MENU

Litigation

The Future of Religious Liberties under the New Administration

Religious Liberties Practice Group Teleforum Tuesday, December 13, 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call

What is ahead for religious liberties under the Trump administration? Will churches be granted a victory in Trinity Lutheran v. Pauley? Will Trump’s Justice and Education Departments continue the push for transgender rights in public schools? Professor Richard Garnett of The University of Notre Dame Law School and Professor Thomas Berg of the University of St. Thomas School of Law will join us to answer these questions and many others on religious liberties in 2017.

Featuring:

  • Prof. Thomas C. Berg, James L. Oberstar Professor of Law and Public Policy, University of St. Thomas School of Law
  • Prof. Richard W. Garnett, Paul J. Schierl/Fort Howard Corporation Professor and Concurrent Professor of Political Science, University of Notre Dame Law School

Joint Employment Update - Podcast

Labor & Employment Law Practice Group Podcast
Ronald E. Meisburg November 30, 2016

Ronald Meisburg, former National Labor Relations Board Member and General Counsel, joined us to discuss recent updates to joint employment law. Joint Employment is defined under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers Protection Act as a form of employment that “exists when an employee is employed by two (or more) employers such that the employers are responsible, both individually and jointly, to the employee for compliance with a statute.”

This issue has risen to the forefront of labor law as President Obama’s Department of Labor has become more aggressive in his last year and as businesses grapple with the coming of a new administration.

Featuring:

  • Hon. Ronald Meisburg, Special Counsel, Hunton & Williams

Courthouse Steps: Overtime Regulation - Podcast

Litigation and Labor & Employment Practice Groups Podcast
Lawrence VanDyke, D. Michael Hancock, Jesse Panuccio November 28, 2016

In May, the Department of Labor announced a new overtime regulation, which would require all employers to pay overtime to their salaried employees who make under $47,476 annually. The rule was set to take effect on December 1, 2016. However, 21 states filed suit against the federal government claiming that the rule violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and states’ rights by increasing the overtime threshold, which was $23,660 under the FLSA, so drastically and by setting automatic increases to the threshold every three years. The states argue the rule will decrease full-time employment while increasing unemployment and will burden state governments unlawfully under the 10th Amendment by forcing them to conform to the new regulations. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and a coalition of business groups also filed their own suit against the law. The cases were consolidated.

On November 16, Judge Mazzant of the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas heard the states' motion for a preliminary injunction to temporarily block the rule. On November 22, Judge Mazzant granted the states’ motion and issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Department of Labor from implementing and enforcing the new rule. Solicitor General Lawrence VanDyke, Michael Hancock of Cohen Milstein, and Jesse Panuccio of Foley & Larner LLP joined us to discuss the court's ruling and the future of the overtime rule under the new administration.

Featuring:

  • Mr. Lawrence Van Dyke, Solicitor General of Nevada
  • D. Michael Hancock, Of Counsel, Cohen Milstein
  • Jesse Panuccio, Partner, Foley & Lardner LLP

Justice Scalia's Contributions to Antitrust Law - Audio/Video

2016 National Lawyers Convention
Frank H. Easterbrook, Deborah A. Garza, C. Scott Hemphill, Douglas H. Ginsburg November 23, 2016

In his confirmation hearing, Justice Scalia told the Senators that, as a law school student, he had never really understood antitrust law; later, he learned that he shouldn't have understood it, because it did not make any sense then. It should come as no surprise, that in his subsequent time on the Court, Justice Scalia strove to rectify that problem, and succeeded through clearly written majority decisions that changed the direction of jurisprudence on monopolization (U.S. v. Trinko) and class certification in massive antitrust and other business class actions (Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Comcast v. Behrens), and powerful dissents. As a modern intellectual leader of the "Chicago school" of economics, Justice Scalia played an important role in shaping the Court's approach to antitrust law and hence development of the law in the lower courts. It is a good time to consider the impact of his legacy, including how lasting those decisions will be, whether and how the course of antitrust jurisprudence could change and who will take his place in the Court on these issues.

This panel was held on November 17, 2016, during the 2016 National Lawyers Convention in Washington, DC.

Corporations, Securities & Antitrust: Justice Scalia's Contributions to Antitrust Law
1:45 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.
East Room

  • Hon. Frank H. Easterbrook, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
  • Ms. Deborah A. Garza, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP
  • Prof. C. Scott Hemphill, Professor of Law, New York University School of Law
  • Moderator: Hon. Douglas H. Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

The Mayflower Hotel
Washington, DC

How Justice Scalia's Writing Style Affected American Jurisprudence - Audio/Video

2016 National Lawyers Convention
Brian T. Fitzpatrick, Toni M. Massaro, Kannon K. Shanmugam, Jeffrey S. Sutton, Joan Larsen, Rachel Brand November 23, 2016

In addition to being a brilliant legal thinker, Justice Scalia was widely regarded as a masterful legal writer, perhaps the best of his generation. His gifted prose and frequent use of humor and sarcasm made Justice Scalia's opinions -- whether majority or dissent -- must-reads for lawyers, judges, professors, and law students alike. Commentators from across the philosophical spectrum admired Justice Scalia's writing skill. Just a year before his passing, for example, the New Republic, dubbed Scalia “the foremost living practitioner of performative legal prose." This panel discussion will examine the impact Justice Scalia's writing had on American jurisprudence. Aside from the force of his arguments, what impact did his writing style have on the opinions written by his colleagues on the Supreme Court and judges on lower courts, the briefs filed by practicing lawyers, and even the way law students learned the law? Our panelists will bring a variety of perspectives to this question: former clerk, judge, professors, and critics.

This panel was held on November 17, 2016, during the 2016 National Lawyers Convention in Washington, DC.

Litigation: How Justice Scalia's Writing Style Affected American Jurisprudence
11:45 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.   
East & State Rooms

  • Prof. Brian T. Fitzpatrick, Professor of Law, Vanderbilt Law School
  • Prof. Toni M. Massaro, Regents' Professor, Milton O. Riepe Chair in Constitutional Law and Dean Emerita, University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law
  • Mr. Kannon Shanmugam, Partner, Williams & Connolly LLP
  • Hon. Jeffrey S. Sutton, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
  • Moderator: Hon. Joan L. Larsen, Michigan Supreme Court
  • Introduction: Hon. Rachel Brand, Member, Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board and Senior Advisor to the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center, United States Chamber of Commerce

The Mayflower Hotel
Washington, DC