FedSoc Forums

As small businesses across the country grapple with the current and potential impacts associated with COVID-19, the National Federation of Independent Business continues to track the latest developments from healthcare officials, congress and the administration. Please join us to hear about how the organization is supporting small businesses during this time, and which government policies are positively and negatively affecting business operations today and down the road.

Featuring:
-- Karen Harned, Executive Director, National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center

The Singapore Convention on Mediation was opened for signature on August 7, 2019, with the United States, China, and India among its first signatories. The Convention is “expected to bring certainty and stability to the international framework on mediation” by streamlining the process by which foreign jurisdictions will enforce settlement agreements resulting from mediation. This program will discuss the Convention’s potential impact on international commerce as well as its implementation in the United States.

Featuring:
-- Prof. Roger Alford, Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School
-- Gary Birnberg, JAMS Mediator and Arbitrator
-- Mushegh Manukyan, Mediation Specialist, Office of the Ombudsman for UN Funds and Programmes, United Nations
-- Harout J. Samra, Associate, DLA Piper

Almost exactly a year ago—on April 1, 2019—New York State enacted groundbreaking bail reform that eliminated cash bail for almost 90% of arrests and resulted in a 30% drop in the statewide jail population. The measure took effect on January 1, 2020, and the backlash from law enforcement, local newspapers, elected officials in opposition, the bail bond industry, and even the general public was strong, swift, and immediate. A few weeks ago, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the Legislature approved roll backs to the law, despite it having been in effect for only three months. Join Insha Rahman and Craig Trainor for a discussion—from different perspectives—about New York's bail reform law, its impact, proposals to reform the reform, and why roll backs were passed in the midst of a global pandemic.

Featuring:
-- Insha Rahman, Director of Strategy and New Initiatives,Vera Institute of Justice
-- Craig Trainor, Founder, Trainor Law, P.C.

Commissioner Phillips will join us to discuss data privacy and the COVID pandemic. Other topics may include the impact of new technologies in addressing the crisis, how the FTC and other privacy enforcers around the world are responding, the ways in which the FTC works with industry, and what today tells us about the future. Commissioner Phillips will also discuss the potential for a future federal privacy bill.

Featuring:
-- Noah Phillips, Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission

As corporations and even entire municipalities are increasingly advising or requiring their employees to work from home in light of COVID-19, it is important to remember that doing so it not without its risks. For any organization that has information to protect -- whether customer or employee personal information, financial information, or confidential and proprietary trade secrets -- permitting company data to travel home with or be remotely accessed by employees raises the chances of a cyber incident involving that data. When a “cyber-mishap” occurs, the company may have a duty to report the incident to consumers, regulators and business counterparties. Put simply, cyber criminals are not expected to take a “corona-holiday.” In fact, some might even prey on vulnerabilities created by the situation. Fortunately, there still is time to address the potential privacy and data security risks — and to develop clear guidance for employees to follow. These policies should be tailored to each company’s specific risk profile and communicated clearly to all employees.

While every organization’s information security defenses are unique, some of the most common risks to be addressed concerning remote work include the following: unsecure personal and public WiFi networks; working on unsecure personal devices; transferring corporate data using personal e-mail accounts; synching with personal cloud storage accounts; physical document management and destruction; unsecure connections to employer systems; unsecure conference call lines; and phishing schemes and other frauds. Because many employees are justifiably concerned for the health and safety of themselves and their families, it is understandable if data security is not their first priority. However, with some careful planning, well-defined policies, and transparent communication between employees and management, companies should be able to maintain the security of their data while keeping their employees safe.

Featuring:
-- Nicholas Degani, Senior Counsel, Federal Communications Commission
-- Paul Eisler, Director, Cybersecurity, USTelecom
-- Joseph V. DeMarco, Partner, DeVore & DeMarco LLP

This teleforum provides a wide-ranging discussion on the recent developments in the China-Taiwan relationship. It explores the role that the United States may have in light of Taiwan Relations Act obligations and regional stability to provide both assurance and support to our ally, Taiwan, while - at the same time - examining concerns over the range of Chinese reactions.

Featuring:
-- Dr. June Teufel Dreyer, Professor of Political Science, University of Miami, Coral Gables
-- Prof. Julian Ku, Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Faculty Director of International Programs, and Maurice A. Deane Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law, Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University
-- Moderator: Saul Newsome, Attorney, Newsome International Law, LLC

Watchlisting people with known or suspected ties to terrorism has long been a key tool among U.S. counterterrorism and transportation security programs. For just as long, a wide range of people – from U.S. citizens to foreign nationals with no legal status in the United States – have litigated their suspected presence on watchlists or no-fly lists, claiming that those lists, or aspects of their administration, violate various tenets of due process and other rights. Last year, courts were particularly rough on the federal agencies charged with curating and using watchlists. For the first time, a district court held the government’s procedures with respect to the FBI’s centralized Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB), violates procedural due process of a group of twenty-three U.S. citizen plaintiffs. On the heels of that decision, the Supreme Court declined to review an en banc opinion by the Ninth Circuit suggesting that the government acted in bad faith with respect to the nearly 15-year long litigation concerning Malaysian national Rahinah Ibrahim’s one-time inclusion on the TSA’s no-fly list.

Join former DHS General Counsel Joe Whitley and Professor Tung Yin for a fascinating conversation on these cases and the current legal and policy landscapes concerning watchlists. The discussion will be moderated by the former Senior Advisor for Legal Policy at the State Department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism, Adam Pearlman.

Featuring:
-- Hon. Joe D. Whitley, Chair, Government Enforcement & Investigations Group, Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC
-- Prof. Tung Yin, Professor of Law, Lewis & Clark Law School
-- Moderator: Adam R. Pearlman, Managing Director, Lexpat Global Services

Paul Atkins, Patomak Global Partners CEO, and banking consultant Bert Ely discuss the numerous programs Congress, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, has directed the Federal Reserve to implement to provide financial support to America's financial institutions, state and local governments, and the broader economy. Much of this support will consist of the Fed purchasing bonds and other debt instruments, which could balloon the Fed's balance to a record size. Some of these support programs were undertaken after the 2008 financial crisis; others have never been tried before. Paul and Bert also offer their views as to how these programs might play out, and their potential longer term impacts on the U.S. financial system and the broader economy – all of which is taking place in an election year.

Featuring:
-- Paul Atkins, CEO, Patomak Global Partners
-- Bert Ely, Principal, Ely & Company Inc.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has used rulemaking only a few times through the decades. But the Board recently issued final rules that make major changes to secret ballot election petitions, particularly decertification petitions. The final rules, issued April 1, 2020, make three major changes:

(1) Ending the controversial “blocking charge” policy that allowed unions to unilaterally halt secret ballot elections by filing unfair labor practice charges alleging employer violations of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

(2) Reinstating the rule of Dana Corp., 351 NLRB 434 (2007), which allows employees to call for a secret ballot election after an employer voluntarily recognizes a union pursuant to a “card-check." The Dana rule had been in effect until it was overruled by the Board in Lamons Gasket Co., 357 NLRB 739 (2011).

(3) A construction industry employer and union may no longer bar an employee’s election petition if they converted their Section 8(f) bargaining relationship into a Section 9(a) “exclusive representation” relationship without proof of majority employee support for the union.

All of these new rules recognize that secret ballot elections are the “gold standard” under the NLRA and are preferred to “card checks” and other informal processes by which unions become bargaining representatives of all employees in a bargaining unit.

Aaron Solem, a Staff Attorney at the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, will discuss the arguments for and against the final rules, and what these changes portend for NLRB elections and employee free choice.

Featuring:
-- Aaron Solem, Staff Attorney, National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation

Police in Greenwood Village, CO, chased a shoplifting suspect into a home belonging to Leo Lech and his family. When the suspect took a shot at the police, they responded by using an armored vehicle to tear gaping holes in the side of the house and launching "gas munitions" into the interior, effectively destroying the home. The Lech family sought compensation, but the Tenth Circuit rejected their claim on the grounds that the Fifth Amendment's just compensation requirement contains a categorical exception for law enforcement. Was that decision correct, and either way, should the Supreme Court grant cert and reconsider whether owners are entitled to compensation when their property is damaged or destroyed in police operations?
Featuring:
Clark Neily, Vice President for Criminal Justice, Cato Institute
Moderator: Jeffrey Redfern, Attorney, Institute for Justice


Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up on our website. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.