Federalist Society Event Audio

A Look Back at the October Supreme Court 2007 Term 7-1-08

info@fed-soc.org — 6 Aug 2008 19:47:28 GMT

Is the DC gun ban constitutional? Do Guantanamo Bay prisoners have a constitutional right to bring habeas actions challenging their detentions? Does Louisiana’s law authorizing the death penalty for child rape violate the Eighth Amendment? Come to the Federalist Society’s luncheon panel discussion on "A Look Back at the October 2007 Supreme Court Term" on Tuesday, July 1, 2008, from 12 noon to 2:30pm at the National Press Club. By then the Court is expected to have ruled on these and other important questions. Our panelists will discuss the Court’s term, what it tells us about the Roberts Court, emerging jurisprudential themes and trends, and the future of the Court. This event will be broadcast over the internet in a live webcast. Panelists include Hon. Rachel Brand of WilmerHale, Hon. Ted Cruz of Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius, Mr. Tom Goldstein of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Prof. Orin Kerr of George Washington University School of Law, Prof. Nelson Lund of George Mason University School of Law, Mr. Charles Rothfeld of Mayer Brown, and ABC Legal Correspondent Ms. Jan Crawford Greenburg as the moderator.

2008 Annual Supreme Court Round Up 7-11-08

info@fed-soc.org — 22 Jul 2008 00:52:42 GMT

On July 11, 2008, former United States Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson delivered the Annual Supreme Court Round Up at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC.

Securities Litigation Reform 6-25-08

info@fed-soc.org — 26 Jun 2008 20:03:40 GMT

On May 19, William Lerach, formerly of the law firm of Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach LLP, began his prison sentence for his role in a $250 million illegal kickback scheme. On the same day, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), citing the possibility of widespread criminal practice in the area of securities class action law, introduced the Securities Litigation Attorney Accountability and Transparency Act (S. 3033). This legislation would require the disclosure of payments between plaintiffs and attorneys, the competitive bidding as a factor for the selection of lead counsel, and a GAO study to determine appropriate attorneys fees. Advocates argue that these reforms are essential to update securities class action law. Opponents argue that the Act is unnecessary and overstates the current level of abuse. Senator John Cornyn delivered an address on June 25, followed by comments from Mr. Holt M. Lackey of the United States Senate - Committee on the Judiciary and Counsel to U.S. Senator John Cornyn and by Mr. Andrew J. Pincus of Mayer Brown.

Hein, One Year Later: The Future of Church-State Litigation 6-18-08

info@fed-soc.org — 26 Jun 2008 15:10:00 GMT

In June 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation, that taxpayers could not pursue a lawsuit claiming that conferences administered under the Bush Administration's Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The Court's plurality opinion held that, even though taxpayers have standing under the Establishment Clause to challenge legislative expenditures on religion, the plaintiffs in this case lacked such standing because the program involved discretionary executive branch spending, rather than legislation authorizing the challenged faith-based conferences. Our panel will focus on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Hein and its impact on existing and future church-state litigation. The event will summarize the Court’s fractured opinion and examine what has happened in the last year as a result of Hein, discussing the lower court decisions that have cited Hein as a basis for dismissing Establishment Clause claims. Finally, the panel will speculate about what to expect in the coming years and discuss what Hein says about the Roberts Court and its views on church-state litigation. Panelists include Mr. Alex J. Luchenitser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Prof. Ira C. "Chip" Lupu, of The George Washington University Law School, Mr. Walter M. Weber of the American Center for Law and Justice, and Prof. Robert W. Tuttle of The George Washington University Law School as the moderator.

Communications and Technology Policy for the Next Administration 6-10-08

info@fed-soc.org — 11 Jun 2008 15:34:08 GMT

The communications and technology sectors are key drivers of our nation's prosperity, of our society's dynamism, and our republic's vitality. The next President will face major decisions on the direction of markets, regulation, antitrust, and regulators. Two former Federal Communications Commission Chairmen, Reed E. Hundt and Michael K. Powell, will discuss the respective visions of likely Presidential nominees Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John S. McCain for communications and technology. Former FCC Chief of Staff Bryan Tramont will moderate.

Assessing Recent FTC Merger Litigation: One Win, One Loss, and One Tie 6-5-08

info@fed-soc.org — 6 Jun 2008 21:23:14 GMT

The Federal Trade Commission, which appeared to be in the midst of a losing streak with respect to merger challenges as early as last summer, has worked its way back to a more respectable ratio of wins and losses. FTC challenges to mergers of entities as diverse as natural gas utilities, organic grocery stores, and hospitals have raised a host of issues that are likely to impact merger practice for years to come. Equitable Resources/Peoples Natural Gas was a (belated) victory for antitrust enforcement in regulated industries, Whole Foods/Wild Oats was a defeat (for now) for narrow market definitions, and Evanston Northwestern/Highland Park proved that a challenge to a consummated hospital merger could succeed... though the nature of the remedy has caused critics to question the value of that victory. What do these three cases tell us about the state of current FTC merger practice? Is the Commission challenging the right transactions and protecting consumers? Are the courts functioning as an unnecessary obstacle to merger enforcement or an appropriate check on agency authority? Join our panel of experts for a discussion of these issues and more. Panelists include Mr. John T. Delacourt of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, Mr. Paul T. Denis of Dechert LLP, Mr. Chul Pak of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, Mr. Edwin S. Rockefeller, author of The Antitrust Religion and former head of the American Bar Association's Antitrust Law Section, and Ms. Margaret A. Ward of Jones Day as the moderator.

The Obstruction of Justice 5-29-08

info@fed-soc.org — 3 Jun 2008 20:35:29 GMT

Every few months, a highly visible public figure or government official becomes embroiled in a criminal investigation that ultimately includes obstruction of justice charges. Barry Bonds, Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), Roger Clemens, Scooter Libby, Martha Stewart, Computer Associates, the U.S. Attorney firings, the CIA’s destruction of interrogation tapes -- all have included a focus on the conduct occurring during the investigation of other, unrelated charges. But what exactly is obstruction of justice, and what role should it play in our justice system? No one can doubt the importance of punishing those who willfully corrupt the administration of justice, lie under oath, tamper with witnesses, or destroy evidence, but critics charge that prosecutors have used "creative interpretations" of obstruction of justice statutes to punish marginal conduct or create criminal liability where none otherwise existed. What is the proper role and scope of the obstruction statutes? Have obstruction of justice prosecutions veered too far from heartland cases? Panelists include Mr. Michael J. Madigan of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer, & Feld, Prof. Stephen A. Saltzburg of The George Washington University Law School, Hon. George J. Terwilliger III, of White & Case LLP and former Deputy U.S. Attorney General, Prof. Jonathan Turley of The George Washington University Law School, and Judge Merrick B. Garland of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit as the moderator.

Credit Card Regulation 5-20-08

info@fed-soc.org — 21 May 2008 21:11:12 GMT

Congress and many consumer activist groups have called for closer regulation on the terms of credit cards. In particular, there have been calls to place price caps on certain fees, including overlimit fees, late fees, and the like. There have also been calls for stricter regulation of credit card marketing, such as marketing to college students. Likewise, there have been calls for specific regulation of certain practices, such as cross-default clauses in credit card contracts. Last year the Federal Reserve issued a long-awaited and lengthy set of proposed amendments to Regulation Z implementing the Truth in Lending Act. What would be the likely the effects of these regulations on consumer protection and competition in the credit card industry? Panelists include Mr. Thomas A. Durkin of the Financial Services Research Program at George Washington University and former Senior Economist for the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Mr. Oliver I. Ireland of Morrison & Foerster LLP, Prof. Adam J. Levitin of the Georgetown University Law Center, Prof. Todd J. Zywicki of the George Mason University School of Law, and Mr. Andrew Cochran of GAGE as the moderator.

Subprime Lending 5-20-08

info@fed-soc.org — 21 May 2008 21:08:36 GMT

Problems in the subprime lending industry have led to widespread calls for substantial new regulations on lending to "subprime" consumers. The Federal Reserve has already issued new guidance to banks on loan products such as adjustable rate mortgages and various lending terms and practices. What will be the likely impact of these proposed new regulations if adopted? To what extent are the current problems in the subprime market the result of prior governmental interventions into the mortgage market, such as through the Community Reinvestment Act? Will the issues in the subprime market resolve themselves without government intervention? Panelists include Prof. Jennifer E. Bethel of Babson College, Ms. Margaret Burns of the Single Family Program Development at the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Mr. Allen Fishbein of the Consumer Federation of America, and Prof. Allen Ferrell of Harvard Law School as the moderator.

The War on Terrorism and Specialized Courts 5-12-08

info@fed-soc.org — 20 May 2008 16:15:40 GMT

The legal framework for our counterterrorism efforts has consisted of a mix of the law of armed conflict and criminal law. It also consisted of a varying mix of executive action and legislative authorization. This mix has been controversial. And it may be inadequate, because the efforts must have two objectives. The first is to prevent attacks, and the second is to prosecute terrorists in a manner that is both effective and just. Can these objectives be better achieved through comprehensive legislation and policy innovations, perhaps including the establishment of a specialized court with jurisdiction over (1) intelligence gathering, (2) preventive detention, (3) interrogation, and (4) trials? A distinguished panel will address the Constitutional, legal, and policy issues raised by such suggestions. Panelists include Prof. Neal K. Katyal of Georgetown University Law Center and Counsel to Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Prof. Joseph Margulies of MacArthur Justice Center at Northwestern University School of Law, Mr. David B. Rivkin, Jr., of Baker & Hostetler, LLP, Prof. Glenn M. Sulmasy of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy and National Security and Human Rights Fellow at Harvard University, and Judge Frank H. Easterbrook of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit as the moderator. **There were audio problems during the recording of this event, which we were unable to fix in post-production. We apologize for the poor quality and for the inconvenience.**

Federal Regulation of Water Transfers 4-28-08

info@fed-soc.org — 20 May 2008 16:14:56 GMT

Traditionally, water has been abundant in the Eastern United States, and water transfers from one body of water to another were rarely a subject of dispute. However, as the Eastern United States continues to grow and develop - particularly in the Southeast - many communities are looking to water transfers as a means of supplying adequate water supplies for municipal and industrial purposes, among other things. Water transfers, however, raise a number of concerns, including both water quality and water quantity. One such issue involves the extent to which water transfers require a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit ("NPDES") under the Clean Water Act. On June 14, 2007, a federal judge in Florida issued a final judgment ordering the South Florida Water Management District ("SFWMD") to obtain a NPDES permit for a water transfer conducted as part of a federal water project. Friends of the Everglades v. Dean, Case No. 02-80309 (S.D. Fla.). This decision is currently on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The SFWMD argues that the extension of NPDES jurisdiction to water transfers encroaches on the traditional role of states to allocate water resources, commandeers states' water rights, threatens the important balance of cooperative federalism, imposes unnecessary administrative burdens upon water managers, and diverts resources from current restoration priorities. Panelists include Mr. James Nutt of South Florida Water Management District, Mr. Gil Rogers of the Southern Environmental Law Center, Mr. Brent Fewell of Hunton & Williams and former U.S. EPA Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Water, and Mr. Steven G. McKinney of Balch & Bingham LLP as the moderator. ***This audio cuts out during the Q&A. We apologize for the inconvenience.***

"Tax Expenditures": The Wisdom and Efficacy of Using the Tax Code to Implement Social Policy 5-7-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 May 2008 16:43:59 GMT

The Federalist Society's 2008 Tax Policy Conference titled "Our Nation's Founding Principles and Our Tax Code - Consistent or In Conflict?" was held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on May 7, 2008. This panel featured Prof. Lily Batchelder of the NYU School of Law, Mr. Leonard E. Burman, Director of the Tax Policy Institute, Urban Institute, Mr. Stephen J. Entin of The Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation, and Hon. Eileen J. O'Connor of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, and former Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, as the moderator.

Charity: Whether and, if so, How Our Tax Laws Affect Charitable Activities, Religious Institutions, and Free Speech 5-7-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 May 2008 16:34:23 GMT

The Federalist Society's 2008 Tax Policy Conference titled "Our Nation's Founding Principles and Our Tax Code - Consistent or In Conflict?" was held at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on May 7, 2008. This panel featured Mr. Lee E. Goodman of LeClairRyan, Mr. Kevin Hasson of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Ms. Anne D. Neal of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, and Mr. Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center as the moderator.

Health Care: How Our Tax Laws Affect How Health Care is Paid for and Delivered 5-7-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 May 2008 16:09:46 GMT

The Honorable Eileen J. O'Connor of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, and former Assistant Attorney General for the Tax Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, opened The Federalist Society's 2008 Tax Policy Conference titled "Our Nation's Founding Principles and Our Tax Code - Consistent or In Conflict?" at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, on May 7, 2008. The following panel featured Mr. Michael F. Cannon of the Cato Institute, Mr. Robert B. Helms of the American Enterprise Institute, Prof. Mark V. Pauly of the University of Pennsylvania - Health Care Systems Department, and Prof. Amy Monahan of the University of Missouri - Columbia as the moderator.

Is the Election of Judges Good Public Policy? 4-28-08

info@fed-soc.org — 7 May 2008 23:00:52 GMT

The Nashville Lawyers Chapter hosted this event on April 28, 2008. Panelists included Justice Harold F. See, Jr., of the Alabama Supreme Court, former Attorney General of Tennessee Paul G. Summers, and Mr. Woody Woodruff of Waller, Lansden, Dortch & Davis as the moderator.

Reporters' Shield 4-29-08

info@fed-soc.org — 30 Apr 2008 22:09:09 GMT

A number of high profile court orders in the recent past have demanded reporters divulge confidential sources or face contempt charges. In response, both the House and the Senate have considered versions of a federal "reporters’ shield" law to supplement the common law privilege often extended to reporters to keep sources confidential. This topic provokes a number of questions about the role of the press and whether it should be treated more leniently, the issue of who is "press," the proper balance of governmental confidentiality and the "public right to know," and the ability of law enforcement and national security experts to pursue leakers of confidential or classified information. -- Is a federal reporters’ shield law a good idea? How broadly should it reach? Should it protect professional journalists only or extend to ad hoc writers and bloggers, and if so, where and how is a line to be drawn? Are there other ways to balance reporters' and sources' interests with law enforcement? Is there a better mechanism than contempt to employ? -- Panelists include Prof. Lillian BeVier of the University of Virginia School of Law, Mr. Andrew C. Hruska of King & Spalding, Mr. Erik S. Jaffe of the Law Offices of Erik S. Jaffe, Prof. Lee Levine of Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz, L.L.P. and Georgetown University Law Center, and Hon. Rachel Brand, Former Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Policy at the U.S Department of Justice as the moderator.

Judge Janice Rogers Brown Address 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 16:11:43 GMT

Judge Janice Rogers Brown of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia delivered the Keynote Address at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium Banquet on March 8, 2007. Eugene B. Meyer, President of the Federalist Society, introduced Judge Brown.

2008 Bator Award Presentation 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 16:05:30 GMT

The 2008 Paul M. Bator Award was awarded to Prof. Saikrishna Prakash of the University of San Diego School of Law on March 8, 2008, at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium held at the University of Michigan Law School. Professor Prakash was introduced by University of Chicago Law School Student Chapter member, Miss Carina Cilluffo.

Tradition and the People's Constitution 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 16:03:03 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this panel at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 8, 2008. The panelists included Prof. William Eskridge of Yale Law School, Prof. Thomas Merrill of Columbia Law School, Prof. Reva Siegel of Yale Law School, Prof. Keith Whittington of Princeton University, and Prof. Joan Larsen of the University of Michigan Law School as the moderator.

An Originalist Judge and the Media 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 15:59:10 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this speech and commentary at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 8, 2008. The speech was delivered by Justice Stephen Markman of the Michigan Supreme Court followed by commentary from Prof. Richard Primus of the University of Michigan Law School and Mr. Pete Williams of NBC News. Judge Sean Cox of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan was the moderator.

The People's Common Law: Is Law & Economics Anti-Democratic? 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 15:56:38 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this panel at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 8, 2008. The panelists included Prof. Robert Ellickson of Yale Law School, Prof. Brian Simpson of the University of Michigan Law School, Prof. Henry Smith of Yale Law School, and Prof. Adam Pritchard of the University of Michigan Law School as the moderator.

Kelo, Grutter, and Popular Responses to Unpopular Decisions 3-8-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 15:54:09 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this panel at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 8, 2008. The panelists included Prof. Sherman Clark of the University of Michigan Law School, Mr. Ward Connerly, Founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, Prof. Marci Hamilton of the Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, and Justice Robert Young of the Michigan Supreme Court as the moderator.

The Merits of Electing Our Judges 3-7-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 15:50:01 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this debate at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 7, 2008. The speakers included retired Chief Justice Tom Phillips of the Texas Supreme Court and now of Baker Botts LLP, Chief Justice Clifford Taylor of the Michigan Supreme Court, and Mr. Leonard A. Leo, Executive Vice President of the Federalist Society, as the moderator.

Judicial Interference With Community Values 3-7-08

info@fed-soc.org — 24 Apr 2008 15:38:09 GMT

The Federalist Society's Student Division presented this panel at the 2008 Annual Student Symposium on March 7, 2008. Opening remarks were delivered by University of Michigan Law School Student Chapter President Craig Chosiad and Dean Evan Caminker of the University of Michigan Law School. Panelists included Prof. Richard Garnett of the University of Notre Dame Law School, Prof. Roderick Hills Jr. of the New York University School of Law, Prof. Douglas Laycock of the University of Michigan Law School, Prof. Amy Wax of the University of Pennsylvania Law School, and Justice Maura Corrigan of the Michigan Supreme Court as the moderator.

The False Claims Act 4-18-08

info@fed-soc.org — 22 Apr 2008 19:49:12 GMT

Congress is considering several amendments to the False Claims Act which would broaden whistleblower protection and qui tam provisions. Supporters argue that these amendments will lead to better government and a closer monitoring of federal expenditures. Others maintain that the amendments, which make federal employees relators under qui tam, are inadvisable at best and potentially detrimental to business and other concerns. Panelists include Mr. Jonathan Diesenhaus of Hogan & Hartson LLP, Mr. Andrew Grosso of Andrew Grosso & Associates, Ms. Marcia Madsen of Mayer Brown LLP, Ms. Shelley Slade of Vogel, Slade & Goldstein, LLP, and Mr. R. Christopher Cook of Jones Day as the moderator.

Dictating Norms: Who Decides What's Right for the World? 4-14-08

info@fed-soc.org — 15 Apr 2008 20:26:32 GMT

The proliferation of international policymaking organizations has intensified and institutionalized the influence of global governance. Suprastate and non-state actors, such as the United Nations, NGOs, and international financial institutions, have risen in prominence and power, bringing with them internationalist agendas that are challenging states' abilities to steer their own domestic policies and priorities. As the lines between state sovereignty and global governance become increasingly blurred, who should decide what's right for the world? What are the processes by which international agendas are declared universal, and are they democratic? What happens when national governments disagree with world agendas and how are disputes arbitrated? As globalization progresses, should national governments expect to cede some aspect of sovereignty? Please join us to discuss these and other important questions as the Federalist Society and AEI inaugurate a joint project, Global Governance Watch (GGW). A web-based resource that addresses issues of transparency and accountability at the United Nations, in NGOs, and related international organizations, and the threats that such organizations pose to national sovereignty, the GGW project focuses on four strategic areas: 1) national security -- exploring the ways in which international organizations have become increasingly involved in national defense policy, 2) development -- monitoring the efficacy of international organizations that conduct development work, 3) global regulation -- assessing the impact of international efforts to regulate such areas as health policy, intellectual property rights, and corporate social responsibility, and 4) human security -- assessing human rights actors and related global efforts to promote a secure world free from "want" and "fear." Introduction by Danielle Pletka of AEI and Leonard Leo of The Federalist Society. Keynoted Address by John R. Bolton of AEI. Presentation of Global Governance Watch by David Peyton of AEI and Alyssa Luttjohann of The Federalist Society. Panelists include Ronald A. Cass of the Center for the Rule of Law, Grover Joseph Rees III of the Department of State, Claudia Rosett of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and James P. Kelly III of The Federalist Society as the moderator.

A Review of Supreme Court Labor and Employment Cases 4-4-08

info@fed-soc.org — 9 Apr 2008 16:52:00 GMT

The current Supreme Court Term promises to be one of the most important in years for labor and employment lawyers, with the Court taking up cases on the scope of admissible evidence in discrimination cases, the parties' burden in age discrimination class actions, unions' ability to agree to arbitration as the exclusive means for resolving discrimination complaints, states' ability to restrict employers' use of state contract funds in opposing union organizing, and several other important issues. On April 4 at the National Press Club, the Federalist Society hosted a panel of nationally-recognized experts who discussed the leading cases before the Court this Term and what they could mean for the direction of labor and employment law. Speakers include Hon. Eric S. Dreiband of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Mr. Willis J. Goldsmith of Jones Day, Prof. Michael H. Gottesman of Georgetown University Law Center, Mr. Joseph M. Sellers of Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., and Hon. Eugene Scalia, former Solicitor of the United States Department of Labor as the moderator.

Debating the Role of the Chief Justice in Judicial Selection 3-11-08

info@fed-soc.org — 20 Mar 2008 16:48:14 GMT

The Federalist Society's St. Louis Lawyers Chapter presented this debate on March 11, 2008. Speakers include Mr. Bill Placke of Better Courts for Missouri, Mr. Woody Cozad of the Cozad Company, Mr. Tom Walsh of Sonnenschein Nash & Rosenthal LLP, Mr. Randy Scherr of R.J. Scherr and Associates, and Judge Samuel J. Hais formerly of the Missouri 21st Judicial Circut as the moderator.

The Courts and the Legislature vs. the People: Who is in Charge? 2-23-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 Mar 2008 19:53:21 GMT

The Federalist Society presented this panel during the Second Annual Western Conference at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, on February 23, 2008. Panelists included Judge Alex Kozinski of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, political strategist and pollster Mr. Arnold Steinberg, Prof. Eugene Volokh of the University of California at Los Angeles, former California Governor Pete Wilson, and Hon. Gail Heriot of the United States Commission on Civil Rights as the moderator.

Contemporary Themes in Direct Democracy 2-23-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 Mar 2008 19:41:05 GMT

The Federalist Society presented this panel during the Second Annual Western Conference at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, on February 23, 2008. Panelists included Prof. Elizabeth Garrett of the University of Southern California, Prof. Daniel Lowenstein of the University of California at Los Angeles, Prof. John Matsusaka of the University of Southern California, and Judge Carlos Bea of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as the moderator.

Ward Connerly Address 2-23-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 Mar 2008 19:28:00 GMT

Ward Connerly, founder of the American Civil Rights Institute, delivered this address at The Federalist Society's Second Annual Western Conference at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, on February 23, 2008. Introduction by Mr. Manuel Klausner of the Law Offices of Manuel S. Klausner.

What Would the Framers Have Thought of Direct Democracy? 2-23-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 Mar 2008 19:26:53 GMT

The Federalist Society presented this panel during the Second Annual Western Conference at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, on February 23, 2008. Panelists included Prof. Maimon Schwarzschild of the University of San Diego, Prof. Marci Hamilton of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, and Dean Kenneth Starr of Pepperdine University as the moderator.

Federal Preemption and the Supreme Court

info@fed-soc.org — 25 Feb 2008 18:01:35 GMT

The federal preemption of state tort law is an issue in several cases on the Supreme Court's docket, including February 25 oral arguments in Warner-Lambert v. Kent. On the same day, petitioners' briefs are due in Wyeth v. Levine, in which the federal government and pharmaceutical manufacturers argue that Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of prescription drug labeling preempts state "failure-to-warn" litigation, and in Altria v. Good, in which tobacco manufacturers argue that Federal Trade Commission labeling requirements preempt the multibillion-dollar consumer fraud litigation over light cigarettes. Earlier in the term, in Riegel v. Medtronic, the Court heard arguments about whether federal regulations preempt product liability claims over preapproved medical devices. How will the Supreme Court resolve these complicated questions? What is the appropriate relationship between federal regulation and state tort law? What are the pros and cons of preemption, and what impact will these cases have on product liability litigation and product safety? This event was co-hosted by The Federalist Society and the American Enterprise Institute. Panelists include Dr. Michael S. Greve of the American Enterprise Institute, Prof. Catherine Sharkey of New York University School of Law, Hon. Daniel Troy of Sidley Austin, Mr. Brian Wolfman of Public Citizen Litigation Group, and Mr. Theodore H. Frank of the American Enterprise Institute as the moderator.

The Akaka Bill 2-12-08

info@fed-soc.org — 12 Feb 2008 23:22:37 GMT

The proposed Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act (known as the "Akaka Bill") would set in motion a process under which ethnic Hawaiians living throughout the country could form themselves into an Indian tribe. In doing so, they would become by far the largest such tribe in our nation's history-with as many as 400,000 members. Supporters argue that the Akaka Bill is a matter of simple justice-that it partially restores ethnic Hawaiians to the sovereignty they held prior to the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani in 1893. Opponents assert that the bill is less about Queen Liliuokalani and more about safeguarding various special benefits-from special schools to special business loans-currently enjoyed by ethnic Hawaiians, some of which are now under challenge in the courts on equal protection grounds. If passed, would the Akaka Bill be constitutional? Is it good policy? What sort of precedent would it set for other groups that may wish to form Indian tribes in the future? These and many other questions will be discussed by our panel of experts. Panelists include: Rep. Steve King, of Iowa, Mr. Joe Matal, Counsel to Senator Kyl, Senate Judiciary Committee, and Mr. Dean Reuter, Director of the Practice Groups for The Federalist Society as the moderator.

A New Role for an Aging Star: Universal Service in the Age of Competition and Technological Change 2-5-08

info@fed-soc.org — 7 Jan 2008 17:39:07 GMT

The United States spends $7 billion a year to subsidize telephone companies. This program, known as Universal Service, is designed to guarantee affordable telephone service to rural and low-income Americans, to reduce Internet connection costs for schools and libraries, and to enhance connectivity for rural health care providers. Consumers each month pay a roughly 10% fee on their phone bills to support this program. What is the future of Universal Service, given the end of monopoly telephone service, the spread of low-cost high-speed Internet connections, and the explosion in alternatives for voice service including wireless and VoIP? Is this program simply an antiquated relic from a monopoly era? In this era of innovation and competition, should the system be reformed to empower consumers, rather than subsidize companies? Can the size of the fund be reduced? Can these funds be more productively deployed? Should the fund continue to subsidize multiple carriers within the same area? Should wireless companies be subsidized at the same level as wireline companies? And, should the fund be used to subsidize broadband services? The Federalist Society presented this program on the future of Universal Service. FCC Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate delivered a keynote address. As the Chairman of the FCC’s Joint Board on Universal Service, Commissioner Tate is at the epicenter of these policy debates. After her address, a roundtable discussion convened that brought together leaders from Capitol Hill and various industry sectors to explore solutions to the vexing problem of reshaping Universal Service for the Digital Age. Panelists inlcuded Mr. Jon Banks, Senior Vice President for Law and Public Policy at the United States Telecom Association; Hon. Kyle E. McSlarrow, President & CEO of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association; Mr. Paul J. Nagle, Repulican Chief Counsel, U.S. Senate Committe on Commerce, Science and Transportation; Ms. Courtney Reinhard, Minority Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce; Mr. Lawrence Sarjeant, Vice President Legislative and Regulatory Affairs for Qwest Communications International; Mr. Scott Wallsten, Vice President for Research and Senior Fellow at iGrowthGlobal as the moderator.

Judicial Confirmations 1-31-08

info@fed-soc.org — 31 Jan 2008 20:25:37 GMT

Senator Arlen Specter and a panel of experts examine the state of the judicial nomination and confirmation process. How does the pace of confirmations measure up to previous, similarly-situated administrations and Congresses? Has the administration been sufficiently attentive to the issue of nominations? Has the Senate been remiss in its duty to hold hearings and votes? What can be expected for the balance of the President's term; is the Senate entitled to effectively foreclose action on pending nominees at some point in anticipation of a Presidential election? Panelists include Prof. Michael J. Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina School of Law, Mr. Simon Heller of the Alliance for Justice, Mr. Michael B. Wallace of Wise Carter Child & Caraway, Mr. Edward Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Mr. David G. Savage of The Los Angeles Times as the moderator. Opening address by United States Senator Arlen Specter with an introduction by Mr. Eugene B. Meyer, President of the Federalist Society.

Is The Mississippi Bar Doing Enough to Combat Corruption and to Protect the Honor and Integrity of the Profession? 1-17-08

info@fed-soc.org — 22 Jan 2008 22:48:17 GMT

The Mississippi Lawyers Chapter presented this panel discussion on January 17, 2008, at The University Club in Jackson, Mississippi. Panelists included Robert R. Bailess of Wheeless, Shappley, Bailess & Rector and President of the Mississippi Bar, Mark A. Chinn of Chinn & Associates, Merrida (Buddy) Coxwell of Coxwell & Associates and Past President of MTLA, W. Wayne Drinkwater, Jr. of Bradley, Arant, Rose & White, Adam B. Kilgore, General Counsel of The Mississippi Bar, J. Scott Newton of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, Carlton W. Reeves of Pigott, Reeves & Johnson and President of The Magnolia Bar Association, and Brad Prewitt of Prewitt Group, P.A. as the moderator.

The Duke Lacrosse Case & the Academy 1-4-08

info@fed-soc.org — 21 Jan 2008 20:23:08 GMT

This address by Professor KC Johnson of Brooklyn College took place on January 4, 2008, at the Federalist Society's 10th Annual Faculty Conference in New York City.

American Law Schools: Envy of the World or General Motors Before the Fall? 1-4-08

info@fed-soc.org — 21 Jan 2008 20:23:07 GMT

This panel discussion took place on January 4, 2008, at the Federalist Society's 10th Annual Faculty Conference in New York City. Panelists included Prof. Paul Campos of the University of Colorado School of Law, Dean John Garvey of Boston College & President-Elect, Association of American Law Schools, Prof. Maimon Schwarzschild of University of San Diego School of Law, Prof. George Shepherd of Emory University College of Law, Dean Rodney Smolla of Washington & Lee School of Law, and Judge Frank Easterbrook of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit as the moderator.

Is the DC Gun Ban Unconstitutional? 1-4-08

info@fed-soc.org — 22 Jan 2008 21:53:59 GMT

This debate took place on January 4, 2008, at the Federalist Society's 10th Annual Faculty Conference in New York City. Panelists included Prof. Nelson Lund of George Mason University School of Law, New York City Council Member Hon. David Yassky, and Prof. Randy Barnett of Georgetown University Law Center as the moderator.

Post Kelo Reform 1-4-08

info@fed-soc.org — 18 Jan 2008 17:58:12 GMT

This panel discussion took place on January 4, 2008, at the Federalist Society's 10th Annual Faculty Conference in New York City. Panelists included Prof. David Dana of Northwestern University School of Law, Prof. Steve Eagle of George Mason University School of Law, Prof. James Ely of Vanderbilt University Law School, Mr. Daniel B. Kelly of Yale Law School, and Prof. Ilya Somin of George Mason University School of Law as the moderator.

Executive Discretion & the Rule of Law 1-3-08

info@fed-soc.org — 18 Jan 2008 17:55:51 GMT

This panel discussion took place on January 3, 2008, at the Federalist Society's 10th Annual Faculty Conference in New York City. Panelists included Prof. Harvey Mansfield of Harvard University, Prof. Neomi Rao of George Mason University School of Law, Prof. Ilya Somin of George Mason University School of Law, and Prof. John McGinnis of Northwestern University School of Law as the moderator.

Corporate Social Responsibility or UN Corporate Governance? 12-11-07

info@fed-soc.org — 11 Dec 2007 22:24:46 GMT

Recently, UN officials have begun using a human rights agenda to govern the activities of corporations throughout the world. The latest UN effort involves the promotion of an ambiguous “right to health” and its related access to medicines. The UN effort to globally govern pharmaceutical companies is being led by Paul Hunt, the UN Special Rapporteur on the “right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.” On September 19, 2007, Mr. Hunt published draft Human Rights Guidelines for Pharmaceutical Companies in relation to Access to Medicines. The Draft Guidelines set forth a human rights regimen designed to pressure pharmaceutical companies to embrace a “right to health” the scope of which has never been established in international law. Panelists include Mr. John Gardner, Former General Counsel for USAID and Mr. James P. Kelly III, Chairman of the Social and Human Sciences Committee for the U.S. National Commission for UNESCO.

American Exceptionalism, the War on Terror and the Rule of Law in the Islamic World 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 22:59:43 GMT

Since at least the time of the American Revolution, America has been a revolutionary force for democracy and liberty in world affairs. Some have called us a dangerous and revolutionary nation. American ideas about democracy and liberty have played a role over the last 200 years in the French Revolution, the Latin American wars of independence from Spain and Portugal, reform efforts in Britain, the revolutions of 1848, Woodrow Wilson's war to make the world safe for democracy, the Second World War struggle against the Nazis and fascists, and the cold war struggle against communist totalitarianism. Is it fair to say that Americans have spread our system of government to Western and Eastern Europe, to Latin America, to Japan, and to much of the rest of the world? If so, what role, if any, should America play in spreading democracy and liberty to the Islamic World? Do we have a special responsibility in Iraq or elsewhere to spread our ideas about freedom, self-government, and the rule of law? What are the limits on America's foreign policy responsibilities? Should we be an exemplar of liberty and democracy only, or should we actively seek to spread our way of life around the world? Can or should a country that believes in liberty and democracy ever engage in imperialism? Panelists include Prof. Neal K. Katyal of the Georgetown University Law Center, Prof. Michael S. Paulsen of the University of Saint Thomas School of Law, Mr. David B. Rivkin Jr. of Baker & Hostetler, Prof. Nadine Strossen of New York Law School, and Prof. Steven G. Calabresi of Northwestern University School of Law and Chairman, The Federalist Society Board of Directors.

The Conservative and Libertarian Legal Movement: A 25 Year Retrospective 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 22:43:52 GMT

The Federalist Society's Annual Convention Luncheon was held on November 17, 2007. The topic of the luncheon panel was "The Conservative and Libertarian Legal Movement: A 25 Year Retrospective." Panelists included Mr. Manuel S. Klausner of the Reason Foundation, Hon. Edwin Meese III of the Heritage Foundation, and Mr. Alfred Regnery of The American Spectator as the moderator. Introduction and opening remarks by Mr. Eugene B. Meyer, President of the Federalist Society, and Hon. E. Spencer Abraham, Co-Founder of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.

Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property: American Exceptionalism or International Harmonization? 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 22:39:54 GMT

The Federalist Society's Intellectual Property Practice Group presented this panel discussion at the 2007 Annual National Lawyers Convention on November 17, 2007. Panelists included Prof. Shubha Ghosh of Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, Prof. F. Scott Kieff of Washington University in St. Louis, Prof. Adam Mossoff of Michigan State University College of Law, Prof. Steven M. Tepp of the U.S. Copyright Office, and Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Borrowing in America: Home Mortgages, Foreclosures and Predatory Lending 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 18:51:37 GMT

The Federalist Society's Financial Services & E-Commerce Practice Group presented this panel discussion at the 2007 Annual National Lawyers Convention on November 17, 2007. Panelists included Ms. Anne Canfield of the Consumer Mortgage Coalition, Mr. Alex J. Pollock of The American Enterprise Institute, Mr. Allen Fishbein of the Consumer Federation of America, Mrs. Montrice Yakimov of the Office of Thrift Supervision, and Judge Edith H. Jones of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Amending State & Federal Constitutions to Prohibit Sex Discrimination 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 18:50:27 GMT

The Federalist Society's Civil Rights Practice Group presented this panel discussion at the 2007 Annual National Lawyers Convention on November 17, 2007. The panelists included Prof. Martha F. Davis of Northeastern University School of Law, Prof. Gail Heriot of the University of San Diego School of Law, Mrs. Phyllis M. Schlafly of the Eagle Forum, and Judge Jerry E. Smith of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

The Constitution & American Exceptionalism: Citation of Foreign Law 11-17-07

info@fed-soc.org — 28 Nov 2007 17:23:39 GMT

What relationship is there between the ideology and reality of American exceptionalism and our ideas about the Constitution? Is the U.S. Constitution a symbol of the United States' status as a Shining City on a Hill – a kind of Ark of the Covenant of the New Israel that is America? How different is the U.S. Constitution from the Constitutions of other Western democracies and are those differences a good thing? How different is Supreme Court constitutional case law from the comparable case law of other major Western democracies? Why is the U.S. so much more enthusiastic about freedom of speech and of the press than are other Western democracies? What explains America's unique fascination with the separation of church and state, the exclusionary rule, the death penalty, jury trials, and property rights? Why is the abortion issue so much more controversial in the U.S. than it is in other Western democracies? Are we unique in the power we give to our Supreme Court to decide controversial issues of domestic policy? Do these differences suggest that the U.S Supreme Court ought not to rely on foreign law in interpreting the U.S. Constitution, since the United States is such a different country from Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and Japan? Panelists included Prof. Akhil Reed Amar of Yale Law School, Judge Frank H. Easterbrook of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Prof. Vicki C. Jackson of the Georgetown University Law Center, Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz of the Georgetown University Law Center, and Judge Janice Rogers Brown of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit as moderator.