FedSoc Events

We recognize the risks of agency overreach when rulemaking seeks to impose ESG considerations on business. But to what extent have private banks and institutional investors also been able to leverage their economic power to shape firm behavior on climate and other ESG questions – outside of the democratic process? And if we worry that the administrative state lacks political accountability for contentious policy choices, should we also be concerned about the role of private economic influence?
Join us for a dinner at the Mayflower Hotel as our panelists discuss these questions and more. This registration link above will direct registrants to the Executive Branch Review conference ticket sales page, where dinner tickets will be available at a discount to logged in members. Login or Join today!
Featuring:

Christina Parajon Skinner, Assistant Professor of Legal Studies and Business Ethics, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Julia Mahoney, John S. Battle Professor of Law, Univeristy of Virginia School of Law
Matthew Stoller, Director of Research, American Economic Liberties Project
Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Founding Partner, Boyden Gray & Associates
Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Reading Materials:

The New Separation of Ownership and Control: Institutional Investors and ESG - Julia Mahoney
Banks and Climate Governance - Christina Skinner

Featuring:

Anthony LoCoco, Deputy Counsel, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL)
Colin T. Roth, Partner, Stafford Rosenbaum LLP
Ryan J. Walsh, Partner, Eimer Stahl LLP
Moderator: Hon. Shelley A. Grogan, Judge, District II, Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Featuring:

Prof. Christopher W. Schmidt, Professor of Law & Co-Director of ISCOTUS, Chicago-Kent College of Law
Daniel Suhr, Senior Attorney, Liberty Justice Center
Misha Tseytlin, Partner, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP
Moderator: Hon. Maria S. Lazar, Judge-Elect, District II, Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Deference doctrines utilized by the federal Judiciary when federal agencies act is the subject of substantial debate and attention. Chevron deference, Skidmore deference, and Kisor/Auer deference are recognizable to many. But less attention is paid to how state legislatures and judiciaries calibrate the balance of separated powers on the same score.
In this webinar, Professor Aram Gavoor will lead a balanced discussion and press the governors' General Counsel or Chief Legal Counsel from Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. The program will explore the similarities, differences, and unique features of state judicial deference to administrative agency interpretations of law.
Featuring:
Ryan D. Newman, General Counsel, Governor of Florida Ron DeSantis
Jonathan T. Skrmetti, Chief Legal Counsel , Office of Tennessee Governor Bill Lee
James P. Sullivan, General Counsel , Office of Texas Governor Greg Abbott
Moderator: Aram A. Gavoor, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professorial Lecturer in Law, The George Washington University Law School
---
To register, click the link above

On March 24, 1998, the Federalist Society's student chapter at Cardozo School of Law in New York City, New York, hosted a lecture by Dean James Huffman of Lewis & Clark Law School which covered "Judicial Activism and the Role of the Judiciary."

Featuring:

Dean James Huffman, Lewis & Clark Law School

In midst of the pandemic, among the many urgent public demands, Chicago took the time to assess the propriety of monuments to historical figures like Abraham Lincoln. Cities across the country are grappling with the legacy of such figures, many of whom did not live perfect lives. Chicago's effort was part of a larger social movement to remove from sight, or to hold accountable, historical and contemporary figures, including Christopher Columbus, Thomas Jefferson, Dr. Seuss, Woodrow Wilson, J.K. Rowling, and even Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant. Americans are now regularly “cancelled” for actions and statements made many years ago. Is "cancel culture" an important tool of social justice or a new form of intimidation by the powerful? Does canceling someone work to deter bad behavior? How does cancellation and its potential to chill speech interact with the First Amendment?
Speakers:

Prof. Nadine Strossen, John Marshall Harlan II Professor of Law, Emerita, New York Law School & Former President, American Civil Liberties Union
Jonathan D. Urick, Associate Chief Counsel, U.S. Chamber of Commerce Litigation Center
Prof. Anders Walker, Lillie Myers Professor of Law; Professor of History, St. Louis University School of Law
Moderator: Hon. Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., Senior Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

Leading the charge for abolition during the Civil War-era, among others, were abolitionists with deeply held religious beliefs. Today, virtually everyone supports religious liberty and virtually everyone opposes discrimination. But how do we handle the hard questions that arise when exercises of religious liberty seem to discriminate unjustly? Or when anti-discrimination laws unjustly constrain religious liberty? How do we promote the common good while respecting conscience in a diverse society? For example, many religious liberty questions have arisen in response to the redefinition of marriage, such as when bakers, florists, and photographers who do not wish to prove same-sex wedding services and charge for discrimination. This conflict extends well beyond the LGBT arena, notably in the abortion debate. What counts as discrimination, when is it unjust, and when should it be unlawful? Should the law give religion and conscience special protection at all, and if so, why? Might the protection of religious liberty for all serve the ever so pressing need to calming fear and polarization in today’s society?
Speakers:

Prof. Thomas C. Berg, James L. Oberstar Professor of Law and Public Policy, University of St. Thomas School of Law
Justin Edward Butterfield, Deputy General Counsel, First Liberty Institute
D. John Sauer, Solicitor General, Missouri
Moderator: Hon. James C. Ho, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

The Fourteenth Amendment, adopted in 1868, dramatically changed constitutional law. How are we to understand these changes? How would an originalist understand these changes? Did the Fourteenth Amendment change our Federalism and, if so, how much? Does the Fourteenth Amendment protect unenumerated rights?
Speakers:

Prof. Evan D. Bernick, Assistant Professor, Northern Illinois University College of Law
Prof. Ilan Wurman, Associate Professor, Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University
Moderator: Hon. Chad A. Readler, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

On October 9, 1996, the Federalist Society's student chapter at Loyola University School of Law in New Orleans, LA hosted its annual James Madison Lecture, featuring former attorney general Edwin Meese III as the keynote speaker.
Featuring:

Moderator: Justice Harry T. Lemmon, Louisiana Supreme Court
Introductory Remarks: Harvey C. Koch, Partner, Koch & Rouse
Introduction: Verne Spears, Member, The Federalist Society
Edwin Meese III, Distinguished Fellow, The Heritage Foundation
Judge Martin Leach-Cross Feldman, United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
Judge Edith Brown Clement, United States District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
Judge Eldon Fallon, United Stats District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
Prof. Paul Bayer, Louisiana State University Law Center

Across the country, states are looking at how to handle the privacy rights of their citizens regarding "big tech." Illinois, Virginia, California, and Florida have their versions. Ohio is trying to tackle this issue through HB 376. HB 376 is being described as a consumer protection bill, which will protect the selling of data by "big tech" companies and allow recourse for citizens when their data is sold against their direction. Advocates against the bill say that the bill protects "big tech" rather than the people it purports to protect.
Featuring:

Hon. Brian Stewart, State Representative, Ohio
David Straite, Partner, DiCello Levitt Gutzler LLC
Carl M. Szabo, Vice President & General Counsel, Net Choice
Moderator: Hon. J. Philip Calabrese, Judge, United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio