FedSoc Events

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Second Amendment: Next Steps in the Unfolding Litigation Battle."
The U.S. Supreme Court famously decided many Second Amendment cases in its Heller and McDonald cases. Yet much remains uncertain. In its first significant Second Amendment case in ten years, the Court is poised to decide the extent of citizen rights to carry firearms outside the home. Our panel will discuss the oral argument (scheduled for November 3), the merits, the procedure, as well as possible outcomes.
Featuring:

Mr. Jonathan Lowy, Vice President, Legal & Chief Counsel, Legal, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
Prof. Mark W. Smith, Senior Fellow of Law and Public Policy and Presidential Scholar, The King’s College
Mr. David H. Thompson, Managing Partner, Cooper & Kirk PLLC
Moderator: Hon. Thomas M. Hardiman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Private Power and Eminent Domain."
Since the Founding, the extent to which the public power of eminent domain may be used by, or for the benefit of, private parties, has been a subject of intense debate. Time and time again, the U.S. Supreme Court has considered cases testing the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee that "private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation." U.S. Const., amend. V. Over 15 years ago, in the landmark case of Kelo v. New London, the Court upheld the exercise of eminent domain to transfer private property from private individuals to other private entities. The decision – controversial from the outset – prompted deeper questions about the extent to which the Constitution allows for eminent domain for "public purposes" even where the action advances the economic interests of private parties over others. But how lasting is this precedent? In a recent dissent from the denial of certiorari in Eychaner v. Chicago, three justices voted to revisit Kelo, two of them expressly calling to overrule it. Since Kelo, the U.S. Supreme Court has continued to review eminent domain and other cases, raising significant property rights concerns – often involving complex questions at the intersection of private and public power.
Most recently, in the 2020-2021 term, the U.S. Supreme Court heard three cases dealing with the intersection of private and public power in the eminent domain context:

Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, where the Court held that a state regulation allowing union organizers to enter private property constituted a taking requiring just compensation;
PennEast Pipeline v. New Jersey, where the Court dealt with the legality of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) delegation of eminent domain powers to a private pipeline company; and
Pakdel v. San Francisco, where the Court continued to reduce procedural hurdles for inverse condemnation claims (expanding upon a prior decision just two years ago in Knick v. Township of Scott).

For this panel, a distinguished lineup of speakers will discuss the intersection between public and private power in the eminent domain context. The panel will focus on eminent domain’s history, the implications of originalism for understanding the extent and use of that power, recent Supreme Court rulings on these topics, and the likely subjects and issues for review in future cases, among other things. As part of this discussion, the panel will illuminate the constitutional, legal, economic, and philosophic principles and considerations that help to inform perspectives on this important topic of public versus private power in the realm of property rights.
Featuring:

Hon. Paul D. Clement, Partner, Kirkland & Ellis LLP; Former Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice
Prof. Roderick Hills, William T. Comfort, III Professor of Law, New York University School of Law
Mr. Robert J. McNamara, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
Mr. Joshua Thompson, Director of Legal Operations, Pacific Legal Foundation
Moderator: Hon. Jennifer Walker Elrod, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel discussed "ABA Law School Accreditation Standards."
For many years, the U.S. Department of Education has recognized the Council of the American Bar Association Section on Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar as the accrediting organization for law schools. The importance of that function cannot be overstated. For nearly every state, a J.D. degree from an ABA-accredited law school is required to practice law. To become accredited, a law school must comply with the standards contained in the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools. In May 2021, the Council of the ABA Section proposed a set of accreditation standards that, among other things, would require law schools to "take effective actions that, in their totality, demonstrate progress in (1) Diversifying the students, faculty, and staff; and (2) Creating an inclusive and equitable environment for students, faculty, and staff." An interpretation of that provision stated, "The requirement of a constitutional provision that purports to prohibit consideration of race, color, ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, disability, or military status in admissions or employment decisions is not a justification for a school’s non-compliance." The school would have to show "effective actions and progress . . . by means other than those prohibited by the applicable constitutional or statutory provisions." In addition, law schools must "provide training and education to law students on bias, cross-cultural competency, and racism: (1) at the start of the program of legal education, and (2) at least once again before graduation." The Council has since withdrawn the proposal for further study, but it may reappear.
Our panel of experts will discuss the degree to which the ABA’s proposed new policy represented a change from its prior practice; if it was a change, how it came about, including any arguments for or against it; whether it is justified and consistent with the accrediting role; and, if it is not, what steps, if any, might be appropriate to take.
Featuring:

Hon. Scott Bales, Former Chief Justice, Arizona Supreme Court
Prof. John McGinnis, George C. Dix Professor in Constitutional Law, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law
Prof. Thomas D. Morgan, Oppenheim Professor Emeritus of Antitrust and Trade Regulation Law, George Washington University Law School
Mr. Daniel R. Thies, Shareholder, Webber & Thies, P.C.
Moderator: Hon. Gregory Katsas, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". The final day of the conference commenced with showcase panel on "Corporate and Academic Management Today."
The life of law school Deans and university administrators have always included responding to various demands from students and faculty. In recent years those demands include attacks on the school for failing to address racist behavior and patterns, sexual harassment and the mistreatment of gays and other minorities. Over the last couple of years those demands have significantly increased in quantity, volume and force. At the same time corporate management, especially across Fortune 500 companies, but by no means limited to them, have experienced similar pressures. Most recently, we're beginning to see pushback on behalf of outspoken students on free speech grounds, accused predators with due process claims, and others on equal protection grounds. How has management handled these pressures both in academia and in the corporate world? How should they? This roundtable includes those who have dealt with these issues—is some cases very recently and in others from a few years ago.
Featuring:

Mr. Richard Bagger, Partner and Executive Director, Christie 55 Solutions LLC
Dean David Schizer, Dean Emeritus & Harvey R. Miller Professor of Law, Columbia Law School
Dr. Lee Burdette Williams, Executive Director, College Autism Network; Former Vice President of Student Affairs and Dean of Students, Wheaton College; Former Dean of Students, University of Connecticut
Prof. Robin Fretwell Wilson, Mildred Van Voorhis Jones Chair in Law, Director, Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois College of Law
Moderator: Hon. Michael Brennan, U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?".
On September 11, 2001, at the age of 45 and at the height of her professional and personal life, Barbara K. Olson was murdered in the terrorist attacks against the United States as a passenger on the hijacked American Airlines flight that was flown into the Pentagon. The Federalist Society believes that it is most fitting to dedicate an annual lecture on limited government and the spirit of freedom to the memory of Barbara Olson. She had a deep commitment to the rule of law and understood well the relationship between respecting limits on government power and the preservation of freedom. And, significantly, Barbara Olson was an individual who never took freedom for granted in her own life, even in her final terrifying moments-her inspiring and energetic human spirit is a testament to what one can achieve in a world that places a premium on human freedom. Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson delivered the first lecture in November 2001. The lecture series continued in following years with other notable individuals.
Featuring:

Hon. Theodore B. Olson, Partner, Gibson Dunn

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel explored "Originalism: Perspectives from the Bench."
Many would agree that originalism is now a standard when it comes to judicial philosophy. On this panel, a variety of judges will discuss how they 'do' originalism while sitting on a case. Furthermore, they will provide their views on whether and how advocates can best brief and argue cases along originalist lines.
Featuring:

Hon. Edith Jones, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Hon. Kevin Newsom, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
Hon. Andrew Oldham, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Hon. Neomi Rao, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit
Moderator: Hon. John Nalbandian, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?" This panel covered "China, Global Companies, and Human Rights."
This panel will explore a suite of issues related to global companies that do business in China and the implications for national security, human rights, and the rule of law. Panelists will explore how companies that have supply chains or otherwise are active in China weigh human rights concerns (e.g., in Xinjiang or Hong Kong) against market access, as well as consider the dilemma companies face when they find themselves caught in the crossfire between U.S. and allies' human rights sanctions (e.g., Global Magnitsky) and Chinese retaliatory sanctions. Do American companies feel an obligation, apart from any legal mandates, to act in ways that advance U.S. national security or foreign policy objectives? With senior policymakers intently focused on these and related issues, is the private sector giving them sufficient attention?
Featuring:

Amb. Craig Allen, President, US-China Business Council; Former U.S. Ambassador to Brunei Darussalam
Amb. Kelley Currie, Former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues
Mr. John S. Jenkins, Jr., Executive Vice President and General Counsel, TE Connectivity
Dr. Kori Schake, Senior Fellow and Director of Foreign and Defense Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute
Moderator: Hon. Carlos T. Bea, Senior Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel asked "Is Anyone Still Committed to Free Speech?".
The Supreme Court in 1964 spoke of "a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open." That commitment has seemingly waned of late. Conservatives bemoan a new institutional "cancel culture" that chills heterodox views, with many now questioning limits on government’s ability to regulate the speech and associations of private parties like social-media platforms, corporations, and employers. Meanwhile, progressives complain that speech rights are, as one ACLU attorney put it, "more often a tool of the powerful than the oppressed" and should be subordinated to other values like equity, safety from harmful speech, and "anti-racism." Has something truly changed in recent years, and, if so, does it matter? Is the traditional view of free speech—freedom from government regulation—worth defending?
Featuring:

Mr. Mike Davis, President and Founder, Internet Accountability Project; Former Chief Counsel for Nominations to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley; Founder, The Article III Project
Prof. Stanley Fish, Professor of Law, Florida International University College of Law; Floersheimer Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law, Cardozo Law
Prof. Joel Gora, Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Ms. Nicole Neily, President and Founder, Parents Defending Education
Moderator: Hon. David R. Stras, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eight Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel covered "Federalism and Broadband Spending: Finding the Right Approach."
The Covid-19 pandemic accelerated the desire for increased—indeed, universal—broadband access. This panel will focus on the infusion of federal and state funding into broadband networks. The panel will explore the ways in which states and private actors can play a role in ubiquitous deployment, the appropriate role of the FCC and other government agencies, including the USDA, NTIA, and DOE, how the FCC’s Universal Service programs can continue to facilitate deployment and adoption, and the terms that should accompany government funding distributed through states and federal agencies.
Featuring:

Hon. Brendan Carr, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission
Hon. Eric Allan Koch, Senator and Chairman, Indiana Senate Utilities Committee, Indiana State Senate
Dr. Roslyn Layton, Senior Vice President, Strand Consult
Moderator: Hon. Steven Menashi, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

The 2021 National Lawyers Convention took place November 11-13, 2021 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. The topic of the conference was "Public and Private Power: Preserving Freedom or Preventing Harm?". This panel discussed "Cancel Culture Comes to Financial Services."
Under the Obama Administration’s Operation Choke Point initiative bank regulators sought to de-bank various legal industries such as payday lenders, firearms dealers, and home-based charities. Today, banks have increasingly acted on their own initiative to effectively operate a new voluntary form of Operation Choke Point. In January 2021, Florida’s Bank United closed Donald Trump’s personal bank account. Other banks have cut off others seemingly because of political views and have been pressured by activists to cut off funding to politically-disfavored industries, religious organizations, and others, effectively a new voluntary form of Operation Choke Point.
Is this voluntary activity the free exercise of business judgment, or is it inappropriate response to external pressure? What kind of unintended consequences might occur where banks use their business to punish based on viewpoint? Could this behavior make banks into utilities subject to more financial regulation or even government actors carrying out government directives? What are the appropriate responses to "cancel culture" or "choke point" tactics in banking? What steps are appropriate either through governmental or private actions?
Featuring:

Prof. Christopher Peterson, John J. Flynn Endowed Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Mr. Paul Watkins, Managing Director, Patomak Global Partners
Prof. Todd J. Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University; Senior Fellow, Cato Institute
Moderator: Hon. Eric Murphy, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit