Federalist Society Event Audio
Summary: The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. This podcast feed contains audio files of Federalist Society panel discussions, debates, addresses, and other events related to law and public policy. Additional audio and video can be found at www.federalistsociety.org/multimedia.
Given that everyone is getting older and more prone to disease, medical innovation is one of the most important measures, if not the most important measure, of a successful health policy. Technological acceleration, including advances in genomics and stem cell research, suggest that we are on the cusp of a golden age of medical innovation. But government-imposed price controls and other policies can reduce the incentives for devising new treatments, resulting in preventable death and illness. This panel will look at the effect of Obamacare, and the policies of the FDA on innovation. More generally, will the current regulatory processes and reimbursement policies equipped to manage the next generation of personalized medicine and diagnostic devices? This program was presented on February 21, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium. -- Featuring: Mr. Peter Huber, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute; Ms. Lindsay Kelly, Special Counsel, Irell & Manella LLP; and Mr. Gerald Masoudi, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP; former Chief Counsel, Food and Drug Administration. Moderator: Hon. Thomas B. Griffith, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Our patent system has historically been thought to be an engine of innovation, but it is much criticized today. Is a one-size-fits all model for patent duration appropriate in today's technological environment or does it simply incentivize unnecessary litigation? For instance, the rapid pace of technological change in some areas may obviate the need of lengthy patents in some areas. Should certain innovation—such as business processes be patentable? Should the patent office be reorganized or split up to better assess patents. What other types of incentives, including those provided by copyright or prizes, provide alternatives to patents? This program was presented on February 21, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium. -- Featuring: Ms. Phyllis Turner-Brim, Chief Intellectual Property Counsel, Intellectual Ventures; Prof. Doug Melamed, Visiting Professor, Stanford Law School; Prof. Michael Meurer, Boston University School of Law; and Mr. Adam Mortara, Partner, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP. Moderator: Hon. Danny J. Boggs, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Regulation can be a significant barrier to innovation, protecting incumbents and making it harder to bring new goods and services to market. Determining the appropriate regulation is all the more difficult when accelerating technology is creating many new opportunities as well as potential dangers. Can the administrative state itself innovate to promote beneficial innovation? Topics to be considered here will be the nature and scope of cost-benefit analysis, the use of experiments to guide regulation and prizes as an alternative to top-down regulation. This program was presented on February 20, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium. -- Featuring: Prof. William Baude, University of Chicago Law School; Mr. Jon Dudas, Senior Associate to the President, University of Arizona and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office; Mr. Steve Lehotsky, Deputy Chief Counsel for Litigation, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center; and Prof. Jennifer Nou, University of Chicago Law School. Moderator: Hon. Stephen Markman, Michigan Supreme Court. Introduction: Ms. Kathryn Bi, President, University of Chicago Law School Federalist Society.
The Freedom Restoration Act prohibits the federal government from requiring closely held corporations to provide contraceptive coverage under the Affordable Care Act. -- The National Constitution Center, the Federalist Society and the American Constitution Society convene the first in a series of constitutional debates to be held across America. In the inaugural debate, Frederick Gedicks of Brigham Young University and Kevin Walsh of the University of Richmond argue for and against the motion: "Hobby Lobby was wrongly decided." -- This debate was made possible through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. -- Speakers: Prof. Frederick Gedicks, Brigham Young University and Prof. Kevin Walsh, University of Richmond. Moderator: Prof. Jeffrey Rosen, President and CEO, National Constitution Center. Introduction: Ms. Caroline Fredrickson, President, American Constitution Society. -- The opinions expressed in this debate are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.
The Federalist Society's Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group and its George Washington University Law School Student Chapter co-sponsored a conference on the Future of Media -- examining the government's role in light of today's rapidly evolving media landscape. The conference took place at The George Washington University Law School on February 25, 2015. -- Featuring: Jeffrey H. Blum, Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, DISH Network Corporation; Rick Kaplan, General Counsel and Executive Vice President of Legal Affairs, National Association of Broadcasters; Barry J. Ohlson, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, Cox Enterprises; and Ryan Radia, Associate Director of Technology Studies, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Moderator: Patricia J. Paoletta, Partner, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP.
The Federalist Society's Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group and its George Washington University Law School Student Chapter co-sponsored a conference on the Future of Media -- examining the government's role in light of today's rapidly evolving media landscape. The conference took place at The George Washington University Law School on February 25, 2015. -- Featuring: Hon. Joshua D. Wright, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission. Introduction: Mr. Anthony Glosson, Student Member, Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group and Editor-in-Chief, Federal Communications Law Journal. Introduction: Mr. Bryan N. Tramont, Wilkinson Barker Knauer, LLP and Chairman, Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group.
On March 4, 2015 the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on King v. Burwell. The Federalist Society proudly hosts a panel discussion ahead of the oral arguments. King v. Burwell focuses on whether the Internal Revenue Service may permissibly promulgate regulations to extend tax-credit subsidies to coverage purchased through exchanges established by the federal government under Section 1321 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan H. Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law; Mr. Simon Lazarus, Senior Counsel, Constitutional Accountability Center; Ms. Carrie Severino, Chief Counsel and Policy Director, Judicial Crisis Network; and Mr. Robert N. Weiner, Arnold & Porter LLP. Moderator: Mr. Robert Barnes, Reporter, The Washington Post. Introduction: Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President & Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society.
On November 20, 2014, President Obama, with much attention from the media and the public, announced executive action on immigration. Our discussion will address the specifics of the President’s actions, and the legality of those actions. What exactly was said and done by the President, and how do his actions differ from acts he previously asserted were beyond his unilateral power? Has the President exceeded his constitutional authority to act? What happens next? Please join us over the lunch hour for a discussion with three experts in the field. -- Featuring: Mr. Kamal Essaheb, Immigration Policy Attorney, National Immigration Law Center; Mr. David Rivkin, Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP; and Mr. Ilya Shapiro, Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies, Cato Institute. Moderator: Mr. Peter Bisbee, Membership Director and Associate Director of External Relations, The Federalist Society.
The Federalist Society does not authorize the use or transcription of these recordings, in part or in whole, by any person or organization for any use other than for the private viewing of the recorded event. -- Some animal rights activists have maintained for years that animals deserve many of the same basic legal rights that humans have. Though “animal personhood” might be perceived as a niche issue, the legal status of animals such as apes, dolphins, elephants and whales reaches far beyond the realm of animal rights—to the food, pharmaceutical, tourism and entertainment industries and more. Recently, animal rights supporters have begun turning to the legal system for help. In late 2013, the animal rights organization Nonhuman Rights Project filed lawsuits in New York State to establish the “legal personhood” of four chimpanzees and relocate them to outdoor sanctuaries. While intermediate appellate courts have rejected the Nonhuman Rights Project’s argument, the group has publicly stated its intention to appeal to the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court. -- These lawsuits were the first in the United States to seek limited personhood rights for animals with advanced cognitive abilities. At the core of the lawsuits are fundamental questions about the legal status of animals. Is the concept of animal rights more about the restriction of human activity, or about truly granting rights to animals? Do current animal welfare laws provide sufficient protections to animals? Should animals have the ability to challenge their own detention, though the writ of habeas corpus? -- Featuring: Prof. Richard L. Cupp, John W. Wade Professor of Law, Pepperdine University School of Law and Mr. Steven M. Wise, President, Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. Moderator: Hon. A. Raymond Randolph, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
In the innovation economy, entrants often confront increased regulatory hurdles, particularly on a state level, as they enter the marketplace and disrupt previously tightly regulated industries, such as hospitality and transportation. In California, for example, legislators have proposed rigorous insurance requirements, drug testing, and new background checks on Uber and Lyft drivers that traditional taxicab drivers do not face. Airbnb faces scrutiny in New York, with critics accusing it of violating rent control laws by creating an underground rental market, threatening public safety and driving up rental prices. In New Jersey, Tesla sales have been shut down after licensing restrictions prevented direct-to-consumer sales of electric vehicles, bypassing franchised dealers. While the entrants contend that these restrictions only serve to restrain competition and protect special entrenched interests, the critics maintain that consumer protection and maintaining a level playing field are the true goals in their regulatory policies. What’s the proper balance between innovation and regulation? Will these new entrants incentivize innovation or will existing regulatory capture only succeed in maintaining the status quo? Are state regulations the greatest impediment to innovation, or do federal regulations also impede progress? -- This panel was part of the 2015 Annual Western Chapters Conference held on January 24, 2015, at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA. -- Featuring: Evan Baehr, Co-founder, Outbox and Co-founder, Able Lending; Prof. Jordan Barry, Herzog Endowed Scholar and Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law; Katie Biber Chen, Senior Counsel, Airbnb; Andrea Ambrose Lobato, Policy Counsel, Lyft; and Prof. Stephen Miller, University of Idaho School of Law. Moderator: Hon. Carlos Bea, U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. Introduction: Mr. David DeGroot, Special Counsel, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP and President, San Francisco Lawyers Chapter.
John Allison, President and CEO of the Cato Institute, delivered the Keynote Address at the 2015 Annual Western Chapters Conference. He was introduced by Andrew Pappas, President of the Los Angeles Lawyers Chapter. The annual conference was held at The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, CA on January 24, 2015. -- Featuring: Mr. John Allison, President and CEO, Cato Institute and former CEO, BB&T. Introduction: Mr. Andrew G. Pappas, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher and President, Los Angeles Lawyers Chapter.
This panel was part of the 17th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference held on January 3-4, 2015 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC. -- Featuring: Prof. Michael Greve, George Mason University School of Law; Prof. Philip Hamburger, Columbia Law School; Prof. Kristin Hickman, University of Minnesota Law School; and Prof. Richard Pierce, The George Washington University School of Law. Moderator: Prof. John McGinnis, Northwestern University School of Law.
This debate was part of the 17th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference held on January 3-4, 2015 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC. -- Featuring: Prof. Lester Brickman, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law and Prof. Brian Fitzpatrick, Vanderbilt Law School. Moderator: Prof. Jill Fisch, University of Pennsylvania Law School.
This panel was part of the 17th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference held on January 3-4, 2015 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC. In Memory of Prof. Dan Markel, Florida State University School of Law, Prawfsblawg Founder, and former Searle fellow. -- Featuring: Prof. William Baude, University of Chicago Law School, "Is Originalism the Law?"; Prof. Charles Korsmo, Case Western University School of Law, "Aggregation by Acquisition: Replacing Class Actions with a Market for Legal Claims"'; Prof. Minor Myers, Brooklyn Law School, "Aggregation by Acquisition: Replacing Class Actions with a Market for Legal Claims"; Prof. Christopher Newman, George Mason University School of Law, "Bailment and the Property/Contract Interface"; Prof. Christopher Walker, Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, "Inside Agency Interpretation"; and Prof. Kevin Walsh, University of Richmond School of Law, "In the Beginning There Was None: Supreme Court Review of State Criminal Prosecutions". Commentators: Prof. James Lindgren, Northwestern University School of Law and Prof. Keith Hylton, Boston University School of Law. Moderator: Prof. Richard Garnett, University of Notre Dame Law School.
This debate was part of the 17th Annual Federalist Society Faculty Conference held on January 3-4, 2015 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC. Resolved, that the Affordable Care Act does not authorize subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance through federal exchanges -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan Adler, Case Western Reserve University School of Law and Prof. Nick Bagley, University of Michigan School of Law. Moderator: Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Georgetown University Law Center.