Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression. Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School (Moderator) Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression.Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE)Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School(Moderator) Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP

Congress is currently debating the Antisemitism Awareness Act. This proposed legislation aims to provide a clear definition of antisemitism for use in enforcing existing civil rights laws. Supporters argue that the bill is a crucial tool for combating rising antisemitism by filling a gap in current legal definitions. Opponents, however, contend that the bill could stifle free speech and limit criticism of Israel. Join the Federalist Society for a timely discussion on the legal and constitutional implications of this legislation, exploring the complexities of defining hate speech while upholding the principles of free expression. Featuring: William Creeley, Legal Director, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) Prof. Eugene Kontorovich, Professor of Law and Director, Center for the Middle East and International Law, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School (Moderator) Aharon Friedman, Special Counsel, Sullivan &amp; Cromwell LLP

Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

Necessary & Proper is the official podcast of the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative. The Framers of the Constitution intended the legislature to be the most powerful branch of government. In its present state, as the government operates on a day to day basis, it is not. Were the Founders simply wrong about the inherent powers of the legislative branch? Has the institution of Congress developed practices that are not compatible with the text of the Constitution? Why are current Congressional leaders unable or unwilling to act as an effective check on the presidency? Why is Congress unable to pass a budget? Why has Congress ceded much of its authority to the executive branch and to administrative agencies? What does it mean to serve productively as a member of the House or Senate? These and other important questions are the focus of the Article I Initiative. Periodic releases from Necessary & Proper will feature experts who can shed light on what the Framers envisioned for the legislative branch and how it can be restored to its proper place in the constitutional order.

News

Politics

Necessary &amp; Proper is the official podcast of the Federalist Society's Article I Initiative. The Framers of the Constitution intended the legislature to be the most powerful branch of government. In its present state, as the government operates on a day to day basis, it is not. Were the Founders simply wrong about the inherent powers of the legislative branch? Has the institution of Congress developed practices that are not compatible with the text of the Constitution? Why are current Congressional leaders unable or unwilling to act as an effective check on the presidency? Why is Congress unable to pass a budget? Why has Congress ceded much of its authority to the executive branch and to administrative agencies? What does it mean to serve productively as a member of the House or Senate? These and other important questions are the focus of the Article I Initiative. Periodic releases from Necessary &amp; Proper will feature experts who can shed light on what the Framers envisioned for the legislative branch and how it can be restored to its proper place in the constitutional order.

Share Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

Sign up to save your podcasts

Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

Necessary & Proper Episode 99: Defining Antisemitism: A Debate on Free Speech and Civil Rights

More shows like Necessary & Proper Podcast

FedSoc Events

SCOTUScast

FedSoc Forums

Faculty Division Bookshelf

Federalist Radio Hour

The Editors

RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

Uncommon Knowledge

Advisory Opinions

Talks from the Hoover Institution

Morning Wire

WSJ Opinion: Free Expression