Federalist Society Event Audio

The historic approach to encouraging innovation and creativity by granting property rights, enshrined in the text of the U.S. Constitution, has come under attack by a growing number of legal theorists and technologists. In a new book, Laws of Creation, Ronald Cass and Keith Hylton take on these critics with a vigorous defense of intellectual property law. The authors carefully examine the IP doctrines that have been developed over many years in patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret law. Does the current regulatory regime spur creativity and economic growth, or do they produce licenses that stifle progress and innovation? -- Featuring: Hon. Ronald A. Cass, President, Cass & Associates, PC; Prof. Keith N. Hylton, Boston University School of Law; and Prof. F. Scott Kieff, The George Washington University Law School, as the moderator.

Parental and community support for school choice has increased dramatically in recent years, with vouchers, charter schools, home schooling, and other educational alternatives all garnering greater support. Supporters cite gains in reading levels and higher graduation rates amongst reasons why school choice improves education outcomes for low-income, inner-city students. They also cite the importance of offering the same choice in education that higher income families are able to provide. What impediments stand in the way of implementing school choice? How large of a factor is union opposition to school choice? Are unions correct in asserting that vouchers take resources away from the public school system and are financially unaccountable? What about charters? Recently, the California Supreme Court decision upheld the rights of charter schools not to be controlled by the union’s collective bargaining agreements. Will this lead to an increased number of charter schools? How does the national school choice movement encourage reform in California? What trends or alternatives may arise in the future? A panel of experts will discuss these questions and will offer their assessment of school choice programs a decade after Zelman v. Simmons-Harris opened the door for school choice programs. Featuring: Prof. Julian Betts, Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego; Mr. Clint Bolick, Vice President for Litigation, The Goldwater Institute; Prof. Bruce Fuller, Professor, Education and Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley; Mr. William R. Maurer, Executive Director, Institute for Justice Washington Chapter (IJ-WA); Ms. Gloria Romero, Democrats for Education Reform and former Democratic Majority Leader, California State Senate (2001-08); and Moderator: Hon. Carlos Bea, U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit. Introduction by Mr. Leonard A. Leo, Executive Vice President, The Federalist Society.

The Federalist Society's Facutly Division co-hosted this debate with the American Society of International Law on Saturday, January 5, 2013, during the 15th Annual Faculty Conference. Featuring: Prof. Richard Pildes, New York University School of Law; Prof. Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Georgetown University Law Center?; and Ms. Elizabeth Andersen, Executive Director & Executive Vice President, American Society of International Law, as the moderator.

The Federalist Society's Facutly Division hosted this panel discussion on "Dodd-Frank" on Saturday, January 5, 2013, during the 15th Annual Faculty Conference. Featuring: Prof. Geoffrey Miller, New York University School of Law; Prof. David Skeel, University of Pennsylvania Law School; Mr. Adam White, Boyden Gray & Associates; and Prof. Todd Henderson, University of Chicago Law Schoo?l, as the moderator.

On January 4, 2013, at the 15th Annual Faculty Conference in New Orleans, LA, the Federalist Society provided an opportunity for young legal scholars to give presentations on papers they had recently authored followed by commentaries from Prof. Michael McConnell of Stanford Law School and Prof. James Lindgren of Northwestern University School of Law. Featuring: Prof. Erin Hawley of the University of Missouri School of Law on "Jurisdictional Quandaries: A Way Forward"; ??Prof. Joshua Hawley of the University of Missouri School of Law on "The Transformative Twelfth Amendment"; Prof. Daniel Kelly of Notre Dame Law School on "The Right to Include"; Prof. Randy Kozel, Notre Dame Law School, "Settled v. Right: Constitutional Method and the Path of Precedent"; Prof. Minor Myers, Brooklyn Law School "Fixing Multiforum Shareholder Litigation"; and Prof. Eugene Volokh of UCLA School of Law? as the moderator. Wyndham Riverfront New Orleans New Orleans, LA

The Federalist Society's Facutly Division hosted this roundtable discussion on "Judicial Deference v. Judicial Engagement" on Friday, January 4, 2013, during the 15th Annual Faculty Conference. Prof. John O. McGinnis opened the conference with a few words on Judge Robert Bork. The panel featured: Prof. Elizabeth Price Foley, Florida International University College of Law; Prof. Chrisopher Green, University of Mississippi School of Law; Prof. Joshua Hawley, University of Missouri School of Law; Prof. Lee Strang, University of Toledo College of Law; and Prof. Randy Barnett, Georgetown University Law Center, as the moderator. Introduction by Hon. Lee Liberman Otis, Senior Vice President & Faculty Division Director.

As the technology sector continues to thrive, scrutiny of internet search engine results also continues. More specifically, the Federal Trade Commission and European Union officials have for the past year been investigating the manner in which Google reports search results, and whether those results unfairly harm Google rivals. Is a search engine company free to favor its subsidiaries and associated businesses in its search results? Does the answer to that question depend on the dominance in the market of the search engine, or perhaps its subsidiaries? Do search engine results implicate speech rights? These and other questions will be addressed. -- Featuring: Mr. Thomas Barnett, Partner, Covington & Burling, LLP; Hon. Ronald A. Cass, President, Cass & Associates, PC; and Judge Carlos T. Bea, U.S. Cout of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, as the moderator. Introduction by Mr. David DeGroot, Special Counsel, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP and President, San Francisco Lawyers Chapter.

The Indianapolis Lawyers Chapter hosted this discussion on Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III's book, Cosmic Constitutional Theory, on December 12, 2012. -- Featuring: Hon. David F. Hamilton, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit; Hon. Diane S. Sykes, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit; and Mr. Thomas M. Fisher, Indiana Solicitor General, as the moderator.

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.

After it became clear at the oral argument the health care mandate law might be in trouble, President Obama suggested that the Justices would be engaging in judicial activism if they overturned the law. This is a particularly high profile example, but charges of judicial activism have been a key part of the discussion of the role of the courts for quite some time, in earlier times from people generally identified as conservatives, but more recently by liberals and progressives. Is there real meaning to the term? Would the term apply to overturning the Affordable Care Act? The Defense of Marriage Act? The three most common ways of understanding judicial activism are that it refers to when judges invalidate legislation, when they do so based on their individual preferences rather than the requirements of the Constitution, and when they overrule a prior precedent. This panel will consider these various possibilities as well as whether the term continues to be a useful one. -- Featuring: Prof. Steven G. Calabresi, Northwestern University School of Law and Chairman, The Federalist Society; Hon. Walter E. Dellinger, III, Partner, O’Melveny & Myers LLP, Duke University School of Law and former Acting U.S. Solicitor General; Prof. Nelson R. Lund, Patrick Henry Professor of Constitutional Law and the Second Amendment, George Mason University School of Law; Mr. William H. "Chip" Mellor, President and General Counsel, Institute for Justice; Prof. Mark V. Tushnet, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Harvard Law School; Hon. J. Harvie Wilkinson, III, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit; and Moderator: Hon. Edith H. Jones, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

The Fourth Annual Rosenkranz Debate was held on November 17, 2012, during The Federalist Society's 2012 National Lawyers Convention. -- Featuring: Prof. Hadley P. Arkes, Edward N. Ney Professor in American Institutions, Amherst College; Hon. Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit; and Moderator: Hon. Thomas B. Griffith, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit. Introduction by Mr. Eugene B. Meyer, President, The Federalist Society.

The Telecommunications & Electronic Media Practice Group hosted this panel on "Communications Law Reform" on Saturday, November 17, 2012, during the 2012 National Lawyers Convention. -- Featuring: Prof. Jonathan B. Baker, American University Washington College of Law; Prof. Daniel Crane, University of Michigan Law School; Hon. Robert M. McDowell, Federal Communications Commission; Hon. Maureen K. Ohlhausen, Federal Trade Commission; Hon. Ajit V. Pai, Federal Communications Commission; and Moderator: Hon. Jennifer W. Elrod, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

The Environmental Law & Property Rights Practice Group hosted this panel on "Federalism and the Energy Revolution: Can State and Federal Regulators Adapt to Innovations?" on Saturday, November 17, 2012, during the 2012 National Lawyers Convention. -- Featuring: Mr. Joel R. Burcat, Saul Ewing LLP; Mr. Jason B. Hutt, Partner, Bracewell & Giuliani LLP; Prof. James R. May, Environmental Law Center, Widener University School of Law; Mr. Craig Segall, Associate Attorney, Sierra Club Environmental Law Program; and Moderator: Hon. Timothy M. Tymkovich, U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

The Administrative Law & Regulation Practice Group hosted this panel on "The Administrative State After the Health Care Cases" on Saturday, November 17, 2012, during the 2012 National Lawyers Convention. -- Featuring: Hon. Ronald A. Cass, President, Cass & Associates, PC; Hon. Christopher C. DeMuth, Distinguished Fellow, Hudson Institute; Prof. Timothy S. Jost, Robert L. Willett Family Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University School of Law; Hon. Brett M. Kavanaugh, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit; and Moderator: Hon. Thomas M. Hardiman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

The Federalist Society's 2012 National Lawyers Convention began the morning of its third and final day with a call to order by Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President & Director of Practice Groups for the Federalist Society, followed by Showcase Panel III. -- The current Supreme Court divided five to four in Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn -- a case in which some Arizona taxpayers sued to prevent public funds from going to scholarships at religious schools on the same terms as they went to pay for scholarships at secular schools. The Court also split five to four in another taxpayer religion suit Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation in 2007. Meanwhile in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, decided in 2010, the Supreme Court voted five to four that, under what the Court described as a "reasonable, viewpoint-neutral condition on access to [recognition as a student organization]," state universities can force religious groups to accept members and officers who do not subscribe to their belief that gay sex is wrong or lose their official status and school funds. At the same time, in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Church and School v. EEOC, the Court unanimously reaffirmed and gave a fairly generous construction to its longstanding ministerial exception to employment discrimination laws as applied to religious organizations. The recent controversy over the requirements to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients in violation of the religious beliefs of some who would be forced to pay shows us other possible cases involving religious belief and conscience concerns. Religion has long had a special place in our society and in the Constitution. Is that evolving? If so, how? Are we rethinking the question of whether religion is in some ways different? What does the Constitution say about this? -- Featuring: Prof. Corey L. Brettschneider, Brown University; Prof. Philip Andrew Hamburger, Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law, Columbia Law School; Prof. William P. Marshall, University of North Carolina School of Law; Hon. Michael W. McConnell, Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law, Stanford Constitutional Law Center, and former Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit; and Moderator: Hon. William Francis Kuntz, II, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York. Introduction by Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President & Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society.