Is the Administrative State Too Big to Fail?: MetLife v. Financial Stability Oversight Council - Podcast

Financial Services & E-Commerce Practice Group Podcast
Peter J. Wallison April 26, 2016

On March 30, Federal district court Judge Rosemary Collyer struck down the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s designation of MetLife as a systemically important financial institution. MetLife v. Financial Stability Oversight Council has readily apparent implications for financial regulation, and many commentators have suggested that it may even have far-reaching effects on the future of the larger administrative state. Our expert discussed the opinion, its outlook on appeal, and its possible impact.


  • Hon. Peter J. Wallison, Arthur F. Burns Fellow in Financial Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute

RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. The European Community - Post-Argument SCOTUScast

SCOTUScast 4-20-16 featuring Richard A. Samp
Richard A. Samp April 20, 2016

On March 21, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in RJR Nabisco, Inc. v. The European Community. The European Community and 26 of its member states sued RJR Nabisco (RJR) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleging that RJR conducted a global money-laundering enterprise in violation of several laws, including the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a federal statute. The alleged RICO enterprise involved the importation of illegal drugs into European countries by Colombian and Russian criminal organizations, with RJR helping to launder their drug money through a cigarette import-purchase scheme. Applying a presumption against extraterritorial application of federal law, the district court dismissed The European Community’s civil RICO claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated that judgment and reinstated the RICO claim, however, concluding that various alleged predicates for RICO liability had been intended by Congress to apply extraterritorially and that other offenses asserted sufficiently important domestic activity to come within RICO’s coverage.

The U.S. Supreme Court granted RJR’s subsequent petition for writ of certiorari on the following question: whether, or to what extent, RICO applies extraterritorially.

To discuss the case, we have Richard A. Samp, who is Chief Counsel at Washington Legal Foundation.

Take Care on Immigration: United States v. Texas - Podcast

Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Podcast
Josh Blackman April 18, 2016

On Monday, April 18, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Texas, which will examine the constitutionality of the President's executive actions on immigration. In addition to complex questions about standing and administrative law, the Court has added a Take Care Clause question to the argument. Our expert attended the oral arguments and offered a summary as well as his analysis.


  • Prof. Josh Blackman, Assistant Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law

True the Vote v. IRS - Podcast

Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Podcast
John C. Eastman April 14, 2016

True the Vote, a Texas-based vote monitoring organization intent on policing and preventing voter fraud, brought suit against the Internal Revenue Service alleging discrimination against conservative organizations applying for tax-exempt status. On Thursday, April 14, additional oral arguments were held in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Advocate Professor John Eastman joined our Teleforum to discuss the merits of the case, its procedural posture, and the argument.


  • Prof. John C. Eastman, Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service, Chapman University School of Law

Intellectual Property in the Supreme Court - Podcast

Litigation and Intellectual Property Practice Groups Podcast
Garrard R. Beeney, Matthew S. Hellman, Dennis D. Crouch April 11, 2016

Continuing the trend of recent years, this Term the Supreme Court is hearing a number of cases that will determine important intellectual property rights. Our experts discussed the pending cases, and what they might mean for IP rights and the economy going forward. On broader issues, is either court more consistently in favor of strong property rights protection? Is there an explanation for the perceived IP rights dissonance between the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit? As the Supreme Court’s overall docket continues to shrink, what explains the Court’s steadily high number of intellectual property cases?


  • Garrard R. Beeney, Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
  • Matthew S. Hellman, Partner, Jenner & Block
  • Moderator: Prof. Dennis D. Crouch, Co-Director, Center for Intellectual Property & Entrepreneurship, Associate Professor of Law, University of Missouri School of Law