man was prosecuted in both a federal district court and a Court of Indian Offenses. In Ysleta, the Court ruled 5-4 that the state of Texas could not control gambling activities on the lands of the Ysleta del sur Pueblo Native tribe.
    Please join our legal experts to discuss these cases, the legal issues involved, and their implications for the future of Native American law in America.
    Featuring:
    Anthony J. Ferate, Of Counsel, Spencer Fane LLP
    Jennifer Weddle, Shareholder, Greenberg Traurig
    ---
    To register, please click the link above

    • 1 hr 1 min
    Biden’s Antitrust Agenda: Mission Creep or Mission Achieved?

    Biden’s Antitrust Agenda: Mission Creep or Mission Achieved?

    Whether in academia, on Capitol Hill, among federal and state enforcers, or in the plaintiff and defense bars, few topics are debated as hotly as the future of antitrust law. The Biden administration's ambitious competition policies and enforcement goals are evolving against the backdrop of this larger debate – and to strong fanfare in some quarters. Certain academics, practitioners, and politicians view the Biden administration's approach as a renaissance, one that embodies the Neo-Brandeisian revolution and is a much-needed return to the original intent of U.S. antitrust law.Others are more skeptical, and consider the Biden administration's more expansive approach inconsistent with current law or sound policy. These skeptics believe the Biden administration's approach goes beyond legitimate objectives for antitrust policy and enforcement, and that the new efforts of the Biden FTC or DOJ amount to mission creep, or worse.This webinar will feature Elyse Dorsey, Amanda Lewis, David J. Shaw, and Jonathan Wolfson discussing antitrust developments under the Biden administration and offering various evaluations of the administration's approach.
    Featuring:

    Elyse Dorsey, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP
    Amanda Lewis, Partner, Cuneo Gilbert & Deluca, LLP
    David J. Shaw, Partner, Morrison & Foerster
    Moderator: Jonathan Wolfson, Chief Legal Officer and Policy Director, Cicero Institute

    ---
    To register, please click the link above

    • 59 min
    Courthouse Steps Decision: Carson v. Makin

    Courthouse Steps Decision: Carson v. Makin

    On June 21, 2022, the Supreme Court decided Carson v. Makin. In a 6-3 opinion, the Court reversed and remanded the judgment of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The Court held that Maine's "nonsectarian" requirement for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments to parents who live in school districts that do not operate a secondary school of their own violates the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.
    Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kagan joined, and in which Justice Sotomayor joined as to all but Part I-B. Justice Sotomayor filed a dissenting opinion.
    Please join our legal expert to discuss the case, the legal issues involved, and the implications going forward.
    Featuring:

    Arif Panju, Managing Attorney, Institute for Justice

    • 54 min
    Fireside Chat: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Live Not By Lies

    Fireside Chat: Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Live Not By Lies

    Nearly fifty years ago, Alexander Solzhenitsyn released the text of a four-page essay titled Live Not By Lies. The account of his eight-year imprisonment as a political dissident in a Russian gulag had just been published in the West. In retaliation, the Russian government exiled Solzhenitsyn to Zurich. The day before his expulsion from Russia, Solzhenitsyn released the text and eventually made his way to America.
    In his essay, Solzhenitsyn argued that the totalitarian regime which had silenced a generation of his fellow Russians existed only because lies were allowed a foothold. Out of an understandable desire to conform—“not to stray from the herd, not to set out on our own, and risk suddenly having to make do without the white bread, the hot water heater, a Moscow residency permit”—individuals had allowed crushing authoritarian violence to take over little by little.
    Liberation was still possible, but it had to begin with the individual and a “personal non participation in lies.” In the essay, Solzhenitsyn calls on his fellow Russians to “stand straight as . . . honest m[e]n” so that the "rule [of the lies] hold not through [us].”
    Solzhenitsyn’s insight into psychology and human society is evergreen—and well worth revisiting today. Join us for a Fireside Chat to discuss Solzhenitsyn’s famous essay and more.
    Featuring:
    Professor Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law
    Moderator: Hon. Stephanos Bibas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    ---
    To register, click the link above.

    • 1 hr
    Freedom of Thought Dinner & Panel

    Freedom of Thought Dinner & Panel

    We recognize the risks of agency overreach when rulemaking seeks to impose ESG considerations on business. But to what extent have private banks and institutional investors also been able to leverage their economic power to shape firm behavior on climate and other ESG questions – outside of the democratic process? And if we worry that the administrative state lacks political accountability for contentious policy choices, should we also be concerned about the role of private economic influence?
    Join us for a dinner at the Mayflower Hotel as our panelists discuss these questions and more. Dinner tickets will be available when purchasing conference tickets at a discount to logged in members. Login or Join today!
    Featuring:

    Christina Parajon Skinner, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
    Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, Univeristy of Virginia School of Law
    Matthew Stoller, Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project
    Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
    Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

    Reading Materials:

    The New Separation of Ownership and Control: Institutional Investors and ESG - Julia Mahoney
    Banks and Climate Governance - Christina Skinner

    • 1 hr 34 min

Customer Reviews

4.5 out of 5
80 Ratings

80 Ratings

Classicrocklover238 ,

Great stuff

Highly recommended

1Lsudokufan ,

It’s great

Though I’d like to see more states included in these events series.

ann37923 ,

Great content, needs better audio

Fantastic content. Audio needs to be louder.

Top Podcasts In News

The New York Times
NPR
The Daily Wire
Cumulus Podcast Network | Dan Bongino
Crooked Media
Rachel Maddow, MSNBC

You Might Also Like

The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society
Will Baude, Dan Epps
Hoover Institution
Cato Institute
Hoover Institution

More by The Federalist Society

The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society