DiscoverFedSoc Events
FedSoc Events
Claim Ownership

FedSoc Events

Author: The Federalist Society

Subscribed: 2,573Played: 7,051
Share

Description

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.
668 Episodes
Reverse
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
Featuring:Brian Barnes, Partner, Cooper & Kirk PLLCAntonio García-Martínez, Author, Chaos Monkeys, and ex-Advisor, TwitterMichael McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor, Stanford Law School, and Co-Chair, Oversight BoardChris Pavlovski, Founder and CEO, Rumble.comModerator: Olivia Jackson, General Counsel, Oversight BoardIntroduction: Jonathan Breit, Stanford Law School ’22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:A. Douglas Melamed, Professor, Stanford Law School, and ex-General Counsel, IntelAaron Schur, Deputy General Counsel, YelpHal Singer, Managing Director, Econ OneDina Srinivasan, Author, The Antitrust Case Against FacebookAlan Sykes, Professor, Stanford Law SchoolModerator: Ted Ullyot, Former General Counsel, FacebookIntroduction: Austin Peters, Stanford Law School '22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Paul Grewal, Chief Legal Officer, CoinbaseInterviewer: Katie Biber, Chief Legal Officer, BrexIntroduction: Theodore Furchtgott, Stanford Law School '22* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Melissa Holyoak, Solicitor General, State of UtahClayton Kozinski, Counsel, Lehotsky Keller LLPAaron Royston, Managing Partner, venBio PartnersHoan Ton-That, Co-Founder and CEO, Clearview AIModerator: Gabe Ledeen, Managing Counsel, Privacy and Product, CruiseIntroduction: Daniel Bojorquez, Stanford Law School '23* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
ConvocationEugene B. Meyer, President and CEO, The Federalist SocietyA Conversation on Regulation as OpportunitySalen Churi, General Partner, Trust VenturesMiles Jennings, General Counsel, a16z CryptoModerator: Ann McDonald, Stanford Law School '23* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
A sharply divided Congress is facing significant challenges in order to raise revenue and meet President Biden’s priorities. While no one pretends to have a crystal ball, some changes are likely coming this fall and winter. Depending upon what compromises can be reached, ideas for reform range from changing step-up-in-basis rules and pass through regulations to significant changes in corporate taxation. Meanwhile in Brussels, a movement is growing among national leaders to establish global minimum corporate taxes and other significant changes to the global tax system. What is a practitioner to make of all this? What do we need to prepare for?Listen to our our panel of experts dissect and explain some of the most impactful potential tax reforms of 2021.
The Evansville Lawyers Chapter is honored to host Dave Hoppe, President, Hoppe Strategies, for a discussion entitled "How to Fix the Budget Mess."Featuring: David Hoppe, President, Hoppe StrategiesIntroduction: Seth Zirkle, Evansville Lawyers Chapter President
Featuring:Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason UniversityModerator: Chad Davis, President, Polk County Lawyers Chapters* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Hon. Daniel Cameron, Attorney General, Commonwealth of Kentucky* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
This panel discussed the upcoming Supreme Court term, which began on October 4, 2021. The Court's docket already includes major cases involving abortion, civil rights, criminal law, free expression and religious liberty, copyright, immigration, national security, the Second Amendment, and matters of constitutional structure. The full list of cases granted thus far for the upcoming term can be viewed on SCOTUSblog. The panel discussed broader questions about the direction of the Court.Featuring:Sarah Keeton Campbell, Associate Solicitor General and Special Assistant to the Attorney General, Tennessee Attorney General's OfficeJohn P. Elwood, Partner, Arnold & PorterMatthew Kuhn, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Office of the Kentucky Attorney GeneralModerator: Hon. John K. Bush, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Hon. Allison Joy Ball, State Treasurer, Commonwealth of KentuckyKevin Gallagher, Counsel, Wilmer HaleHon. Robin L. Webb, Kentucky State Senator Moderator: Hon. John B. Nalbandian, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Jesse Barrett, Partner, SouthBank Legal: LaDue | Curran | KuehnRussell Coleman, Partner, Frost Brown Todd and Former United States Attorney for the Western District of KentuckyElaine Leonhard, Supervisory Assistant United States Attorney, Eastern District of KentuckyHon. Danny Reeves, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of KentuckyModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring:Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
On February 28-29, 1992, the Federalist Society held its eleventh annual National Student Symposium at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, Texas. The subject of the conference was "The Legacy of the Federalist Papers." The last panel covered "The Anti-Federalists After 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?".3:45 p.m.Panel IV: The Anti-Federalists after 200 Years: Pundits or Prophets?Prof. Akhil R. Amar, Yale Law SchoolHon. Charles J. Cooper, Partner, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge; and former Assistant U.S. Attorney GeneralProf. Lino A. Graglia, University of Texas School of LawModerator: Hon. Edwin Meese III, 75th Attorney General; and Distinguished Fellow, The Heritage Foundation*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
Schools across the country have introduced elements of critical race theory into their curriculums. The Biden Administration has produced a federal rule that would prioritize funding for history and civics programs shaped by CRT. Meanwhile, lawmakers in 16 states have introduced or passed legislation this year seeking to limit the teaching of critical race theory within public institutions. And parents across the country have pushed back against school boards adopting CRT and filed litigation to that effect. What is critical race theory? Is the Biden Administration able to encourage its teaching through funding? Are states and localities within their rights in designing and limiting curricula and what can and cannot be taught in public schools or do laws that do so potentially violate First Amendment rights or other applicable law?Featuring:Prof. Christopher Brooks, Professor of History, East Stroudsburg UniversityJoe Cohn, Legislative and Policy Director, FIRETaylor Meehan, Counsel, Consovoy McCarthy PLLCModerator: Alison Somin, Legal Fellow, Center for the Separation of Powers at the Pacific Legal Foundation* * * * * 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 COVID-19 pandemic resulted in over a year of virtual public schooling in some parts of the country, which caused a surge of interest in school choice options as parents sought in-person instruction for their children. About 500,000 students nationally left traditional public schools during the pandemic to move into private schools, charters, and full-time home-schooling. State legislatures across the country thus responded by considering legislation to increase the number of charter schools, offer additional scholarship and tax credit programs, and create education savings account options to increase choice in education.This panel surveyed proposed education reforms to expand school choice and discussed the responses of unions, school boards, and parents to these proposals. Panelists considered changes the Biden Administration may make in education special emphasis on any proposed reforms in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey.Featuring:Robert S. Eitel, President, Defense of Freedom InstituteBenjamin A. Field, Attorney, Institute for JusticeModerator: Judge Joshua Wolson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Featuring: Prof. Robert P. George, Princeton UniversityIntroduction: Lisa Ezell, Vice President & Director, Lawyers Chapters, The Federalist Society* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Despite the fact that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits racial discrimination by schools that receive federal funding, racial preferences are being applied in admissions at many colleges and universities for the purpose of enhancing diversity. More recently, in light of this renewed emphasis on and interest in student diversity, the application of racial preferences in student admissions in higher education is having a trickle-down effect in admissions at prestigious magnet, charter and private secondary schools as well, many of which are discarding merit and test-based admissions policies in the name of diversity. However, the United States Supreme Court is currently considering whether to hear a case relating to Harvard University’s affirmative action policies which require the consideration of race in student admissions.This panel discussed the effects of racial preferences in higher education and also considered whether the Supreme Court will review the legal challenge to Harvard University’s admission policies, analyzed the merits of various legal arguments in the Harvard case, and predicted how the conservative leaning Supreme Court may potentially rule.Featuring:Cory Liu, Partner, Ashcroft Law Firm, and former assistant general counsel to Texas Governor Greg AbbottTheodore Shaw, Julius L. Chambers Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Civil Rights, UNC School of LawPatrick Strawbridge, Partner, Consovoy McCarthy Park PLLC, and adjunct professor for the Supreme Court Clinic at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason UniversityModerator: Judge Paul Matey, United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit* * * * * As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
On February 28-29, 1992, the Federalist Society held its eleventh annual National Student Symposium at the University of Texas School of Law in Austin, Texas. The subject of the conference was "The Legacy of the Federalist Papers." The second day of the symposium featured a lunchtime debate on "The Federalist and the Contemporary Debate on Term Limits."2:30 p.m.Debate: The Federalist and the Contemporary Debate on Term LimitsHon. William Kristol, Chief of Staff, Office of the Vice PresidentProf. Nelson Polsby, Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California at BerkeleyModerator: Hon. Will Garwood, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit*******As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.
loading
Comments (1)

Denny Gomez

A terrible example. I have seen video of lab tests of that Audi model that supported the claims of victims. Occam's Razor would lead anyone to consider the likelihood of a new technology to create unintended consequences MUCH more likely than that dozens and dozens of unrelated people around the world have engaged in wildly inexplicable behavior. Under what circumstances would someone crash into a whole row of cars? What would cause a person to accelerate into and through the rear wall of their own garage, over the body of their 10 year-old son? (This last happened in one case not mentioned here.) There's plenty of junk science presented in courts. This is a bad example.

Aug 26th
Reply
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store