Congress as "Iran Deal" Enforcer? International & National Security Law Practice Group Teleforum Friday, September 04, 02:30 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
With final congressional review action on the Iran Deal just days away, is Congress empowered to act in a fully informed manner with the vital information pertinent to all side agreements? Is the IAEA predictably a trustworthy actor? What tools might the people’s branch of government utilize to provide oversight and enforcement capability if Iran is in violation? Prof. Alan Dershowitz and Ambassador Dennis Ross approach these questions from different perspectives drawn from deep historical and geopolitical experience. Prof. Dershowitz is author of a book entitled The Case Against the Iran Deal: How Can We Now Stop Iran from Getting Nukes? and Ambassador Ross most recently wrote "How to Put Some Teeth into The Nuclear Deal with Iran" with David Patraeus.
- Professor Alan Dershowtiz, Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Harvard Law School
- Ambassador Dennis Ross, William Davidson Distinguished Fellow and Counselor, The Washington Institute
- Jamil Jaffer, Moderator, Former Chief Counsel and Senior Advisor, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
The Rise of “Empty Suit” Litigation™: Where Should Tort Law Draw The Line? Litigation Practice Group Teleforum Wednesday, September 09, 03:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
In The Rise of “Empty Suit” Litigation™: Where Should Tort Law Draw The Line?, Victor E. Schwartz discusses the need to stop all litigation where an individual or class action plaintiff has suffered no real harm, physical, emotional or economic. In his article, Schwartz criticizes finding liability for the estimated cost of medical monitoring following exposure to a potentially harmful substance absent a physical injury. He also examines class action litigation claiming that a product’s actual value was lower than the purchase price, or that the resale value of a product diminished because of an alleged latent defect, even when the product functioned properly for most or all consumers. Of course, he also addresses both individual claims where there has been no real injury, or economic loss and class actions that rely on speculative or expert-driven theories of harm or damages. Join us for this Teleforum where Mr. Schwartz will explain his article in greater depth, and answer questions from our audience.
- Mr. Victor E. Schwartz, Partner, Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.
What's the Download on Municipal Broadband? Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group Teleforum Monday, September 21, 01:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
The role of municipally-owned and operated broadband networks in the United States has been the subject of considerable debate. Among some stakeholders, there is increasing enthusiasm around the potential for government-owned broadband networks (GONs) to serve as an engine for municipalities to jump-start economic development. When GONs fail, however, the costs are borne by taxpayers. Earlier this year, the FCC threw its hat into the ring by moving aggressively to preempt certain provisions of Tennessee and North Carolina law that restrict municipal provision of broadband service. In this teleforum, we will assess the need for GONs, address the competition policy and regulatory issues associated with these projects, and explore whether the FCC’s move to preempt the states will survive judicial appeal.
- Charles M. Davidson, Director, Advanced Communications Law and Policy Institute, New York Law School
- Randolph J. May, President, The Free State Foundation
- Christopher Mitchell, Policy Director, Next Century Cities
- Moderator: Rachael M. Bender, Senior Policy Director, Mobile Future
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. The 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