Dealing with Putin’s Russia: What is the Best Approach? Dealing with Putin’s Russia: What is the Best Approach? August 01, 2014 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
From the time he entered office after being tapped by Boris Yeltsin to succeed him, President Vladimir Putin’s overarching objective was to consolidate power – at home and abroad. From earlier focuses on the Russian economy and quashing internal rivals, President Putin now seeks to recover geo-strategic assets lost in the Soviet collapse, which he called “the greatest geo-political catastrophe of the 20th century.”
President Putin's adventurism in the “post-Soviet space” was previously limited to cyber-activities in the Baltics, widespread regional economic and security pressure, and the 2008 invasion of Georgia. But in 2014 he aimed far higher by invading and annexing Crimea and then destabilizing eastern Ukraine. The downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 by Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine has caused the West to re-assess its overall approach to Russia.
What is President Putin up to? How far will he go? What should the United States do to deter President Putin's ambitions to make Russia the dominant power in Eurasia? And what are our European allies willing to do?
- Hon. Brian H. Hook, Founder, Latitude, LLC and former Assistant U.S. Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs
- Ms. Heather Hurlburt, Senior Fellow in National Security, Human Rights First
Chicago Summer Social The Chicago Lawyers Chapter July 31, 2014 05:30 PMChicago Yacht Club
400 E. Monroe
Please join the Chicago Lawyers Chapter for a summer social to meet and mingle with law students and lawyer Federalist Society members.
Milton Friedman Legacy Day Luncheon The Connecticut Lawyers Chapter July 31, 2014 11:30 AMPond House Cafe at Elizabeth Park
1555 Asylum Avenue
West Hartford, CT 06117
- Stephen Moore, Chief Economist, The Heritage Foundation
2014 Supreme Court Review The Triangle Lawyers Chapter July 31, 2014 12:00 PMCapital City Club
410 S Wilmington St
Raleigh, NC 27601
Raleigh, NC 27601
- Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies and Editor-in-Chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review, Cato Institute
NYC Bar Exam Happy Hour New York City Young Lawyers Chapter July 30, 2014 05:15 PMClyde Frazier's Wine & Dine
485 10th Ave.
New York City, NY 10018
Celebrate the conclusion of the NY Bar Exam with food and drink courtesy of the Federalist Society NYC Young Lawyers Chapter. The happy hour will begin immediately after the MBE, and is located one block from the Javits Center exam location.
The Highs–and Lows–of High-Frequency Trading Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Group Teleforum July 30, 2014 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
While other fields of law are trying to anticipate the future ramifications of the widespread use of drones, robots, and self-driving vehicles, financial markets have already confronted the fact that – for about five years now – automated trading programs have made the majority of all trades in equities and commodities. Automation has substantially reduced the cost of trading, but it has also had profound effects on the structure of financial markets, and has raised questions about its facilitation of allegedly abusive practices. A 2013 documentary, “Ghost Exchange,” and a 2014 best-selling book, Michael Lewis’s Flash Boys, focused public attention on the effects of high-frequency trading (HFT) on market integrity and stability, and helped precipitate a series of aggressive enforcement investigations as well as rulemaking initiatives at financial regulatory agencies in the U.S. and abroad. Our experts will review the state of the debate over HFT, and possible paths forward.
- Brian Mannix, President, Buckland Mill Associates
- Joanne Medero, Managing Director, BlackRock Inc.
11th Annual Supreme Court Round-Up Philadelphia Lawyers Chapter July 29, 2014 05:00 PMDrinker Biddle & Reath LLP
Twentieth Floor Reception Area
One Logan Square
130 North 18th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Net Neutrality: The Power to Act Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group Teleforum July 29, 2014 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
After suffering two judicial setbacks already, most recently in the D.C. Circuit’s Verizon v. FCC decision this past January, the Federal Communications Commission is once again proposing to adopt new net neutrality regulations. The proposed regulations would bar internet service providers from blocking access to any lawful website or from engaging in commercially unreasonable practices. A key aspect of the FCC’s proposal drawing considerable attention concerns whether the FCC should bar so-called paid prioritization of internet traffic.
In this Teleforum, three experts with divergent views will address whether there is any need for the FCC to adopt any new neutrality regulations and, if so, whether the agency possesses the legal authority to do so. There are two principal legal theories that may support FCC action that we will discuss – using the FCC’s existing authority under Section 706 of the Communications Act or classifying internet service providers as common carriers under Title II of the Act. The panelists will also discuss the most important question of all: whether and how net neutrality regulation might affect consumer welfare.
- Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission
- Prof. Daniel Lyons, Boston College Law School
- Michael Weinberg, Vice President, Public Knowledge
- Moderator: Randolph J. May, President, The Free State Foundation
Supreme Court Wrap Up with Greg Katsas New Jersey Lawyers Chapter July 28, 2014 06:30 PMThe Morris Museum
6 Normandy Heights Road
Morristown, NJ 07960
- Greg Katsas, Partner, Jones Day
Cooperation or Coercion on Climate: Is the EPA Trying to Deputize the States? Federalism & Separation of Powers Practice Group Teleforum July 28, 2014 02:00 PMFederalist Society Teleforum Conference Call
It has been argued that EPA's recently announced carbon emissions rule is just the latest attempt to draw states into the implementation of its regulations. The Supreme Court has long been permissive of such "cooperative federalism" programs in both the regulatory and spending contexts, insisting in New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997) that such programs constitute mere "encouragement" not rising to the level of coercion or commandeering. But Texas's fight to resist being drawn into implementing EPA's greenhouse gas regulations suggests that federal "encouragement" can be deeply coercive, employing penalties against the state's economy that courts have no doctrine to account for.
- Prof. Michael S. Greve, George Mason University School of Law
- Mario Loyola, Senior Fellow, Texas Public Policy Foundation
- Dr. Bryan W. Shaw, Chairman, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality