FedSoc Events

The Sixth Annual Executive Branch Review Conference is scheduled for Tuesday, April 17 at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. and will examine the increase in federal regulatory activity and the legal and practical considerations of regulatory reform. This daylong conference will feature plenary panels, addresses, and breakout panels.

Hon. Neomi Rao, Administrator, Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs
Introduction: Mr. Dean Reuter, General Counsel | Vice President & Director, Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

What methods of interpretation should Ohio courts use in constitutional matters and in cases involving disputes over statutory text? Does the Ohio Supreme Court have obligations or restrictions different from those facing federal courts? Are there systemic problems in the Ohio judicial system that the Ohio Supreme Court needs to address? Has the Ohio Supreme Court improperly ignored established precedent or constitutional or statutory requirements in ways that need to be corrected? Can judges really maintain independence if they are elected by voters and must run in partisan primaries? If so, how? What role do lawyers play in building citizen trust and support in the judiciary?
Candidates for the two current vacancies on the Ohio Supreme Court shared their views on how the Ohio Supreme Court should address these and other questions. They also explained how their views are informed and shaped by the Ohio Constitution, the Ohio canons of judicial ethics, and past studies of the administration of justice in Ohio’s courts.

Hon. Craig Baldwin, Fifth District Court of Appeals
Hon. Mary DeGenaro, Associate Justice, Ohio Supreme Court
Hon. Michael Donnelly, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
Hon. Melody Stewart, Eighth District Court of Appeals
Moderator: Douglas R. Cole, Partner, Organ Cole LLP

Demand for criminal justice reform appears to be growing across the political spectrum. Bipartisan coalitions have formed to address over criminalization, prison reform, bail bond reform, sentencing guidelines reform, and more. Panelists will explore these efforts. Are reforms truly needed, or does the criminal justice system already work well? If reforms are needed, what reforms are best—and are there reforms in other states that may be worth exploring in Ohio? What efforts have the Ohio General Assembly and the Ohio Supreme Court made to address criminal justice reform? Are there arguments that criminal law practitioners should be making in the courtroom in light of these legal developments?

Heather Childs, Vice President, Compliance, Capital One
Daniel Dew, Legal Fellow, Buckeye Institute
Hon. Dave Yost, Ohio State Auditor
Moderator: Hon. Sharon Kennedy, Associate Justice, Ohio Supreme Court

Earlier this year the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31. The case turns on the question of whether “agency fee” arrangements—which require workers to pay union fees to public sector unions to cover the unions’ activities other than political action—violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court previously found such mandatory union fees to be constitutional in Abood v. Detroit Board of Education (1977). However, in 2016, the Supreme Court split 4-4 on this question in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association.

L. Camille Hebert, Carter C. Kissell Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University
William L. Messenger, Staff Attorney, National Right To Work Legal Defense Foundation
Moderator: Robert Alt, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Buckeye Institute

Since the 1980s, the originalist approach to constitutional interpretation has gained greater and greater acceptance in legal circles, and the number of originalists within the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary has grown. At the same time, originalism still has fierce critics who argue that it is an inappropriate method for constitutional interpretation. Likewise, in the last decades of the 20th century the U.S. Supreme Court breathed new life into a federalist view of the Constitution and the relationship between the federal government and the states. As with originalism, the federalist movement has its own strong critics.
The panelists discussed these two legal concepts. What are originalism and federalism, really? Are they valid or flawed? What developments may we see from the federal courts with regard to these concepts in the future—particularly in light of Neil Gorsuch’s joining the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017? And how do these concepts apply to the work of ordinary legal practitioners?

Jonathan Adler, Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law; Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law
Eric Murphy, State Solicitor, Ohio
Peter M. Shane, Jacob E. Davis and Jacob E. Davis II Chair in Law, Ohio State University Moritz College of Law
Moderator: Hon. Gregory G. Katsas, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Introduction to the 2018 Ohio Chapters Conference made by Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice.

Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice

On Thursday, March 29, Professor Josh Blackman was invited to speak at CUNY Law about free speech on campus. Upon arrival at the law school, he was met with protesters and hecklers who attempted to disrupt the event. Warning: Audio and video contain strong language.

Prof. Josh Blackman, South Texas College of Law, Houston

As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

In both the House and the Senate, it has become extremely difficult to build consensus, which in turn creates gridlock, dysfunction, and partisanship.
Does Congress need to reform its processes altogether? Or should it return to earlier methods of committees, conferencing, and compromise? Machalagh Carr, Josh Chafetz, David Schoenbrod, and David Hoppe reflect on the processes of Congress which enable the legislative branch to effectively wield its constitutional powers.
Watch the video on YouTube

Prof. Josh Chafetz, Professor of Law, Cornell Law School
David Hoppe, President, Hoppe Strategies
Prof. David Schoenbrod, Professor of Law, New York Law School
Moderator: Machalagh Carr, General Counsel & Parliamentarian, Committee on Ways and Means, U. S. House of Representatives

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

Under the Constitution, the legislative branch possesses full authority over trade policy. Congress, however, has delegated much of this power to regulate trade to the executive branch, creating a number of serious issues, from trade wars to favoritism to economic depression.
What can Congress do to counteract the consequences of their abdication? Mike Lee discusses the history of Congress' trade powers, suggesting a procedural solution to restore the balance of powers intended by the Founders.
Watch the video on YouTube

Hon. Michael Lee, U.S. Senator, Utah
Introduction: Mr. Dean Reuter, General Counsel | Vice President & Director, Practice Groups, The Federalist Society

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

As the upper chamber of Congress, the Senate functions as a check on the legislative process. Many have complained, however, that the Senate is obstructionist, anti-majoritarian, and overly partisan.
Is the Senate broken? Or is it operating as intended by the framers of the Constitution? Daniel Flores, Christopher DeMuth, Matt Glassman, and James Wallner discuss their views on Senate reform.
Watch the video on YouTube

Hon. Christopher DeMuth, Distinguished Fellow, Hudson Institute
Dr. Matt Glassman, Senior Fellow, Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University
Dr. James Wallner, Senior Fellow, R Street Institute
Moderator: Daniel Flores, Chief Counsel for the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law for the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives

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