With the Court starting to hear cases for the upcoming year on October 7, 2024, a balanced panel of experts previewed some of the most interesting and potentially consequential cases for the coming year. The panelists focused on the civil justice-related cases on the docket, the cases where economic analysis is most at play, and those cases likely to have the most substantial economic impact or require adjustment to business activity.

Panelists:

John H. Beisner, Of Counsel, Litigation; Mass Torts, Insurance and Consumer Litigation, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Robert S. Peck, President, Center for Constitutional Litigation

Donald J. Kochan, Moderator, Professor of Law and Executive Director, Law & Economics Center

This one-hour talk examined the recent Department of Justice (DOJ) complaint against Apple, which alleges that Apple has designed and structured its iPhone platform in a manner that violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Join us as Professor James Cooper of George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School, Professor Erika Douglas of Temple University Beasley School of Law, Professor Thom Lambert of the University of Missouri School of Law, and moderator Professor John Yun of George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School discuss the scope of a platform’s duty to deal, the relevance of privacy considerations in antitrust matters, and the applicability of the seminal Microsoft case in determining the likely outcome.

Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Law & Economics Center at the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School, Donald J. Kochan, moderates a discussion about Climate Change Lawsuits and Preemption or Displacement of State Law: An Analysis of the Sunoco Cert Petition. This conversation, recorded in May, 2024, features Phil Goldberg of Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., Catherine M. Sharkey of New York University School of Law, and John Yoo of University of California at Berkeley School of Law, who analyzed, from diverse persepectives, the merits of the Sunoco Cert Petition and the arguments surrounding it.

Professor of Law and Executive Director of the Law & Economics Center at the George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School, Donald J. Kochan, moderates a discussion about the Standards for Judicial Education on Scientific Topics. This conversation, recorded in January, 2024, features David Faigman of the University of California College of Law, Jonathan Klick of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Gary Marchant of the Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, and Charles R. Santerre of Clemson University, who provide their expertise on teaching judges about science and how to understand scientific methodology, how to evaluate scientific topics as a non-expert, and how to consider the admissibility of expert testimony.

What standards can be employed to ensure that the teachers of judges remain objective educators rather than using the podium to teach the judges how to achieve policy outcomes and overcome scientific barriers to those outcomes? What is appropriate and what is not in educating judges about science? What should be the objective of this kind of specialized judicial education – is it to empower the judges to understand science or to provide tools for activism from the bench? How do you remain objective as an instructor and in the curriculum? What standards should be used when teaching science to ensure that you do not cross the line into helping judges manipulate science to achieve preferred policy objectives? What are some good and bad models of judicial education on science, and how can judges identify them? These and other questions were explored.