FedSoc Events

The economics profession has long proffered Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) as the best tool for making balanced and efficient governmental decisions on spending and regulation. Though some critics object to the tool, presidents from both parties for over four decades have endorsed the BCA paradigm as the preferred way to make sound regulatory decisions, and Congress is considering legislation that would require agencies to support major regulatory initiatives with BCA. -- But is BCA a silver bullet for improving policy decisions? If not, what procedural and analytical changes might improve its usefulness as a policy development tool? This diverse panel of legal and policy experts will explore these questions and examine the appropriate role for congressional and judicial oversight, the proper scope of BCA, and when analysis should be conducted and by whom. -- This panel was presented on June 18, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC during the Third Annual Executive Branch Review Conference. -- Featuring: Hon. C. Boyden Gray, Boyden Gray & Associates; Mr. Michael A. Livermore, University of Virginia School of Law; Mr. Richard D. Morgenstern, Resources for the Future; and Hon. Eugene Scalia, Gibson Dunn and Crutcher. Moderator: Hon. Susan E. Dudley, The George Washington University.

The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed new regulations for CO2 emission reductions from existing power plants. The proposal requires states to implement the Agency’s Clean Power Plan. Proponents argue that it is an essential measure to protect vital natural resources; opponents argue that it will be massively costly and logistically difficult to implement (particularly given the timeframes required in the proposed regulations), and that it robs the states of their sovereign power. Our panel of experts will discuss the underlying legal authority for EPA’s proposal, the appropriate federalism model for regulation of CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act, and the policy implications. -- This panel was presented on June 18, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC during the Third Annual Executive Branch Review Conference. -- Featuring: Mr. David Doniger, Natural Resources Defense Council; Mr. Mark W. DeLaquil, Baker & Hostetler LLP; Mr. Robert M. Sussman, Sussman & Associates; and Mr. Misha Tseytlin, West Virginia Attorney General's Office. Moderator: Ms. Elana Schor, Politico.

The communications and technology sectors have seen an explosion of growth and innovation over the last decade, and yet the primary body of law governing these areas, The Communications Act, has not been updated since the days of dial-up internet. In 2013, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (Mich.) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (Oreg.) announced that they would commence efforts to “update the law to better meet the dynamic needs of the 21st century.” In January, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (S. Dak.) announced similar plans. -- Our panel will discuss recent efforts to update the Communications Act for the modern internet age. What should a new framework look like? With the convergence of technologies, should the current platform-specific regulation be replaced with a more flexible, service-based regulatory scheme? Should special considerations still apply in certain services? How could such regulations impact developing business models and evolving technologies? Should the scope of the FCC’s jurisdiction remain the same? These and other issues will be explored. -- This panel was presented on June 18, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC during the Third Annual Executive Branch Review Conference. -- Featuring: Mr. Jonathan Adelstein, President & CEO, PCIA - The Wireless Infrastructure Association; Ms. Kelly Cole, National Association of Broadcasters; Ms. Grace Koh, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce; and Mr. David B. Quinalty, U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Moderator: Mr. Scott Belcher, Telecommunications Industry Association.

The theme of the Third Annual Executive Branch Review Conference, what role does and should Congress play vis-a-vis the administrative state, will be developed in a series of addresses, debates and panel discussions. Experts will discuss incentives for Congressional action and inaction, reducing delegation from Congress to the agencies through more precise statutory language, the tools of Congressional oversight, and more. The conference will also include breakout sessions by selected practice groups to provide detailed discussion about executive branch activities in particular areas of the law. -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered the opening address on June 18, 2015, at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. Introduction: Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President & Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society.

National Review Institute Senior Fellow Andrew C. McCarthy delivered this address on "National Insecurity: Is the Law the Enemy's Weapon?" during the 2015 National Security Symposium on April 29, 2015.

The National Constitution Center, the Federalist Society and the American Constitution Society presented this debate on Citizens United. Professor Anthony Johnstone, argued in favor of the resolution and Professor John McGinnis argued against the resolution. Jeffrey Rosen, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Constitution Center, moderated the program. -- This debate was made possible through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. -- Speakers: Prof. Anthony Johnstone, University of Montana School of Law and Prof. John McGinnis, Northwestern University School of Law. Moderator: Prof. Jeffrey Rosen, President and CEO, National Constitution Center. -- The opinions expressed in this debate are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.

Several significant cyber incidents, including the recent Sony hack, have been attributed to nation-states or groups closely associated with nation-states. The Intelligence Community's most recent Worldwide Threat Assessment predicts "an ongoing series of low-to-moderate level cyber attacks from a variety of sources over time, which will impose cumulative costs on U.S. economic competitiveness and national security." It identifies Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as Threat Actors. An expert panel will analyze whether any cyber incidents should be considered acts of war, whether U.S. responses be governed by the Law of Armed Conflict, what kinds of incidents warrant responses, and what those responses might be. -- The Federalist Society's International & National Security Law Practice Group presented this panel during the 2015 National Security Symposium on April 29 in Washington, D.C. -- Featuring: Hon. Stewart A. Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, former Assistant Secretary of Policy, Department of Homeland Security, and former General Counsel, National Security Agency; Prof. Eric Talbot Jensen, Brigham Young University Law School, and former Chief, International Law, Office of The Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army; Catherine B. Lotrionte, Director, CyberProject, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, and former former Counsel to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, former Assistant General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency; and Prof. John C. Yoo, Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law, University of California Berkeley School of Law, former Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel. Moderator: Prof. Jeremy A. Rabkin, George Mason University School of Law.

Since September 11, 2001, the intelligence community has been at the center of key national security events including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the hunt for Osama Bin Laden and other key terrorism figures, leaks by Edward Snowden, and disclosures about the CIA's rendition program. During that same period of time, the management of the intelligence community has been reformed, executive agencies have reorganized themselves to better interact with the intelligence community, and most recently, the CIA has announced a fundamental reorganization of its key functions. Our panel will consider how the government can best manage the intelligence community. We will discuss the role of Congressional oversight, the ability to demand accountability, whether the current structure of the intelligence community is optimal, and if effectiveness measures can be applied to intelligence work. -- The Federalist Society's International & National Security Law Practice Group presented this panel during the 2015 National Security Symposium on April 29 in Washington, D.C. -- Featuring: Michael Allen, Managing Director, Beacon Global Strategies LLC, former Majority Staff Director, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counter-proliferation Strategy; Eli Lake, Columnist, Bloomberg View; and Hon. Benjamin A. Powell, Partner, WilmerHale LLP, and former General Counsel to the Director of National Intelligence. Moderator: Matthew R.A. Heiman, Vice President, Chief Compliance & Audit Officer, Tyco. Welcome and Introduction by Dean A. Reuter, Vice President and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society.

Given that everyone is getting older and more prone to disease, medical innovation is one of the most important measures, if not the most important measure, of a successful health policy. Technological acceleration, including advances in genomics and stem cell research, suggest that we are on the cusp of a golden age of medical innovation. But government-imposed price controls and other policies can reduce the incentives for devising new treatments, resulting in preventable death and illness. This panel will look at the effect of Obamacare, and the policies of the FDA on innovation. More generally, will the current regulatory processes and reimbursement policies equipped to manage the next generation of personalized medicine and diagnostic devices? This program was presented on February 21, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium. -- Featuring: Mr. Peter Huber, Senior Fellow, Manhattan Institute; Ms. Lindsay Kelly, Special Counsel, Irell & Manella LLP; and Mr. Gerald Masoudi, Partner, Covington & Burling LLP; former Chief Counsel, Food and Drug Administration. Moderator: Hon. Thomas B. Griffith, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Our patent system has historically been thought to be an engine of innovation, but it is much criticized today. Is a one-size-fits all model for patent duration appropriate in today's technological environment or does it simply incentivize unnecessary litigation? For instance, the rapid pace of technological change in some areas may obviate the need of lengthy patents in some areas. Should certain innovation—such as business processes be patentable? Should the patent office be reorganized or split up to better assess patents. What other types of incentives, including those provided by copyright or prizes, provide alternatives to patents? This program was presented on February 21, 2015, as part of the 2015 Federalist Society National Student Symposium. -- Featuring: Ms. Phyllis Turner-Brim, Chief Intellectual Property Counsel, Intellectual Ventures; Prof. Doug Melamed, Visiting Professor, Stanford Law School; Prof. Michael Meurer, Boston University School of Law; and Mr. Adam Mortara, Partner, Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP. Moderator: Hon. Danny J. Boggs, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.