Old Senate Chamber
2015 National Lawyers Convention The Role of Congress - Early registration now open!

The Federalist Society's Lawyers Division was founded in 1986 to bring together attorneys, business and policy leaders, judges and others interested in examining and improving the state of the law. The Lawyers Division reaches the legal community thr READ MORE
Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast

Is Clay v. United States, argued on October 2 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, led to 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.


  • Paul D. Kamenar, Senior Fellow, Administrative Conference of the United States
  • John J. Park, Jr., Of Counsel, Strickland Brockington Lewis LLP
Texas Chapters Podcast

The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) ballot initiative, which extends to housing & employment, has been described as an expansive LGBT anti-discrimination measure. The Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the new Pastor Protection Act are intended to provide rights of conscience protection and some assurance of employment accommodation for religious objectors, in light of initiatives like HERO and the anti-discrimination ordinance in San Antonio. After the Supreme Court Obergefell v. Hodges decision, more and more states will face the conundrum encountered by states like Indiana, Kentucky, and now Texas, where the recently affirmed LGBT constitutional privacy interest is in tension with state and federal RFRA laws and other constitutional religious objector protections. Will states that desire to carve out religious conviction protections be eclipsed by the momentum of locally based anti-discrimination measures? Do federal laws provide sufficient public office and private party religious expression protection?


  • Prof. John Eastman, Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service, Chapman University School of Law
  • Prof. Josh Blackman, Assistant Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law
  • Kathleen Hunker, Senior Policy Analyst with the Center for Economic Freedom, Texas Public Policy Foundation
  • Prof. Eugene Volokh,  Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law
Dallas Lawyers Chapter

Panel Speakers:

  • Carl Cecere - Cecere, PC,
  • Marsha Fishman - Organizing for Action
  • Alan Gura - Gura & Possessky, P.L.L.C.
  • Andrew Oldham - Deputy General Counsel to Governor Greg Abbott and a former law clerk to Justice Samuel Alito
Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group Podcast

In Horne v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, eight justices of the Supreme Court agreed that a governmental taking of personal property, just like real property, was a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment. In Horne, the government took physical control of parts of the Horne's raisin crop, withholding it from the market in order to influence raisin prices. Under other agricultural programs, growers are permitted to send to market only certain quantities of the produce, though the government never takes physical control of the goods. Just how sweeping is the Horne decision? Does it apply to all forms of personal property? What level of control must the government exercise over personal property in order for there to be a compensable taking? Are these other agricultural programs now suspect?


  • Prof. John D. Echeverria, Vermont Law School
  • Hon. Michael W. McConnell, Professor of Law and Director, Stanford Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School