Stay ConnectedThe Regulatory Transparency Project is a nonprofit, nonpartisan effort dedicated to fostering discussion and a better understanding of regulatory policies.
On RTP’s Fourth Branch Podcast, leading experts discuss the pros and cons of government regulations and explain how they affect everyday life for Americans.
Axon and Jarkesy have renewed scrutiny of the constitutionality and fairness of FTC’s administrative litigation. For example, the President cannot remove Administrative Law Judges nor FTC Commissioners, and FTC Commissioners both vote to issue the complaint and decide its merits in proceedings. Parties before the DOJ-Antitrust Division, on the other hand, go directly before an Article III judge, and avoid administrative litigation altogether.
This panel, featuring the former FTC Acting Chairman, Commission advisors, and administrative law experts, discussed these and other constitutional challenges to FTC’s administrative litigation. If the courts ultimately uphold constitutionality, is Congressional reform warranted? Should FTC’s administrative tribunal be abolished altogether? Or are internal process reforms sufficient to afford fairer process?
Keith Klovers' article, "Three Options for Reforming Part 3 Administrative Litigation at the Federal Trade Commission," as referenced in the discussion.
In this episode, Randel K. Johnson and Andrew Kilberg discuss the often ephemeral nature of the Rule of Law in immigration and other enforcement proceedings, with a particular focus on the challenges faced by small businesses when confronted with a heavy-handed bureaucracy and the practical difficulties of obtaining judicial review. The experts also examine the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), considering potential legislative reforms to improve the ability of small entities to vindicate their rights before agencies and the courts while improving enforcement and maintaining accountability in regulatory matters.
Featuring:
Randel Keith Johnson, Immigration Academic Fellow, Cornell Law School
Andrew Kilberg, Partner, Gibson Dunn
In this episode, financial experts look back on recent SEC regulation, enforcement, and litigation, as well as their predictions for the next SEC leadership under a second Trump administration.
C. Wallace DeWitt, Securities lawyer
Brian Knight, Director of Innovation and Governance and Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center at George Mason University
Jennifer Schulp, Director of Financial Regulation Studies, Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives
Antitrust efforts have become prevalent in the courts and legislative bodies, both in the United States and abroad. A recent example is the U.S. Department of Justice's case against Google for alleged anticompetitive behavior in its search business. Though cybersecurity and national security concerns are traditionally not included in antitrust efforts, the implications of such priorities should be carefully considered. Join a panel of leading security and antitrust experts for a discussion on recent antitrust actions, how security is directly and indirectly implicated, and considerations for the future.
J. Kennerly Davis presents an overview of electric industry regulation. Davis discusses how regulation has changed in a fundamental way over the last 140 years, and what that change has meant for electric customers large and small.
The Regulatory Transparency Project and the Federalism & Separation of Powers practice group hosted a virtual debate over the recent Supreme Court decision in SEC v. Jarkesy. The panel featured Matthew Wiener, from Penn Carey Law, and Josh Robbins, of the Pacific Legal Foundation. Michael Buschbacher, from Boyden & Gray PLLC, moderated the debate.
Tanner Jones and Jonathan Wolfson from the Cicero Institute discuss their co-authored paper titled "Restoring Legislative Authority: A Balanced Approach to Agency Deference." They explore the implications of the Chevron deference decision and the Loper Bright case. The conversation addresses the impact of these decisions on administrative law, regulation, and specifically on the states.
A panel of experts will engage in a legal discussion about the implications of using AI in rulemaking, as AI technologies inadvertently influence the process of creating and implementing regulations. The panel will also consider how rulemaking and AI influence the legal and political realms.
Featuring:
Speakers:
Catherine Sharkey, Segal Family Professor of Regulatory Law and Policy, New York University School of Law
John Nay, Founder & CEO, Norm Ai
J. Kennerly Davis, Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
(Moderator) Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Accountability, U.S. House of Representatives
This virtual event explored the potential trajectories of AI policy under the upcoming shift in presidential administrations. Our expert panel, featuring Ash Kazaryan, Adam Kovacevich, and Neil Chilson, examined the critical issues surrounding AI and offered insights on what policymakers need to know as they navigate rapidly evolving AI technologies. This discussion, moderated by Adam Thierer, provides a balanced range of perspectives on how future administrations can effectively approach AI governance.
A panel of distinguished legal scholars and practitioners will provide an overview of the current landscape of litigation surrounding climate disclosure regulations. Experts will discuss the legal challenges facing both the SEC’s climate disclosure rule and California’s SB 253 and 261. Panelists will address the legal questions raised during litigation over climate disclosure regimes, as well as the regimes’ implications for corporate governance, consumers, and investors.
Featuring:
Victor B. Flatt, Coleman P. Burke Chair in Environmental Law, School of Law, Case Western Reserve University
Stephen W. Hall, Legal Director and Securities Specialist, Better Markets
Trent McCotter, Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC
[Moderator] Marc Marie, Policy Fellow, Regulatory Policy, Americans for Prosperity
Our TOPPODCAST Picks 
