799 episodes

This series of podcasts features experts who analyze the latest developments in the legal and policy world. The podcasts are in the form of monologues, podcast debates or panel discussions and vary in length. The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers. We hope these broadcasts, like all of our programming, will serve to stimulate discussion and further exchange regarding important current legal issues.

Teleforu‪m‬ The Federalist Society

    • Politics
    • 4.5 • 48 Ratings

This series of podcasts features experts who analyze the latest developments in the legal and policy world. The podcasts are in the form of monologues, podcast debates or panel discussions and vary in length. The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers. We hope these broadcasts, like all of our programming, will serve to stimulate discussion and further exchange regarding important current legal issues.

    Courthouse Steps Oral Argument Webinar: United States v. Arthrex Inc.

    Courthouse Steps Oral Argument Webinar: United States v. Arthrex Inc.

    The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in United States v. Arthrex Inc. on March 1, 2021. This case is an important one for the office of patent judges. At issue in the case is whether, for purposes of the appointments clause, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) are principal officers, requiring presidential appointment and Senate confirmation, or are "inferior officers." Also at issue is whether if they are principal officers, the lower court properly cured any appointments-clause defects in the current statutory scheme.

    Profs. Greg Dolin and Dmitry Karshtedt join us review oral arguments, discuss the case, and offer their divergent views on the merits in a discussion moderated by Prof. Kristen Osenga.

    Featuring:
    -- Prof. Gregory Dolin, Associate Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Medicine and Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
    -- Prof. Dmitry Karshtedt, Associate Professor of Law, The George Washington Law School
    -- Moderator: Prof. Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, The University of Richmond School of Law

    • 58 min
    Undue Delay or Due Process? Does the Due Process Clause Require a Prompt Post-Seizure Hearing When the Government Seizes an Individual’s Pro

    Undue Delay or Due Process? Does the Due Process Clause Require a Prompt Post-Seizure Hearing When the Government Seizes an Individual’s Pro

    The Institute for Justice (IJ) has filed a petition for certiorari in Serrano v. CPB, asking the Court: “When the government seizes a vehicle for civil forfeiture, does due process require a prompt post-seizure hearing to test the legality of the seizure and continued detention of the vehicle pending the final forfeiture trial?” As Gerardo Serrano was driving his Ford F-250 truck across the U.S.-Mexico border, CBP agents searched the vehicle and found five .380 caliber bullets and one .380 caliber magazine in the center console. Gerardo explained that he had a valid concealed carry permit in his home state of Kentucky; he had simply forgotten the bullets and magazine were in the truck. CBP seized Gerardo’s truck for civil forfeiture on the ground that he had attempted to export “munitions of war.” Gerardo asked CBP for a hearing before a judge, but CBP held his truck for over two years without a hearing.

    Our expert panelists disagree on many of the principal issues of the case: Was Mr. Serrano entitled to a hearing promptly after his vehicle was seized? Is the current forfeiture hearing process and timeline consistent with due process and originalism? Will the Court take this case and what should they decide? On the call to discuss these fascinating questions and more is IJ attorney, Rob Johnson, Mr. Serrano’s lead attorney, and two of the leading experts on civil-asset forfeiture in the country today, Stef Cassella and David Smith.

    Featuring:
    -- Stef Cassella, CEO, Asset Forfeiture Law, LLC
    -- Robert Johnson, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
    -- David Smith, David B. Smith, PLLC
    -- Moderator: Adam Griffin, Constitutional Law Fellow, Institute for Justice

    • 1 hr 2 min
    Law and Corporate Social Responsibility

    Law and Corporate Social Responsibility

    Join SEC Commissioner Elad Roisman and Myron Steele, former Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court, for a lively fireside discussion, moderated by Paul Atkins, former SEC Commissioner and Patomak Global Partners CEO, of the divergent views that drive the ongoing debate about shareholder versus stakeholder capitalism.

    With the start of the 2021 proxy season – the period when many public companies hold their annual shareholder meetings and consider proxy proposals – it seems timely to revisit the discussion around Milton Friedman’s essay, “The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits.” Fifty years ago he published his view that the responsibility of business is “to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game” and it has been debated by economists, scholars, shareholders, and CEOs since that time.

    The virtual Teleforum is open to the public and members of the media. Attendees are encouraged to submit questions before the panel to pg@fed-soc.org. Attendees can also submit questions during the program via chat.

    Featuring:
    -- Hon. Myron T. Steele, Partner, Potter Anderson Corroon; former Chief Justice, Delaware Supreme Court
    -- Hon. Elad L. Roisman, Commissioner and formerly Acting Chairman, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
    -- Moderator: Hon. Paul S. Atkins, CEO, Patomak Global Partners; former Commissioner, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

    • 46 min
    Fireside Chat with Bilal Sayyed, former FTC Director, Office of Policy Planning

    Fireside Chat with Bilal Sayyed, former FTC Director, Office of Policy Planning

    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

    • 1 hr 7 min
    China's Treatment of Turkic Muslims

    China's Treatment of Turkic Muslims

    The Federalist Society hosts Prof. Beth Van Schaack and Mr. John Bellinger for a discussion about the current treatment of Turkic Muslim civilians by the People's Republic of China ("PRC"), under a policy that the PRC describes as a counter-terrorism campaign but that others have described as a genocide. Prof. Van Schaack is the Acting Director of the International Human Rights Clinic at Stanford Law School, and previously served as the Deputy to the Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues in the Office of Global Criminal Justice of the U.S. Department of State. Mr. Bellinger is a partner at Arnold & Porter, and previously served as Legal Adviser to the Department of State, as Senior Associate Counsel to the President, and as Legal Adviser to the National Security Council.

    Featuring:
    -- John B. Bellinger, III, Partner, Arnold & Porter
    -- Prof. Beth Van Schaack, Leah Kaplan Visiting Professor in Human Rights, Stanford Law School

    • 57 min
    The Telecommunications Act at 25 Years: A Panel Discussion

    The Telecommunications Act at 25 Years: A Panel Discussion

    On February 8, 1996, President Bill Clinton signed into law the landmark Telecommunications Act of 1996, the most significant revision of the Communications Act since its enactment in 1934. In the 1996 Act’s preamble, Congress declared the statute’s purpose “to promote competition and reduce regulation.” And the conference report accompanying the law stated it was intended “to provide for a pro-competitive, deregulatory national policy framework.” At the signing ceremony, President Clinton’s rhetoric was soaring: “With the stroke of a pen, our laws will catch up with our future.”

    Now, a quarter century after the Telecom Act’s passage, we can celebrate the 25th anniversary and acknowledge the achievement, while – with the benefit of hindsight – also taking a critical look at what the 1996 Act actually accomplished and whether it needs updating. This program will address these fundamental questions: (1) what did the 1996 Act get right; (2) what did it get wrong; and (3) should it now be updated or substantially rewritten, and if so, in what way? The Federalist Society's Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group is pleased to host a distinguished panel to address these questions.

    Free State Foundation President Randolph May, a former FCC Associate General Counsel with over four decades of experience in the communications law and policy field, will moderate a discussion among experts: Harold Furthgott-Roth, a former FCC commissioner who served as a principal House Commerce Committee staff member working on the 1996 Act; Michelle Connolly, Professor of the Practice in the Economics Department at Duke University who twice served as Chief Economist at the FCC; and Chris Lewis, President and CEO of Public Knowledge who has served as Deputy Director of the FCC’s Office of Legislative Affairs.

    Featuring:
    -- Michelle Connolly, Professor of the Practice, Duke University; former Chief Economist, Federal Communications Commission
    -- Chris Lewis, President & CEO, Public Knowledge; former Deputy Director, FCC Office of Legislative Affairs
    -- Hon. Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for the Economics of the Internet, Hudson Institute; former FCC Commissioner
    -- Moderator: Randolph May, President, Free State Foundation; Executive Committee Member, Federalist Society's Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group

    • 1 hr 2 min

Customer Reviews

4.5 out of 5
48 Ratings

48 Ratings

PodcastListener38 ,

To be fair

The person below should have read the next 9 words in the description: "all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers."

Leea1776 ,

GREAT...But Covid quality

Amazing content. We need to address the quality of the audio. Thank you for producing these. Amazing content!

Paul Bishop III ,

Quality of Audio

What kind of potato was this recorded on?

Top Podcasts In Politics

Listeners Also Subscribed To

More by The Federalist Society