Net Neutrality Litigation Litigation Practice Group Teleforum Friday, October 16, 01:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
After suffering two judicial setbacks, most recently in the D.C. Circuit’s Verizon v. FCC decision in January 2014, the Federal Communications Commission adopted new net neutrality regulations and subjected broadband providers to public utility regulation under Title II of the Communications Act. In a new case, petitioners and intervenors challenging the FCC’s order recently filed their opening briefs outlining their arguments opposing the FCC’s latest attempt to regulate the internet.
In this Teleforum, counsel for two of the net neutrality petitioners and the intervenors will discuss the issues being raised in the D.C. Circuit appeal. The panelists will describe the challenges to the FCC’s authority to regulate the Internet under Title II of the Communications Act and Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act. Is broadband a telecommunications service subject to public utility regulation or is it an information service? Can the FCC adopt rules to regulate the Internet under Section 706? Are broadband providers protected by the First Amendment? How will the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in King v. Burwell and Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, and other constitutionally-rooted canons of statutory construction, affect the net neutrality case? Can the FCC ban paid prioritization of Internet traffic? The panelists will explore these and other issues in this important Teleforum.
- Brett Shumate, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
- Adam J. White, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates
Cybersecurity: Private Sector Faces Increasing Regulatory Risk From Agency Enforcement and Informal “Guidance” Becoming Standard of Care Litigation Practice Group Teleforum Thursday, October 15, 03:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
After Target, Anthem, Sony and Ashley Madison, cybersecurity is at the top of every company and regulator’s list of worries. As Congress considers legislation, the Executive Branch has been implementing a Presidential Executive Order to develop a “voluntary” framework for cybersecurity. The private sector faces a rapidly shifting terrain without clear standards. Agencies are flexing their regulatory muscles to expand oversight through informal guidance and threat of enforcement, as embodied in a recent victory by the FTC in the Wyndham case.
This Teleforum will provide an overview of the cybersecurity trends facing the private sector, and will discuss the implications for predictability, transparency, and innovation. Will the President’s Executive Order, and the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, become the de facto standard for the private sector? Is the federal government regulating through the threat of enforcement by FTC, FCC and other federal agencies, instead of through more regular administrative processes? What should companies make of emerging agency “guidance” from agencies like the FDA, SEC, NHTSA, and DoD, on operations and innovation in areas like the Internet of Things, mobile applications and devices, cloud services, connected cars?
Join us for a lively discussion about these trends and what the private sector faces in 2015 and 2016.
- Megan Brown, Partner, Wiley Rein LLP
- Brent McIntosh, Partner, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
- Rebecca Seidel, General Counsel, Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
The Court's Case on Texting and Class Actions: Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez Litigation Practice Group Courthouse Steps Teleforum Wednesday, October 14, 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
Advertising agency Campbell-Ewald sent recruitment texts to Jose Gomez on behalf of the US Navy, violating a little-known law. When Mr. Gomez sued and attempted to get class certification, Campbell-Ewald offered to pay the statutory damages in full. In this upcoming case, the Supreme Court will consider whether or not Mr. Gomez has Article III standing: is there still a controversy since an offer for complete relief has been made? The answer to this question will have serious implications for a possible class action lawsuit against Campbell-Ewald, and for class actions more broadly.
Short video featuring Richard A. Samp discussing Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez
- Richard A. Samp, Chief Counsel, Washington Legal Foundation
Richard A. Samp October 09, 2015
Advertising agency Campbell-Ewald sent recruitment texts to Jose Gomez on behalf of the US Navy, violating a little-known law. When Mr. Gomez sued, Campbell-Ewald offered to pay the statutory damages in full. In this upcoming case, the Supreme Court will consider whether or not Mr. Gomez has Article III standing: is there still a controversy since an offer for complete relief has been made?
Washington Legal Foundation Attorney Chief Counsel Richard A. Samp previews the case being argued October 14. Mr. Samp clarifies that although the Supreme Court will decide whether or not Mr. Gomez has standing to sue, the underlying issue involves the possibility of a Class Action lawsuit against Campbell-Ewald.
Mr. Samp authored the Washington Legal Foundation amicus curiae brief in support of petitioner Campbell-Ewald Company.