RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Arthrex Inc. on March 1, 2021. This case is an important one for the office of patent judges; at issue is whether, for purposes of the Appointments Clause, administrative patent judges of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office are "principal officers," which require presidential appointment and Senate confirmation, or "inferior officers," which do not. Also at issue is whether, if they are principal officers, the lower court properly cured any Appointments Clause defects in the current statutory scheme.
Gregory Dolin and Dmitry Karshtedt joined us to review oral arguments, discuss the case, and offer their divergent views on the merits in a discussion moderated by Kristen Osenga.
Featuring:

Gregory Dolin, Associate Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
Dmitry Karshtedt, Associate Professor of Law, George Washington Law School
[Moderator] Kristen Osenga, Austin E. Owen Research Scholar & Professor of Law, University of Richmond School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Recent years have seen a dramatic shift in the way in which American consumers use and shop for financial products and make payments, especially the rapid growth of electronic payments and electronic disclosures. These developments have raised both new opportunities for consumer choice and benefits but also potential new consumer protection threats. At the same time, repeated economic and financial crises, such as the 2020 global COVID pandemic, have illuminated the tensions in the existing institutional framework and suggested a need for modernization to respond to these challenges.
To address these challenges, in 2020 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Kathleen Kraninger formed the CFPB Taskforce on Federal Consumer Financial Law to review the existing consumer financial protection framework and to recommend reforms. On January 5, 2021, the Taskforce published its two-volume report (available here). In this live podcast, Taskforce Chair Todd Zywicki joins us for an overview of the Report, its findings, and recommendations. He is accompanied by David Silberman, former Deputy Director (acting) of the CFPB and moderator Brian Johnson, also former Deputy Director of the CFPB.
Featuring:

David Silberman, Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School
Todd Zywicki, George Mason University Foundation Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School
[Moderator] Brian Johnson, Partner, Alston & Bird LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project and Corporations, Securities & Antitrust Practice Group were pleased to host this fireside discussion between Mr. Bilal Sayyed, most-recently Director of the Federal Trade Commission's Office of Policy Planning, and Svetlana Gans, Vice President and Associate General Counsel at NCTA and former Chief of Staff at the FTC. Their conversation covered the current state of the FTC, the challenges facing the agency, and the path ahead in the new administration.

Featuring:
- Bilal Sayyed, Senior Adjunct Fellow, TechFreedom; formerly Director, Federal Trade Commission Office of Policy Planning
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Biden administration faces a variety of issues when it comes to China, from trade policy to aggression in the South China Sea. Not to be overlooked, however, is how the new administration will handle China's policies and practices regarding intellectual property.

In this live podcast, experts from across the political spectrum discuss the key considerations at play regarding China and intellectual property and debate the best path forward for the new administration.

Featuring:
- Mark Cohen, Director and Senior Fellow, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, University of California at Berkeley
- Justin Hughes, Hon. William Matthew Byrne, Jr. Chair Professor of Law, Loyola Law School, Loyola Marymount University
- [Moderator] Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In January, Twitter and Facebook removed President Trump and many of his followers' accounts while Google, Apple, and Amazon cut business ties with Twitter competitor Parler over alleged contract violations, crippling its business. Many on the right are incensed. Others see these actions as an example of polycentric checks-and-balances in the classical liberal tradition. Yet even among those who welcome the silence, many are troubled by Silicon Valley's aggressive actions. But if there is a problem, what is to be done? Between the First Amendment, the bitter partisan divide in Washington, and the need for some content moderation in widely-used social media, what are the realistic regulatory options for curbing Silicon Valley's influence on the national discourse? What are the potential downsides of some of these options?

Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute
- Billy Easley, Senior Policy Analyst for Technology and Innovation, Americans for Prosperity
- [Moderator] Stewart Baker, Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Professor James W. Coleman joins the podcast to break down the regulatory dynamics of the rolling blackouts Texans have experienced this week.

What role did regulators play in this incident, and what lessons should policymakers pull from it? What is the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, also known as 'ERCOT'? And what are the implications of Texas Governor Greg Abbott's order to halt natural gas exports?

Featuring:
- James W. Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Recently, Big Tech companies have come under fire from all sides for their content moderation decisions. Some argue Big Tech companies are not doing enough to stem the spread of harmful content and misinformation. Others contend Big Tech companies' selective approaches to moderation belies partisan preferences — silencing only certain voices and threatening to undermine democratic values. The recent actions by Big Tech companies regarding President Trump have brought these concerns to a head.

Many different solutions have been proposed during the uproar surrounding the debate. Among these options, some have posited that historical regulation of common carriers can provide a road map for appropriate and effective big tech regulation. Do the market positions of modern giants like Twitter and Facebook generate common-carrier obligations? Should they? Experts discuss these issues, exploring the relevant legal contours and the desirability of the proposed common carrier solution to curb Big Tech power, as well as other issues surrounding the debate.

Featuring:
- Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law
- Joshua Wright, Executive Director, Global Antitrust Institute, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- [Moderator] Elyse Dorsey, Adjunct Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Asheesh Agarwal and Ashley Baker join the podcast to discuss Senator Amy Klobuchar's recently-announced bill to amend antitrust law.

How would the bill adjust the definition of "exclusionary conduct"? What would it mean for the government's ability to seek civil fines for antitrust violations? And how does the bill fit into the larger conversation about antitrust law in Washington?

Featuring:
- Asheesh Agarwal, Deputy General Counsel, TechFreedom
- Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

After living in relative obscurity since its passage in 1996, the Congressional Review Act caught the nation's attention in 2017 when a Republican-led Congress and newly-elected President Trump used it to overturn 14 "midnight" regulations issued at the end of the Obama administration. Some prominent Democratic lawmakers opposed the CRA's framework as well as its individual uses in 2017. Will roles be reversed in 2021 regarding Trump administration "midnight" regulations? Can they be completely reversed?

In this live podcast, experts review the overriding purposes of the CRA and do a deep dive into its technical elements, such as the law's expedited congressional procedures, the types of actions it covers, the number of votes needed to overturn an action, and the consequences of disapproval.

Featuring:
- Todd F. Gaziano, Chief of Legal Policy and Strategic Research & Director, Center for the Separation of Powers, Pacific Legal Foundation
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, GW Regulatory Studies Center & Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The Environmental Protection Agency recently finalized two new transparency-related rules. The stated purpose of the rule "Increasing Consistency in Considering Benefits and Costs in the Clean Air Act Rulemaking Process" is "to codify procedural best practices for the preparation, development, presentation, and consideration of BCA in regulatory decision-making under the CAA." The rule "Strengthening Transparency in Pivotal Science Underlying Significant Regulatory Actions and Influential Scientific Information" is intended to help shed light on the science used and disseminated by the agency. Both rules have garnered both praise and criticism, and there is significant confusion over what they would actually do. In this live podcast, subject-area experts discuss the rules and examine their likely real-world impact.

Featuring:
- Rachel Jones, Vice President, Energy and Resources Policy, National Association of Manufacturers
- Clint Woods, Policy Fellow for Regulations, Americans for Prosperity
- [Moderator] Daren Bakst, Senior Research Fellow, Heritage Foundation

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.