Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression. Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School Moderator: Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression.Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law SchoolModerator: Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression. Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School Moderator: Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan &amp; Cromwell LLP

Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

*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: <ul><li>Courthouse Steps: A series of rapid response discussions breaking down all the latest SCOTUS cases after oral argument or final decision</li><li>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</li><li>Litigation Update: A series that provides the latest updates in important ongoing cases from all levels of government</li></ul> The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

News

Politics

*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 decisionA 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 sittingLitigation Update: A series that provides the latest updates in important ongoing cases from all levels of governmentThe Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

*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: <ul><li>Courthouse Steps: A series of rapid response discussions breaking down all the latest SCOTUS cases after oral argument or final decision</li><li>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</li><li>Litigation Update: A series that provides the latest updates in important ongoing cases from all levels of government</li></ul> The Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speakers.

Share Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

Sign up to save your podcasts

Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

More shows like FedSoc Forums

FedSoc Events

SCOTUScast

Faculty Division Bookshelf

Cato Podcast

U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments

Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Cooke

We the People

The Libertarian

RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

Necessary & Proper Podcast

Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture

The Remnant with Jonah Goldberg

What the Hell Is Going On

Advisory Opinions

The Dispatch Podcast

Amarica's Constitution

Divided Argument

Supreme Court Oral Arguments