International & National Security Law Practice Group Podcast
The "Iran Deal" as negotiated by the Obama Administration and approved by the UN raises controversies on many levels. One foundational question concerns whether a president's constitutional Article II power extends to an executive agreement that incurs foreign obligations and implicates international law. The congressional response in the Corker-Cardin review act demurred from challenging whether the nuclear deal was an end-run around treaty Senate ratification requirements by acknowledging the executive agreement classification. Now there are questions as to whether the final deal is sufficiently inconsistent with the anticipated agreement such that the Corker-Cardin bill is undermined. Does UN approval prior to congressional review moot Corker-Cardin? Additionally, as yet unquantified side agreements may have a bearing on congressional posture. Also, some states have sanctioned Iran separately. Since an executive agreement does not carry the federal pre-emptive power as would a treaty, may states continue to act independent of Corker-Cardin, UN, or administration commitments?
- Jamil N. Jaffer, Adjunct Professor of Law and Director, Homeland and National Security Law Program, George Mason University School of Law and former Chief Counsel and Senior Advisor, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
- David B. Rivkin, Jr., Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP
- Prof. John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California Berkeley School of Law
Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
Is Clay v. United States, currently pending in the 11th Circuit, a case study of overcriminalization and abusive federal prosecution? The case raises basic notions of due process, fair notice, the rule of lenity, mens rea, and actus reus. What began as a highly publicized raid by some 200 FBI agents on a Florida health care company over an accounting dispute of how to interpret a provision in Florida’s Medicaid reimbursement statute with no clarifying administrative regulations, ended in the indictment, conviction, and prison sentences for the company’s top executives for fraud. This case is particularly important for all regulated industries, where there are numerous and ambiguous laws and complex regulations governing conduct subject to administrative, civil, and criminal enforcement. John Lauro, counsel in the case, discussed the lawsuit, with Paul Kamenar joining to offer questions and comments.
- Paul D. Kamenar, Washington, D.C. Attorney and Senior Fellow, Administrative Conference of the United States
- John F. Lauro, Principal, Lauro Law Firm
- Moderator: John G. Malcolm, Director and Ed Gilbertson and Sherry Lindberg Gilbertson Senior Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation
Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Group Podcast
The Supreme Court issued a number of notable opinions in the area of bankruptcy law during the recently concluded term. Our experts offered their analysis on recent developments in the field and took questions from a call-in audience.
- Prof. Thomas Plank, Joel A. Katz Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Tennessee College of Law
- Prof. Zvi Rosen Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Hofstra University Maurice A. Deane School of Law
- Prof. David Skeel, S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School
Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
On Thursday July 16, 2015, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an opinion and order ending the long running “John Doe” investigation into potential violations of Wisconsin campaign finance law and whether candidates and outside groups illegally “coordinated” spending. In mid-June of 2015, a young political consultant was sentenced to nearly two years in federal prison for illegally coordinating between a congressional campaign and a Super PAC. The U.S. Department of Justice also recently announced it will look carefully at allegations of coordination between candidate and outside groups. What does all of this mean? Where is the law heading on this? Are civil and criminal investigations into campaign activity going to be increasing?
- Allen Dickerson, Legal Director, Center for Competitive Politics
- Edward D. Greim, Partner, Graves Garrett LLC
- Tara Malloy Senior Counsel, Campaign Legal Center
- Moderator: Jason Torchinsky, Holtzman Vogel Josefiak PLLC
Labor & Employment Law Practice Group Podcast
July has been a busy month for the Department of Labor (DOL). On July 6th, DOL published proposed revisions to the “white collar” overtime regulations which would more than double the minimum salary level required for exemption. On July 10th, DOL defended its 2011 tip credit regulations before the Ninth Circuit in Oregon Restaurant & Lodging v. Perez. Last week, on July 15th, DOL issued new guidance – an “Administrator’s Interpretation” – concluding that “most” workers are employees, not independent contractors. A decision on the validity of DOL’s home care worker regulations is expected any day from the D.C. Circuit in Home Care Association v. Weil, and in August, DOL is expected to issue a request for information on the use of electronic devices by overtime-protected employees outside of scheduled work hours. In this teleforum, the Bush Administration’s wage-hour team at DOL provided a briefing on these developments and discussed what else we can expect from DOL over the next 18 months.
- Paul DeCamp, Jackson Lewis P.C.
- Alexander J. Passantino, Seyfarth & Shaw