FedSoc Forums - TopPodcast.com

View Top 200 Chart

Back to Rankings Page

FedSoc Forums — Business
FedSoc Forums

*This series was formerly known as Teleforums.

FedSoc Forums is a virtual discussion series dedicated to providing expert analysis and intellectual commentary on today’s most pressing legal and policy issues. Produced by The Federalist Society’s Practice Groups, FedSoc Forum strives to create balanced conversations in various formats, such as monologues, debates, or panel discussions. In addition to regular episodes, FedSoc Forum features special content covering specific topics in the legal world, such as:

Courthouse Steps: A series of rapid response discussions breaking down all the latest SCOTUS cases after oral argument or final decision

A Seat at the Sitting: A monthly series that runs during the Court’s term featuring a panel of constitutional experts discussing the Supreme Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting

Litigation Update: A series that provides the latest updates in important ongoing cases from all levels of government

The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

Latest Episodes:

What’s Next for Crypto: Implications of Deflated Prices and Turmoil in Cryptocurrency Markets Sep 14, 2022

Show notes

Events of 2022 brought a "crypto winter," with average prices of cryptocurrencies falling about 70% from their 2021 highs, the bankruptcy of several crypto companies, the complete collapse of a popular so-called "stable" coin, unexpected suspensions of withdrawals by some crypto issuers, large losses by individual investors, and heightened efforts toward expanded regulation and legislation. What does this all mean going forward? Was this simply the end of another bubble and popular delusion which will now wither? Or was it the winnowing out of a typical innovative overexpansion, with a more mature ongoing cryptocurrency industry continuing, perhaps one with significant regulation? This webinar will examine where crypto will go from here.
Featuring:
Bert Ely, Principal, Ely & Company, Inc.
Alexandra Gaiser, Director of Regulatory Affairs, River Financial
Steven Lofchie, Corporate Partner, Fried Frank
J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
Moderator: Alex Pollock, Senior Fellow, the Mises Institute
---
To register, click the link above

The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment: Implications for Labor Law Sep 09, 2022

Show notes

The past few years have witnessed a flurry of new scholarship related to the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, particularly the Privileges or Immunities Clause and its associated citizenship declarations. Evan Bernick, a professor at Northern Illinois University, is the co-author with Randy Barnett of The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment: Its Letter and Spirit. Christopher Green, a professor at the University of Mississippi, is the author of Equal Citizenship, Civil Rights, and the Constitution: The Original Sense of the Privileges or Immunities Clause, as well as a review of Evan's book, to which he and Barnett have responded. This historical debate is not merely of academic interest, however. If the Supreme Court were to view the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment in a new light, what would the implications be for labor law?
Featuring:
--Professor Evan D. Bernick, Assistant Professor, Northern Illinois University
--Professor Christopher R. Green, Associate Professor of Law and H.L.A. Hart Scholar in Law and Philosophy, University of Mississippi School of Law

Talks With Authors: Classified: The Untold Story of Racial Classification in America Sep 06, 2022

Show notes

In his recent book, Classified: The Untold Story of Racial Classification in America, Professor David Bernstein breaks down the history of American racial classifications, and raises questions about the classifications’ coherence, logic, and fairness.
Professor Bernstein joined us to discuss his book and the role that racial classifications should or should not play in our society.
Featuring:
--Professor David Bernstein, University Professor and Executive Director, Liberty & Law Center, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
--Cory Liu, Partner, Ashcroft Law Firm

Religious Liberty at the Supreme Court 2022 Sep 01, 2022

Show notes

Please join these experts as they review religious liberty at the Supreme Court in 2022.
Featuring:
--Prof. Mark L. Rienzi, President & CEO, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty; Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Center for Religious Liberty, Catholic University
--Moderator: Prof. William L. Saunders, Professor, The Catholic University of America; Co-Director of the Center for Religious Liberty, and Fellow, The Institute for Human Ecology

Is Arizona's New Police Recording Law Constitutional? Aug 30, 2022

Show notes

This summer, the state of Arizona passed a law that will prohibit the ability of the public and press to video record police officers in certain situations. Alexa L. Gervasi, the Executive Director for the Georgetown Center for the Constitution, will join this program to argue that this law is a prior restraint on free speech that does not pass judicial review under strict scrutiny. Larry H. James, the Managing Partner of Crabbe Brown & James LLP, will offer his perspective in defense of the new law. In addition to the constitutional implications of this restriction on recording, our speakers will explore what this regulation could mean for the future of policing.
Featuring:
--Alexa L. Gervasi, Executive Director, Georgetown Center for the Constitution
--Larry H. James, Managing Partner, Crabbe Brown & James LLP
--Moderator: Stephen Klein, Partner, Barr & Klein PLLC

Litigation Update: Reges v. Univ. of Washington – University Acknowledgement of Indigenous Land Aug 29, 2022

Show notes

Stuart Reges is an award-winning professor at the University of Washington in the Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering. The Allen School encourages professors to include on their syllabi a statement recognizing that the land on which the university sits was once owned by indigenous tribes. Professor Reges disagreed with the University’s “Indigenous Land Acknowledgement Statement” — instead, he challenged his students and fellow faculty to consider the utility and performative nature of land acknowledgments by including a modified statement on his syllabus.
The University's administrators later concluded that the professor's viewpoint was “offensive” and “inappropriate,” and created a "shadow" section of Professor Reges's class. The school next launched an investigation of the professor under a policy that prohibits “unacceptable” and “inappropriate” speech. The investigation has been ongoing since March 2, 2022, and carries the threat of termination.
On July 13, 2022, Reges sued University of Washington officials to challenge the investigation and punishment as viewpoint discriminatory, and the policy as unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. Representing Reges is Josh Bleisch, Faculty Legal Defense Fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, who joins us to discuss the status of the case.
Featuring:
--Joshua Bleisch, Faculty Legal Defense Fund Fellow, The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression

Do University Diversity Statement Requirements Violate the Constitution? Aug 29, 2022

Show notes

In recent years, universities have increasingly required 'diversity statements' from faculty seeking jobs, tenure, or promotion. But statements describing faculty's contributions to diversity, equity, and inclusion are also increasingly under attack. Criticisms first made in tweets and blog posts have expanded into prominent opinion pieces and, more recently, law review articles. These attacks are having an effect. Within universities, faculty-wide resolutions for and against mandatory diversity statements have been called and academic freedom committees have been asked to intervene. Outside universities, lawyers are recruiting plaintiffs to challenge diversity statement requirements in court.
Join our experts in a discussion on Professor Brian Soucek’s recent article in the UC Davis Law Review about these diversity statements fleshing out the criticisms and developing a framework to address if universities can require diversity statements without violating either the Constitution or academic freedom.
Featuring:
--Professor Brian Soucek, Professor of Law and Chancellor’s Fellow, UC Davis School of Law
--Professor Eugene Volokh, Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

Litigation Update: Faust v. Vilsack - Race Discrimination in the American Rescue Plan Aug 29, 2022

Show notes

The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging allegedly unconstitutional race discrimination in the American Rescue Plan’s provision to offer loan forgiveness based on racial categories. The plaintiffs are twelve farmers and ranchers from Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, Ohio, Missouri, Iowa, Arkansas, Oregon, and Kentucky. Each plaintiff would be eligible for the federal loan forgiveness program, but for their race. In response, U.S. District Judge William Griesbach issued a temporary restraining order on June 10, 2021 halting payments. Other cases subsequently resulted in similar orders.
These lawsuits challenge the extent to which the government can prefer one racial group over another based on allegations of generalized societal or industry discrimination. Prior litigation had addressed allegations of particularized discrimination by the government against black farmers but this more traditional focus on discrimination and tailored remedy was thought by the administration to be inadequate. How should courts respond?
Featuring:
--Rick M. Esenberg, Founder, President, and General Counsel, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty
--Devon Westhill, President and General Counsel, Center for Equal Opportunity

Do Russian Oligarchs Retain Property Rights in the West? Aug 16, 2022

Show notes

In response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, assets of Russian oligarchs have been frozen in Western Europe and the United States. Now some leaders in Western countries urge that these assets be assigned to reconstruction efforts in Ukraine. Are there legal limits on such diversion of foreign-owned property? Should that matter to U.S. policy? Is this rough justice or dangerous precedent? Our legal experts will discuss these questions on this timely webinar.
Featuring:
--Dean Ronald A. Cass, Dean Emeritus, Boston University School of Law; President, Cass & Associates, PC; Former Vice-Chairman and Commissioner, U.S. International Trade Commission
--Prof. Paul B. Stephan, John C. Jeffries, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Law, David H. Ibbeken '71 Research Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
--Moderator: Jeremy Rabkin, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Should the Future Be Determined by the Past? Bearing Arms After Bruen. Aug 11, 2022

Show notes

Professor Nelson Lund will moderate a debate between Professors Adam Winkler and Robert Leider on the Supreme Court’s latest Second Amendment decision. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense. In justifying its holding, the Supreme Court engaged in a methodical historical inquiry, grappling with sometimes contradictory historical facts. In future cases, the Supreme Court also instructed lower courts to examine text, history, and tradition when deciding Second Amendment claims. The Court explicitly rejected the interest-balancing approach previously adopted by most courts of appeals. Bruen may prove to be a watershed decision in constitutional and criminal law.
Did Bruen correctly decide that the right to bear arms applies outside the home? Will Bruen’s text, history, and tradition test be a viable means of analyzing modern gun control laws that have no historical analogue? And now that the right to bear arms outside the home has been recognized as a constitutional right, what effects will Bruen have on state laws criminalizing the carrying of weapons and on police stop-and-frisk policies?
Featuring:
--Adam Winkler, Connell Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law
--Robert Leider, Assistant Professor, George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School
--Moderator: Nelson Lund, University Professor, George Mason University, Antonin Scalia Law School

Related Podcasts