SCOTUScast 12-5-14 featuring Eugene Kontorovich Eugene Kontorovich December 05, 2014
On November 3, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Zivotofsky v. Kerry. This case concerns Section 214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 2003, which directs the Secretary of State, upon request, to record the birthplace of an American citizen born in Jerusalem as born in “Israel” on a Consular Report of Birth Abroad and on a United States passport. The question before the Court is whether this provision unconstitutionally infringes on the President’s power to recognize foreign sovereigns.
To discuss the case, we have Eugene Kontorovich, who is a Professor of Law at the Northwestern University School of Law. Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Podcast
The President, with much attention from the media and the public, announced executive action on immigration. Our discussion will address the specifics of the President’s actions, and the legality of those actions. What exactly was said and done by the President, and how do his actions differ from acts he previously asserted were beyond his unilateral power? Has the President exceeded his constitutional authority to act? What happens next?
2014 National Lawyers Convention
- Prof. John S. Baker, Jr., Visiting Professor, Georgetown University Law Center and Professor Emeritus, LSU Law School
- Prof. John C. Eastman, Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service, Chapman University School of Law
- Margaret D. Stock, Counsel to the Firm, Cascadia Cross-Border Law
- Prof. John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California Berkeley School of Law
Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah delivered this address at the 2014 National Lawyers Convention on Friday, November 14, 2014. He was introduced by Mr. Leonard A. Leo, Executive Vice President of The Federalist Society.
- Hon. Orrin Hatch, U.S. Senate
- Introduction: Mr. Leonard A. Leo, Executive Vice President, The Federalist Society
Mayflower Hotel 2014 National Lawyers Convention
This panel will explore how judicial deference to agency decisionmaking has evolved since the seminal Supreme Court decision in Chevron v. NRDC and whether it is time to revisit the doctrine of "Chevron deference." The panelists will discuss questions such as whether Chevrondeference has led courts to take such a hands-off approach in litigation against agency action that the agencies have become an unaccountable fourth branch of government. Or is Chevron deference a doctrine that is necessary to keep courts from becoming policymaking bodies? They will discuss the real-world implications of Chevron deference from the perspective of regulated parties and whether there are any practical alternatives to Chevron deference. The panel will also explore related doctrines of judicial deference, such as so-called Auer deference, and whether lower courts have taken that deference beyond what the Supreme Court intended.
The Federalist Society's Litigation Practice Group presented this panel on "Time to Revisit Chevron Deference?" on Thursday, November 13, during the 2014 National Lawyers Convention.
- Prof. Jack M. Beermann, Harry Elwood Warren Scholar Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law
- Hon. Charles J. Cooper, Partner, Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, and former Assistant U.S. Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel
- Prof. Thomas W. Merrill, Charles Evans Hughes Professor of Law, Columbia University School of Law
- Prof. Amy Wildermuth, Associate Vice President for Faculty, Senior Vice President Academic Affairs - Operations, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
- Moderator: Hon. Don R. Willett, Texas Supreme Court
- Introduction: Hon. Rachel L. Brand, Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board; Senior Advisor to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, United States Chamber of Commerce; and former Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Legal Policy United States Department of Justice; and Chairman, Litigation Practice Group
Mayflower Hotel 2014 National Lawyers Convention
Is President Obama failing in this basic obligation of the President? Allegations of lawlessness have been made about his decisions not to enforce the immigration law, to suspend some requirements of the Affordable Care Act, and to flout Congress’s requirement of thirty-day notice before freeing prisoners from Guantanamo. Are these fair charges or does the President enjoy inherent constitutional power or specific statutory authority to decline enforcement? What should be Congress’s reaction to non-enforcement? Does this pattern of non-enforcement imply anything more general about the President’s legal or political philosophy?
The Federalist Society's Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group presented this panel on "The President's Duty to Take Care that the Law Be Faithfully Executed" on Thursday, November 13, during the 2014 National Lawyers Convention.
- Dr. John S. Baker, Jr. Visiting Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center; Professor Emeritus of Law, Dale E. Bennett Professor of Law, Louisiana State University Law School
- Hon. Ronald A. Cass, Dean Emeritus, Boston University School of Law and President, Cass & Associates, PC
- Prof. Neal E. Devins, Goodrich Professor of Law, Cabell Research Professor, Professor of Government, Director, Institute of Bill of Rights Law; and Director, Election Law Program, The College of William & Mary
- Prof. Christopher H. Schroeder, Charles S. Murphy Professor of Law and Public Policy Studies; Co-Director of the Program in Public Law, Duke Law School
- Moderator: Hon. Thomas B. Griffith, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
- Introduction: Dr. John C. Eastman, Henry Salvatori Professor of Law and Community Service; Former Dean (2007 – 2010); and Director, Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, Dale E Fowler School of Law, Chapman University; and Chairman, Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group